'Everything is lost if mistrust arises'
Bonhoeffer's return raises questions for many, including closest friends
In scholarship surrounding Bonhoeffer’s personal life and theology, much is owed to Eberhard Bethge, a very close friend in whom Bonhoeffer confided.1 Bethge records changes in his dear friend, Dietrich, after he returns from America in October of 1940 and takes up a position in the Abwehr, Germany’s Military Intelligence. Among some of these changes, Bethge notes Bonhoeffer withdrawals, and begins to give insincere salutes and maintain appearances for the sake of his work. Later, Bethge becomes aware of Bonhoeffer’s involvement in counter-espionage, leaking information to contacts outside Germany, and continuing to write theologically in Ethics, while envisioning a post-Hitler Germany.2
It has been commonly assumed by theologians and scholars that Bonhoeffer was part of a plot to kill Hitler, a plot which did in fact emerge from within the Abwehr. Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, who headed the agency, Hans Oster, and Helmuth James Count von Moltke, are among some of those who formed a “nest of resistance” within the organization.3
Stanley Hauerwas admits to be among those who assumed Bonhoeffer’s participation while yet holding the conflicting awareness that Bonhoeffer’s work within the Abwehr was primarily motivated by his desire to avoid taking up arms, being conscripted into the Wehrmacht, the Armed Forces.
Martin Marty pens the critical question of whether Bonhoeffer did “turn his back on all he had stood for,” and insinuates that changes in Bonhoeffer were profound enough that he “feared that confiding word of them could be unsettling to Bethge.”4
But it might be warranted to ask if perhaps Bonhoeffer grew silent, perhaps even suspiciously so, only to protect those closest to him with whom he shared the dilemma of Hitler. But must that mean supporting assassination?
His silence, I argue, should be understood in context with his theology and situation. From the precarious time and place which Bonhoeffer stood, every word and action could expose himself or his loved ones to the Gestapo. Or on the other hand, they could alienate him from the Confessing brethren and his many other colleagues. We know for instance of such a predicament when rumor that Barth was disappointed in him for joining the Abwher caught Bonhoeffer’s ear. A grieved Bonhoeffer writes to his friend, “everything is lost if mistrust arises.”5
Is it not more likely that Bonhoeffer, sharp and vigilant, simply could not speak because there were too many listening ears, and there was much too much at stake for misunderstandings to go running about? In the midst of a nightmare, Bonhoeffer returns to Germany, placing himself in the thick of it, anchoring himself to his brothers, to his people, to the Church. Why?
This is the fourth post in a series refuting Bonhoeffer’s participation in an assassination attempt carried out against Adolf Hitler. Feel free to read previous entries below:
Charles Marsh, “Resisting the Bonhoeffer Brand: A Life Reconsidered”, https://theotherjournal.com/ 2021/03/19/resisting-bonhoeffer-brand/
Eberhard Bethge, Bonhoeffer: Exile and Martyr (NY: Seabury, 1975), 122-127.
Mark Nation, Bonhoeffer the Assassin?: Challenging the Myth, Recovering His Call to Peacemaking (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013), 2.
Martin E. Marty, Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Letters and Papers from Prison: A Biography (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2011), 216.
Christiane Tietz, Theologian of Resistance: The Life and Thought of Dietrich Bonhoeffer (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2016), 82.