“A time to love, and a time to hate; a time for war, and a time for peace” (Eccl. 3:8).

“From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and violent men take it by force” (Matthew 11:12, ESV).

The Problem of Violence

A recent meme, posted by a child advocate against sex-trafficking said this, “We are stepping into a world… When good men, will be forced to do bad things in the name of freedom” (Dempsey, 2020). Depending on the definitions of the terms used in that statement, it can be argued that this is not an ethical dilemma unique to our current situation but has been faced by all generations throughout history. From the act of punching bullies during childhood to stop them from terrorizing the playground to the American hero, Alvin York, killing Germans in WWI to “save lives,” the use of force can be equally complex and disconcerting – especially for Christians. The story of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a Christian martyr during World War II, exemplifies this moral dilemma as he considered whether or not to participate in a plot to kill Adolf Hitler.

So, how does one justify murdering another human being, even Hitler, while being an evangelical, deeply thoughtful, dedicated Christian, and a pacifist to boot? How does one go from turning the other cheek, blessed are the peacemakers, and do not resist evil but overcome it with good to blowing up a building to eliminate Nazism in a perceived obedience to God? Would killing Hitler in his prime to avoid the murder of mass millions be a moral good? Is this an example of  “good men being forced to do bad things” to defeat evil? So, are there occasions where the end does in fact justify the means? Are there times where two wrongs do in fact make right?

Born on February 4, 1906, he and his twin-sister was raised in the small university town of Tübingen by loving parents. His father was a reputable college professor of psychology and his mother a teacher. His pedigree consisted of artists, musicians, statesmen, and a famous grandfather-theologian, Karl August von Hase, whose textbook on the history of dogma continued to be used in seminaries at the time of young Dietrich’s seminary training. Clearly, the Bonhoeffer children were poised for success, prestige, and affluence throughout their lives.

Prior to the advent of Nazism, Bonhoeffer traveled a conventional, well-worn path toward the ministry. In 1923, he began his theological studies at Tübingen University, where he defended a brilliant and ground-breaking doctoral dissertation, Sanctorum Communio (On the Communion of the Saints). In his early ministry, he taught children at Grunewald parish church, and taught young men every Thursday evening in a reading and discussion group, most of whom would eventually die in war or concentration camps. Then in 1931, he was ordained at St. Matthias Church in Berlin.

Three most profound experiences undoubtedly framed his perspectives towards the Nazi takeover of the church in Germany that led to his opposition toward the tyrannical state. The first was reading the newly published novel and subsequent movie, All Quiet on the Western Front. Next, was a trip to Rome at age 18. Later, a visit to America informed his views from the most unexpected sources.

The novel did much to shape his attitude toward the horrors of war. The trip to Rome shaped his understanding of the church transcending German Lutheran Protestantism. The last experience taught him how churches of marginalized African-Americans engage an oppressive-society, which undoubtedly contributed toward his perspective of the ostracized church and the plight of the Jewish people in Germany. During that same visit, he was indelibly influenced by a French pacifist and fellow-seminarian, Jean Lasserre, whose focus on the Beatitudes influenced his bent toward passivism and resulted in the eventual writing of his classic book, The Cost of Discipleship.

The experience with the oppressed church began in 1930 after he sailed to New York to begin a teaching fellowship at Union Theological Seminary. Tiring of the social gospel in the progressive churches, he wrote “In New York they preach about virtually everything; only one thing is not addressed, or is addressed so rarely that I have as yet been unable to hear it, namely, the gospel of Jesus Christ, the cross, sin and forgiveness, death and life” (Metaxas, 2010, p. 99). So, he pivoted his attention to the African-American churches, particularly Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem, in response to an invitation by his good friend and fellow seminarian, Frank Fisher.

The fertile ground of privation and suffering yielded vibrant and well-grounded expressions of Christianity. He said, “… in general I’m increasingly discovering greater religious power and originality in Negroes” (Metaxas, 2010, p. 105). To immerse himself in this culture and learn all he could, he lived among African-Americans while touring Washington, D. C. and eventually observed their conditions through a broad swath in the South.

As a concert pianist and lover of music, Bonhoeffer was mesmerized by all kinds of music emanating from the black community, particularly the spirituals. So much so, that he took recordings back to Germany to educate young seminarians in his home country.

As Bonhoeffer was being shaped, his beloved homeland was being transformed into a veritable hell-hole. In 1931, Hitler was installed as Chancellor and soon became president three years later at the death of the highly respected Paul von Hindenburg.  The Nazis consolidated power, installed Ludwig Müller as the official representative of the Protestant churches as well as the Reich Bishop of the first-ever national church of Germany. Almost all of the leaders of the German Lutheran Church fell under the spell of a restored nationalism that promised to remove the guilt and shame of WWI and the Weimer Republic imposed on the proud German people. As a result, they became willing dupes.

In 1933, Pope Pius XI signed a Concordant with Hitler promising that the Catholic church would not interfere with the Third Reich in exchange for assurances that they would not be attacked. Of course, Hitler had no intention of honoring that agreement any more than any other. Before that same year was out, he afflicted the Catholic church with death by a thousand cuts.

Pope Pius XI responded in a typically weak response by feckless leaders who fear exerting actual force against evil that might violate some imaginary moral code. He fires off a missive, “With Burning Anxiety,” protesting Hitler’s infractions of their earlier agreement. This, of course, had no effect.

Contrary to this tepid response. Bonhoeffer was one of the few Christian leaders that was clear-eyed about the dangers of Nazism and was not afraid to act in opposition. It cannot be argued that Bonhoeffer’s forcible opposition to the Nazi state exploded after their deplorable acts became unconscionable. He was one of the first to actively oppose Hitler and Nazism. Two-days after Hitler was made Chancellor, he delivered a radio address attacking Nazism and was summarily cut off the air in mid-address.

In 1938, to further Hitler’s control over the church, all German pastors were ordered to take an oath of allegiance to him in recognition of his 50th birthday. Again, almost all pastors pledged at least feigned if not enthusiastic allegiance to der Führer.

Lest we be overly critical of the sheepish church leadership, it must be noted that they suffered from several generations of religious humanism in their theological training – like Schleiermacher’s higher-criticism and Adolf von Harnack’s liberalism. From the Chair of Theology at Berlin University, considered the mountaintop of theological discourse, state-appointed theologians led virtually all pastors down the same primrose path of humanistic preparation for the ministry. Their theological systems twisted Christianity into pretzel-like contortions of the same philosophical idealism that had been acculturated throughout Germany by the likes of Hegel, Kierkegaard, Wittgenstein, Nietzsche, and Heidegger. There were only a precious handful of academics with the scholarly weight and reputation necessary to push back against the ethos of humanistic nationalism – Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer being foremost at the time.

With Protestant churches being the biggest threat to Nazism, their leaders were manipulated, shamed, co-opted, bullied into submission, and eventually subsumed by the state. As expected, their flock by-and-large followed them into the abyss. As a result, a maniacal evil was unleashed on the world.

In September of 1935, the Nuremberg Laws were passed, canceling citizenship for German Jews. On January 1, 1938 all Jewish-owned businesses were liquidated by order of Hermann Göring. On November 9 of that same year, there was a nation-wide organized riot called Kristallnacht that brought the destruction of nearly 300 synagogues, the looting of 7,500 Jewish-owned shops, and the arrest of over 30,000 Jewish men. By September 1941, a decree was issued by the Nazi high command that required all German Jews to wear a yellow star stitched to their clothing. Then in October of ‘41, the first trains rolled out from the station and took Jews from Berlin to the gas chambers at Auschwitz. Two years later, on May 19, the German minister of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, declared that Germany was Judenfrei (free of Jews).

Horrific genocides spread to all undesirables throughout Nazi controlled lands – the physically and mentally impaired, other “inferior” races, resisters, Poles, Czechs, and others. Red-hot smoke-stacks burned around-the-clock at Chelmno, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, Majdanek, and Auschwitz-Birkenau.

But God preserved a small remnant in Germany who would not bow their knee to the state. In 1934, the Barmen Declaration was fashioned primarily by Karl Barth and adopted by representatives from the Lutheran, Reformed, United Churches, free synods, church assemblies, and parish organizations in Barmen, Germany (Cochrane, 1962). Those who signed were later referred to as the, “Confessing Church.” Although not expressly said, the declaration insisted that Christ, not the Führer, is the head of the church.[1]

In July of 1940, to avoid being forced to fight on the front lines or shot, Dietrich’s brother-in-law, Hans von Dohnanyi, managed to convince the Reich that Bonhoeffer would be best suited to serve in the Abwehr, military intelligence. With his ecumenical ties, he would be able to serve the regime with counter-intelligence. Yet as providence would have it, he was then able to convey the Nazi’s malevolent intents to his contacts abroad and messages of support for the resistance back to his compatriots.

Bonhoeffer was intimately involved in the formulation of the Confessing Church, to include serving as director of the seminary at Finkewalde. But alas, they would not escape Nazi persecution any more than any other strata of German society.

In December 1935, Himmler declared all examinations for the Confessing Church invalid, all training invalid, and all participants liable to arrest. In July 1936, the president of the Confessing Church, Martin Niemöller, was arrested. In September 1937, the seminary at Finkenwalde was closed by the Gestapo. November that same year, pastors and former Finkenwalde students were arrested and beaten to death at Buchenwald.

This growing danger from Nazi persecution was accompanied by many acts of bravery and deception by Bonhoeffer to resist the tyranny of the state. In February of 1938, he made his initial contact with members of the German Resistance. In September he wrote Life Together. In 1941, he made two trips to Switzerland on behalf of the Resistance. In 1942, he visited Norway to spread the news of Nazi atrocities. In May during a trip to Sweden, he met with Bishop John Bell who was a member of British Parliament and close confidant of Winston Churchill. This was also done on behalf of the Resistance.

His active role in the conspiracy to assassinate Hitler began in 1940 where Dohnanyi, friend and biographer Ebhard Bethge, Hans Gisevius, Hans Oster, and Bonhoeffer discussed this at his home. His primary role was to carefully convey to his contacts in the outside world that a group of high level officials were plotting a military coup and it would soon be implemented. Hopefully, this would assuage foreign powers from attacking Germany and costing countless thousands of lives.

To protect other believers should the conspiracy go wrong, Bonhoeffer eventually severed all ties with the Confessing Church. He was in the heart of the conspiracy, lending support to those who were more directly involved, like his brother Klaus and brother-in-law Dohnany.

Through a series of events, the first attempt to put a plan in action was not until 1943. Conspirators were to plant a bomb in Hitler’s plane in Smolensk. Unfortunately, the mechanism did not work. The next attempt was in March in Berlin, where Hitler, Himmler, and Göring were all at the same place. This time it was to be a suicide mission, but Hitler suddenly left the location before detonation (Metaxas, 2010, p. 430). Later, July 20, 1944, Klaus von Stauffenberg made another failed assassination attempt at Rastenburg, East Prussia.

All the while, as Bonhoeffer was surreptitiously involved in the conspiracy to kill Hitler and replace him with a military coup, he continued his pastoral duties apart from aligning with the Confessional Church. He would write until the last months of his life, but the last book he published in his lifetime was Das Gebetbook der Bibel (The Prayerbook of the Bible) in 1940. It was a devotional commentary on the Psalms. This infuriated the Nazi brass as it legitimized the Jewish race as God’s people. As a result, he was officially banned from publishing books thereafter.

As a python squeezes its victim, Nazi persecution grew more intense and closer to affecting Bonhoeffer personally. In 1936, his authorization to teach at Berlin University was revoked. In 1938, his sister Sabine and her Jewish husband Gerhard Leibholz and their two daughters escaped to England. In 1940, he was forbidden to speak in public and required to report regularly to the police. A year later, he was banned from printing or publishing. In April 5, 1943, he was arrested and imprisoned at Tegel Prison in Berlin. In July of that year, he was intensely interrogated in prison. In October 1944, he was moved to the Gestapo prison at Prinz-Albrecht-Strasse in Berlin. On February 7, 1945, he was moved to Buchenwald, then moved again to Regensburg on April 3. Five days later he was moved to the Flossenbürg concentration camp during the night. The next day, April 9, Bonhoeffer was executed at Flossenbürg together with other key figures of the resistance.

The camp doctor at Flossenbürg, H. Fischer-Hüllstrung, wrote of Bonhoeffer’s execution, “He . . . said a short prayer and then climbed the steps to the gallows, brave and composed. His death ensued after a few seconds. In the almost fifty years that I worked as a doctor, I have hardly ever seen a man die so entirely submissive to the will of God”(Metaxas, 2010, p. 608).

In trying to understand the migration in Bonhoeffer’s theology that led him to attempting to assassinate a tyrant, one must understand his view of Biblical ethics. This can be found primarily in three of his works, Cost of Discipleship, Ethics, and Letters from Prison.

According to Bonhoeffer, righteousness was not determined by a stand-alone list of principles to which both God and man must subscribe. God determines what and who is righteous or wicked. There is no code of chivalry or manners to which the believer must submit. Christ is the sine qua non of all goodness. There is no real goodness outside of Him to which He must adhere. He need not observe goodness, he is goodness and there is no real goodness outside of him. Something is right because he says it is and nothing more. All imaginary abstractions are futile attempts to create a humanistic moral code. It is an attempt to remove God as the Ultimate Lawgiver.

Bonhoeffer embraced the kingdoms in conflict worldview. For him, if warfare is not occurring, the believer has ceded the ground to the enemy and agreed to a détente with the powers of darkness.  At the same time, he was the foremost Christian ethicist of his generation. He elevated the ethics of the Bible above all else; be “not … pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable” (I Tim. 3:3). We are to “malign no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing every consideration” (Titus 3:2). Those who practice things, like “… enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions… will not inherit the kingdom of God” (Galatians 5:19-21).

Still, assassinating Hitler was a no-brainer when it came to Bonhoeffer. There was no ambiguity or moral crisis. He was a highly educated man and understood the complexity of issues that needed to be unknotted.

For him, in the normal course of human affairs a Christian has the duty to observe all of those high moral values to which must be cherished. However, when dealing with abject and unrepentant evil that actively opposes God’s word, they are to be opposed with all vigor and dispatch.

Bonhoeffer was acutely aware of the theology that had been shaped by the church for almost 2,000 years.  Much scholarship had been conducted to chronicle the martyrdom of saints.

Bonhoeffer was acutely aware that Just War theology had been an ethical standard for warfare for almost two-thousand years. Not only had it been subscribed to by Catholics, but framed by protestants as well. The Westminster Confession of Faith, John Calvin, Martin Luther, and Francois Turrettini would have already been codified and widely known (Assembly, 1981/1855, 23:2, WLC Q. 136; Calvin, 1970, Bk. 4, Sec. 11-12; Luther, 2002/1528; Turrettini, 1992/1685, Top. 11, Q. 17). Since that time, this has further been re-framed by top Reformed and Evangelical theologians (Dabney, 1972, Lect. 33, Q7; Hodge, 2014, Pt. 3, Ch. 19, Sec. 10; Murray, 1957, pp. 178-179).

Of course, Bonhoeffer was not waging war with a foreign adversary at the behest of legitimate state authority. He was in effect, waging war against the very tyranny of the state to which he was a citizen.

He knew quite well that the church suffered martyrdom by tyrants in the past and ultimately prevailed. He was also aware of ample examples where non-violent resistance had triumphed over tyrants. At the same time, he would have known of the many examples where Christians did not triumph through passive resistance, but lost their children and grandchildren to a heretical worldview at the point of a sword. The most imminent example was just to the East, in communist Russia.

As you may imagine, a host of questions are involved in determining whether an act of violence is morally acceptable to God. If someone slaps my face because I am a Christian, it is fairly clear that Jesus enjoins us to offer the other. However, if someone is beating me for sheer sadistic pleasure, regardless of my faith-claim, does it still apply? What if they are injuring me to the point that my family is at risk? Is it ethical for me to resist in order to protect the well-being of others? If I have the power to prevent others from being tormented or killed and I do not exercise it, have I pleased God?

Consider the aggressors themselves. Like Bonhoeffer, it seems like an easy decision to kill Hitler in his mania. Pull the trigger now and ask for forgiveness later, if warranted.

However, what about situations that are not so clear? What if the assailant believes like today’s cultural Marxists, that logic and reason is a part of the Western patriarchy and should be rejected? What if they have been duped into this sinister faith through socialization. If so, isn’t trying to reason with them a fool’s errand – casting pearls before swine? Would it be God’s will, if effective, to treat them as a parent would a petulant child? What if by exerting force you were keeping them from a greater judgment and protecting those who would inevitably be harmed by them?

What if they are socio-paths? What if they have a mental injury to their frontal cortex as to turn them from a mild-mannered person to a raging and dangerous person? Is it not right and just to exert force to inhibit them from acting out nefarious intents? Wouldn’t it be similar to tying down a heroin addict while he is going through withdrawals?

20^th century Christian apologetics has used logic as its stock-and-trade. Those methods were forged in a modernistic world, but it effectiveness fell on deaf ears of the Nazi adherents.

It is popular today to say, WWJD – What Would Jesus Do. Since our dear brother, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, went through a common dilemma that many of us may face soon, it may be instructive to ask WWBD – What Would Bonhoeffer Do, if he was living in a time of cultural Marxism?

[1] In section 8.09, the declaration charges the “Reich Church” with “errors” that are “devastating” and breaking the unity of the German Evangelical Church. Sec. 8.11 attests that Jesus Christ is the “one Word of God” [not the Fuhrer] which the church is to hear and obey. Sec. 8.12 calls for the rejection by any church “could and would have to acknowledge as a source” any “events and powers, figures and truths” other than those of the one Word of God. 8.15 they rejected the “false doctrine” that any areas of life “would not belong to Jesus Christ, but to other lords – areas in which we would not need justification and sanctification through him.”

Sources

Alinsky, S. D. (1989). Rules for radicals: A practical primer for realistic radicals. Vintage.

Aquinas, T. (2012). Summa theologica. Authentic Media Inc.

Assembly, W. (1981/1855). The Westminster confession of faith. Free Presbyterian Publications.

Augustine. (400). Contra Faustum (Vol. XXII). New Advent.

Augustine. (1985). The city of God: On Christian doctrine. Franklin Library.

Baudrillard, J. (1994). Simulacra and simulation. University of Michigan Press.

Bauer, W., Arndt, W. F., & Gingrich, F. W. (1957). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature. University of Chicago Press.

Buchanan, G. (1689). De jure regni apud Scotos. Or, A dialogue, concerning the due priviledge of government in the kingdom of Scotland. Printed for R. Baldwin.

Calvin, J. (1970). Institutes of the Christian religion (F. L. Battles, Trans.). The Westminster Press.

Cochrane, A. C. (1962). The church’s confession under Hitler. Westminster Press.

Dabney, R. L. (1972). Lectures in systematic theology. Zondervan.

Derrida, J. (1997). Of grammatology (G. C. Spivak, Trans.). John Hopkins University Press.

Goldman, A. I. (1999). Epistemology and postmodern resistance. Knowledge in a social world, 3-40.

Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time. Harper.

Hitchens, C. (2007). God is not great: How religion poisons everything. Twelve.

Hodge, C. (2014). Systematic theology. Ravenio Books.

Keil, C. F., & Delitzsch, F. (1980/1892). Commentary on the Old Testament (Vol. 5). Eerdmans.

Kioupkiolis, A., & Katsambekis, G. (2016). Radical democracy and collective movements today: The biopolitics of the multitude versus the hegemony of the people. Routledge.

Lenski, R. C. H. (1961). Commentary on the New Testament: The interpretation of St Matthew’ Gospel (Vol. 1). Augsburg Publishing House.

Lewis, C. S. (2001). Mere christianity. Zondervan.

Luther, M. (2002/1528). On war against the Turk. http://www.lutherdansk.dk/On%20war%20against%20Islamic%20reign%20of%20terror/On%20war%20against%20Islamic%20reign%20of%20terror1.htm

Lyotard, J.-F. (1993). The postmodern explained: correspondence, 1982-1985. U of Minnesota Press.

Maher, B., & Charles, L. (2008). Religulous. Lionsgate.

Metaxas, E. (2010). Bonhoeffer: Pastor, martyr, prophet, spy. Thomas Nelson, Inc.

Murray, J. (1957). Principles of conduct: aspects of biblical ethics. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.

Nietzsche, F. W. (2004). Ecce homo: How one becomes what one is (T. Wayne, Trans.). Algora Publishing.

Rutherford, S. (1644). Lex, Rex. Sprinkle Publications.

Schaeffer, F. A. (1968). The God who is there; speaking historic Christianity into the twentieth century. Inter-varsity Press.

Turrettini, F. (1992/1685). Institutes of elenctic theology. Puritan & Reformed Publishers.

Vattimo, G. (1988). The end of modernity: Nihilism and hermeneutics in post-modern culture.

Wittgenstein, L. (1968). Philosophical investigations (3d ed.). Macmillan.

---