A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #167

[April 2003 journal entry]

Dietrich invested in the Confessing Church as a non-violent civil disobedience strategy and was deeply disappointed when the strategy failed. The credibility of such a resistance strategy depends on two key assumptions/anticipations – i.e., the expectation that the enemy/aggressor will be caused to pause (eventually responding to the strategy) and the ability of the resistors to remain resolute when injuries, deprivations, deaths begin to occur. By 1939 Dietrich saw that the strategy had failed on both counts. Unlike the British in India, the Nazis were in their homeland and had a deep/dark core. The ranks of the Pastors’ Emergency League broke in 1937 when the Nazis brutally confronted the Confessing Church after the 1936 Berlin Olympics.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #166

[April 2003 journal entry]

I have pondered for some time how young Confessing Church pastors trained by Bonhoeffer at Finkenwalde would have conducted confirmation instruction for the youth in their congregations during the Nazi years. What would have been Bonhoeffer’s counsel if/when students asked for guidance? I suspect a spectrum existed among Confessing Church pastors – i.e., with an approach that would have blurred the distinctions with the confirmation experience of ‘German Christian’ youth at one end of the spectrum and with close/clear transposition of Cost of Discipleship instruction for Confessing Church youth at the opposite end of the spectrum.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #165

[February 2003 journal entry]

At least since the mid-1990s, photography has contributed substantively to my ‘non-religious’ experience of and approach to spirituality and ethics. (Music, elective reading, and most recently sketching have somewhat similar importance.) Beyond being a source of relief, photography refreshes (recalibrates, refocuses, replenishes) my attentiveness to the details in everyday situations and my instinct to anticipate (look for) composition in everyday situations. Photography quickens my ability and readiness to be truly/fully present.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #164

[January 2003 journal entry]

Virtually all who strive to live life deeply/genuinely respectful of others (esp., those who live in life’s darkest shadows) are eventually ‘leaven’ – i.e., they are hardly noticed influences on temporal realities and on history. The number of individuals who know about their leavening and the radius within which notice occurs are both limited. The ‘religious’ T/O paradigm offers divine notice and ultimate/eternal reward, thus anticipating an eventual separating of the ‘leaven’ from ‘the bread’. A ‘non-religious’ approach to spirituality and ethics is content with the incognito of ‘leaven’ and does not yearn for an eventual separating of the ‘leaven’ from ‘the bread’.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #163

[January 2003 journal entry]

The Matthew 25:31-46 story has been pivotal for my decision to align with ‘the second commandment’ (i.e., love your neighbor as yourself) as I wrestle with the complexities/limitations I find inseparable from understanding or experiencing ‘the first commandment’ (i.e., love ‘God’ with all your . . .). The Matthew 25:31-46 story supports this reverse ordering of these two ‘commandments’. The story can easily (and ironically, I think) be read through the perspective of the ‘goats’ in the story – i.e., with the readers/interpreters concluding, “Let us, therefore, serve ‘the least of these’ because in doing so we are serving ‘God’.” The ‘goats’ in the story beg for a second chance to do just that. The ‘sheep’ in the story are commended because their motive for caring for ‘the least of these’ is free from such self-serving, from such self-promoting, from such ‘means to the end of strengthening my case in judgment’ objectives. The ‘sheep’ in the story care for ‘the least of these’ in a pure and unconditional sense. If I had stayed on the ‘religious’ path of having to settle ‘the first commandment’ issues as a prerequisite for participating in ‘the second commandment’ ethic, I would either have given up the further inquiry re ‘the first commandment’ I already knew had to be pursued to maintain intellectual integrity or I would have neglected my responsibilities as a spouse, as a parent, as a neighbor. Stepping instead directly into ‘the second commandment’ responsibilities actually liberated and energized my continued inquiry into ‘the first commandment’ questions. Doing so also necessitated a ‘scrapheap’ or ‘non-religious’ rationale for seeking to be the sort of person who sees and cares deeply for ‘the least of these’.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #162

[December 2002 journal entry]

I spoke recently with a Presbyterian Church (USA) pastor/friend about Countee Cullen’s poem The Incident –

The Incident

Once riding in old Baltimore
Heart-filled, head-filled with glee,
I saw a Baltimorean
Keep looking straight at me.

Now I was eight and very small,
And he was no whit bigger,
And so I smiled, but he poked out
His tongue, and called me, ‘Nigger’.

I saw the whole of Baltimore
From May until December,
Of all the things that happened there
That’s all that I remember.

Countee Cullen (1903-46) was raised in New York City by his grandmother and then by F. A. Cullen, the pastor of the largest African-American Methodist Church in the city. Cullen was raised in privilege re both culture and education (including New York University and Harvard). Cullen sought recognition for his poetry beyond his being considered a leading African-American poet. He turned down numerous professorships at the peak of his reputation in the 1920s. He subsequently taught in the New York City public schools.

My pastor/friend was preparing to facilitate a discussion of the poem with his congregation. I encouraged him to imagine the church experiences the three characters in the poem might have had – i.e., (1) the child harshly labeled, (2) the ‘Baltimorean’ child, and (3) a child sitting near enough to have observed and overheard this incident. What is ‘the gospel’ in each child’s church? I suggested that the word ‘religion’ should be approached as one of those words for which a dictionary lists several meanings in a descending order. I would make the nuances Bonhoeffer gave ‘religion’ and the nuances I have added to his in these journal entries the first/common meanings in the list of meanings.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #161

[November 2002 journal entry]

Being radically (i.e., without restriction or discrimination) open to ‘from below’ inquiry and to ‘from below’ consciousness of the depth/breadth of human suffering is essential to a ‘non-religious’ path re spirituality and ethics. Most expressions of Christianity in the United States are located toward the fundamentalist/evangelical end of the spectrum and, therefore, are separate from as well as antagonistic toward these ‘from below’ positions/perspectives. Fundamentalist traditions/groups are sealed/airtight against radical inquiry and radical consciousness of human suffering. Evangelical traditions/groups are closed but not sealed/airtight, careful to stop short of either radical inquiry or radical consciousness of human suffering that would threaten the evangelical theological paradigm. The remaining expressions of Christianity in the United States are located toward the liberal end of the spectrum. Liberal traditions/groups are open optimistically to radical inquiry, but do not strain to be radically conscious of the depth/breadth of human suffering. The authentic expressions of Christianity in the United States I have found re these ‘from below’ perspectives/positions are among the Quakers and among isolated/marginalized individuals within liberal traditions/groups.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #160

[September 2002 journal entry]

During a conversation with Renate Bethge (Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s niece), she asked about an observation in one of my letters to her – i.e., that “I am a historian first, a theologian second”. I began my explanation with a 1974 exchange with a fellow graduate student re how to approach and handle research into the critical scholarship about Jewish scripture and Christian scripture. The student said he intended to take seriously only research results that supported his already established and uncritical view of Jewish scripture and Christian scripture as ‘inspired’. I said my approach would be the reverse. I have never knowingly veered from the approach with which I aligned myself in that conversation. I explained to Renate that in time I concluded I could not maintain ‘a historian first, a theologian second’ approach within the ‘religious’ T/O paradigm/sphere. We then spent most of our time associating the ‘historian first, theologian second’ position with my subsequent interaction with the beginnings of a ‘non-religious’ approach to spirituality and ethics in Dietrich’s prison letters.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #159

[August 2002 journal entry]

A ‘non-religious’ interpretation of a text gives special attention to characters who are criticized, who are not affirmed.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #158

[August 2002 journal entry]

Paradox – To be aligned by choice ‘from below’ with the marginalized and disenfranchised is often to be distant from those who are sensitive to language’s limitations and who are articulate re a scientific worldview.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #157

[May 2002 journal entry]

I was recently asked how – in 1973? in 1979? in 1987? in 1992? – I would have read my journal entries. The question made me wonder. Given my response to Bonhoeffer’s prison letters when I first read them in 1975/76 and my response to a widening exposure to the history of ideas during the years in question, I think I would have responded with considerable interest and openness.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #156

[March 2002 journal entry]

The ‘non-religious’ approach to ‘community’ I am experiencing is descriptive of my sorting and prioritizing relationships as the following experiences unfolded in a simultaneous and interweaved manner during the 1970s/80s – (1) being with my first wife over the course of her disease and death (d. 1987), (2) struggling with tensions in my association – as a historian and as a theologian – within the theologically and socially/politically conservative Christian denomination into which I was born, (3) stepping into a steadily widening range of opportunities within the medical education/practice sphere. Until several years into my thirteen-year tenure as a history and theology professor (1979-1992), I continued to look for vitality in a ‘religious’ understanding of ‘community’. Analogous to the decision to withdraw artificial/intensive life-support technologies, I eventually concluded that the effort was futile, given my irreversible and no longer negotiable decisions (1) to engage in unrestricted historical inquiry, (2) to be as closely aligned as possible with victims of the broad and deep realities of innocent suffering without regard to my existential and theological costs, (3) to be as fully present as possible within the medical education/practice sphere with health care professionals who are committed to the same alignment without my having prior knowledge of their religious or philosophical convictions. I realized that my experience of ‘community’ within the ‘religious’ sphere had been dying for some time. Analogous to a boat crushed in a storm, my experience of ‘community’ within the ‘religious’ sphere had proved to lack integrity as I moved further and further into face to face (rather than ‘religiously’ filtered) engagement with the world’s ‘marketplaces’ and ‘wildernesses’. In this ‘non-religious’ approach to ‘community’, the first-order and primary experience of ‘community’ is the resolve to initiate ‘community’ in every encounter, with particular attention to encounters with victims of the broad and deep realities of innocent suffering. All other experiences of ‘community’ are valued as secondary means to sustain the first-order and primary experience of ‘community’. I do not know of ‘religious’ congregations that have in their origin and as their reason for existing this unconditional alignment with victims of the broad and deep realities of innocent suffering. One reason I persist in testing my thought in these journal entries – far beyond the expectation of anyone with whom I have been or am associated – is the desire to be consistent in my conversations that occur across the primary and secondary experiences of ‘community’.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #155

[February 2002 journal entry]

I continue to think about the correlations on the one hand of ‘religion’ and the ‘God’ language characteristic of the ‘religious’ T/O paradigm and on the other hand the ‘Santa’ traditions/experience – e.g., (1) the naïve, simple, and innocent ‘Santa’ belief of a six-year-old, (2) a confident 2^nd-grader who defends ‘Santa’ belief in reaction to the suspicions of another student, (3) the first serious questions about the illogic of the ‘Santa’ story, (5) a 3^rd-grader’s more frantic and haunted attempts to defend ‘Santa’ belief.

A ‘non-religious’ view of Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- #154

[February 2002 journal entry]

Bonhoeffer’s prediction that ‘religion’ in European countries generally and in Germany specifically would die and/or become increasingly irrelevant/marginalized proved true. Reasons a similar diminishment did not occur re ‘religion’ in the United States would include – (1) the evolution of ‘religion’ into a business with a sustainable market (e.g., church construction, profitable publishing, the mega-church phenomenon, the ‘Christian music’ industry, TV evangelists, . . .), (2) accredited private and independent ‘religious’ colleges, (3) no recent tragedies on United States soil on the magnitude of the Civil War, the world wars, and the Nazi holocaust, (4) the economic and educational legacy of slavery, (5) widespread indifference toward rigorous examination of ideas, (6) . . . .

Fragment -- #214

[April 2003 journal entry]

Being conscious, aware, engaged, present in an open and concrete manner is not a given, a once for all. I must fight for it every day, every hour. There is much resistance. There are many distractions.

Fragment -- #213

[February 2003 journal entry]

It seems that radical (i.e., to the root) cultural/global change now occurs so rapidly that what one person (generation?) settles on, after vigorous/careful examination/testing, as firm existential footing for decision-making is by that point already too out of date to be quickly/easily relevant to the new ‘present’ being faced.

Fragment -- #212

[February 2003 journal entry]

Christian congregations across the spectrum from fundamentalist to liberal expect sermons, regardless of the starting point or line of reasoning, to conclude with an affirmation of some theological variation consistent with the ‘religious’ T/O paradigm.

Fragment -- #211

[January 2003 journal entry]

To ‘counter’ culture, one must first and persistently ‘encounter’ culture.

Fragment -- #210

[December 2002 journal entry]

If ‘sin’ is missing the mark/target, then the identity of the mark/target is of utmost importance.

Fragment -- #209

[October 2002 journal entry]

We recently enjoyed having my artist friend Dean as our houseguest for a few days. In one conversation, Dean asked why western cultures appear to have drifted/declined into decadence (as he considered an audio-book at Borders that argued this thesis). I responded, “Information overload.” We had a very stimulating conversation about the consequences of having too much information to be able effectively to organize information into a construct or paradigm. Since that conversation, I have been considering the association of ‘cadence’ with ‘decadence’.