[August 2006 journal entry]
In a recent conversation with Renate Bethge, I suggested a spectrum with ‘enthusiastic German Christian/Church’ at one end, Dietrich’s ‘resolve to resist’ at the opposite end, and ‘attempt to be neutral’ at the midpoint. Renate reminded me there were distinguishable dispositions from the midpoint toward the ‘enthusiastic German Christian/Church’ end. Then she placed Otto Dibelius – who, as the first bishop of the recently formed Evangelical Church of Berlin-Brandenburg (1945-66), became the most prominent Protestant leader immediately after the war’s end – slightly off the midpoint toward Dietrich’s ‘resolve to resist’, she placed Walter Dress (theologian/churchman married to Dietrich’s younger sister) a bit past Dibelius toward Dietrich’s ‘resolve to resis’, and the vast majority of those associated with the Confessing Church further toward but noticeably short of Dietrich’s ‘resolve to resist’. Renate then observed – “I always felt the fact that Dietrich and Eberhard did not have wives and children made a difference in their stance against the Nazis. Niemoller represented those in the Confessing Church ranks who did risk. He had ‘Traitor to the Fatherland’ painted on his house.” I asked Renate to describe and interpret those who were content to be classified ‘moderate’. She agreed that some ‘moderates’ on either side of the ‘attempt to be neutral’ midpoint on the spectrum saw some validity to the views held on the opposing side of the midpoint. However, for others on the Dietrich’s ‘resolve to resist’ side of the spectrum, ‘moderate’ had to do more with the level of risk to which they would expose themselves, their families, and – in the case of pastors – their congregations.