[October 2000 journal entry]
Bonhoeffer, correctly I think, saw in the modern/scientific remaking of Germany and other western societies a serious/significant challenge to the longstanding ‘religious a priori’ for interpreting being human and interpreting human experience. Are humans essentially ‘religious’ -- i.e., ‘God’ conscious and ‘God’ oriented? I hear Bonhoeffer calling attention to evidence that human beings can live very stable, centered, ‘cultured’ lives without reference to ‘God’ and without ‘religion’. His most immediate examples were among his family members and his fellow conspirators. In the 30 April 1944 letter, he questioned the presupposed ‘religious a priori’ and offered his answer in terms of the “our whole 1900-year-old Christian preaching and theology”. I would go further and argue that a ‘religious a priori’ is assumed in Jewish scripture, in Christian scripture, and -- most importantly -- by ‘Jesus’. This conclusion necessitates – for a ‘non-religious’ spirituality and ethics -- a radical (i.e., to the root) and critical rethinking of those sources as well as the subsequent history of Christian thought.
Bonhoeffer, correctly I think, saw in the modern/scientific remaking of Germany and other western societies a serious/significant challenge to the longstanding ‘religious a priori’ for interpreting being human and interpreting human experience. Are humans essentially ‘religious’ -- i.e., ‘God’ conscious and ‘God’ oriented? I hear Bonhoeffer calling attention to evidence that human beings can live very stable, centered, ‘cultured’ lives without reference to ‘God’ and without ‘religion’. His most immediate examples were among his family members and his fellow conspirators. In the 30 April 1944 letter, he questioned the presupposed ‘religious a priori’ and offered his answer in terms of the “our whole 1900-year-old Christian preaching and theology”. I would go further and argue that a ‘religious a priori’ is assumed in Jewish scripture, in Christian scripture, and -- most importantly -- by ‘Jesus’. This conclusion necessitates – for a ‘non-religious’ spirituality and ethics -- a radical (i.e., to the root) and critical rethinking of those sources as well as the subsequent history of Christian thought.
