8 June 1944 to Eberhard Bethge from Tegel (1)
This is one of the important and influential letters on the theme of “the world come of age” or “religionless” Christianity. Bonhoeffer’s statement that he is being led more by an instinct for future questions than by any clarity regarding the answers is important. Whatever “religionless Christianity” meant for Bonhoeffer, it included faith, prayer, and Bible reading. See previous posts, including the “Baptismal Letter.”
Du stellst nun inbezug auf die Gedanken, die mich in letzter Zeit beschäftigen, so viele wichtige Fragen, daß ich froh wäre, wenn ich sie selbst beantworten könnte.
Es ist eben noch alles sehr im anfang und es leitet mich, wie meist, mehr der Instinkt für kommende Fragen, als daß ich über sie schon Klarheit hätte.
Ich will versuchen, einmal vom Geschichtlichen meinen Standort zu bezeichnen.
Die etwa im 13. Jahrhundert-(ich will mich auf den Streit über den Zeitpunkt nicht einlassen)-beginnende Bewegung in der Richtung auf die menschliche Autonomie (ich verstehe darunter die Entdeckung der Gesetze, nach denen diie Welt in Wissenschaft, Gesellschafts- und Staatsleben, Kunst, Ethik, Religion lebt und mit sich selbst fertig wird) ist in unsrer Zeit zu einer gewissen Vollständigkeit gekommen.
Der Mensch hat gelernt, in allen wichtigen Fragen mit sich selbst fertig zu werden ohne Zuhilfenahme der “Arbeitshypothese: Gott”. In wissenschaftlichen, künstlerischen, auch ethischen Fragen ist das eine Selbstverständlichkeit geworden, and der man kaum mehr zu rütteln wagt; seit etwa 100 Jahren gilt das aber in zunehmendem Maße auch für die religiösen Fragen; es zeigt sich, daß alles auch ohne “Gott” geht, und zwar ebenso gut wie vorher. Ebenso wie auf wissenschaftlichem Gebiet wird in allgemein menschlichen Bereich “Gott” immer weiter aus dem Leben zurückgedrängt, er verliert an Boden.
Hauptwörter der Anfang beginning |
Zeitwörten beantworten könnte could answer Andere Wörter allgemein general |
Here is an attempt at translation, based mostly on what we have already discussed in class:
You pose so many important questions relating to the thoughts with which I have busied myself in recent times, that I would be glad if I could answer them myself. It is all still very much in the beginning stages and leads me, like most, more in the instict for (additional) coming questions than as if I already had clarity over them.*
I will attempt to describe my position from the historical perspective:
The movement that began in about the 13th century (I will not allow myself into the quarrel over the exact point in time) in the direction of human autonomy (I understand under this the discovery of the laws by which the world lives and is self-sufficient in science, social and political life, art, ethics, and religion) has come to a certain completeness in our time.
People have learned to be self-sufficient in all of the important questions, without calling on the help of the “Working Hypothesis: God.” In scientific, artistic, and ethical questions, it has become a “matter of fact” that one can hardly dare to question. Since about 100 years ago, this is true in increasing measure for religious questions. It turns out (lit. “it shows itself”) that everything works without a “God,” and in fact, works just as well as before. In fact just like in the scientific realm, God is being pushed more and more out of all areas of human life, and losing ground.
*This sentence bothers me. I can’t seem to make it make it gramatically correct in English. Suggestions?
My thoughts: Why are we as humans so anxious to have God out of the picture? Is it because we are uncomfortable with the unknown and unquantifiable? Or, is it that we want to be able to declare ourselves wholly self-suffient and self-contained? Wasn’t complete autonomy sort of the first temptation mankind experienced (cf. Gen 3:5 — “God knows if you eat of [the fruit] you will be like him”)?
On the other hand, it doesn’t make sense to refuse to pursue knowledge (through science) because of the possibility that it will prove something we are uncomfortable with. If we were practicing true science, we would set out to discern truth, rather than to disprove our “working hypothesis: God.” I am convinced that if we are practicing unbiased science, it will point to the necessity of God, rather than eradicating him.
How does Bonhoeffer suggest Christians should respond to this movement toward autonomy? I suppose I’ll have to keep reading and translating to find out.
Kommst du denn heute?