Joshua Seek

Personal Meanderings of Joshua Seek 
« Back to blog

Bonhoeffer: Religionless Christianity

I read a post today about Deitrich Bonhoeffer and his thoughts on "religionless christianity".  I had never heard of such a topic, so I looked it up.  Towards the end of his life, while in a German prison, Bonhoeffer wrote a series of letters to a friend on his ponderings of what it meant to be a Christian in a day when absolutes could not be expressed absolutely (post-modernism anyone??).  When a man has no choice but to life a secular life.  But how would such a man consider himself a Christian?  

Does God require Christianity, a religion, a supposed level of piety?

From Bonhoeffer:

To Eberhard Bethage, April, 1944:

What is bothering me incessantly is the question what Christianity really is, or indeed who Christ really is, for us today. The time when people could be told everything by means of words, whether theological or pious, is over, and so is the time of inwardness and conscience--and that means the time of religion in general. We are moving toward a completely religionless time; people as they are now simply cannot be religious anymore. Even those who honestly describe themselves as "religious" do not in the least act up to it, and so they presumably mean something quite different by "religious."

Our whole nineteen-hundred-year-old Christian preaching and theology rest on the "religious a priori" of mankind. "Christianity" has always been a form--perhaps the true form--of "religion." But if one day it becomes clear that this a priori does not exist at all, but was a historically conditioned and transient form of human self-expression, and if therefore man becomes radically religionless--and I think that that is already more or less the case (else how is it, for example, that this war, in contrast to all previous ones, is not calling forth any "religious" reaction?)--what does that mean for "Christianity"? It means that the foundation is taken away from the whole of what has up to now been our "Christianity," and that there remain only a few "last survivors of the age of chivalry," or a few intellectually dishonest people that we are to pounce in fervor, pique, or indignation, in order to sell them goods? Are we to fall upon a few unfortunate people in their hour of need and exercise a sort of religious compulsion on them? If we don't want to do all that, if our final judgment must be that the Western form of Christianity, too, was only a preliminary stage to a complete absence of religion, what kind of situation emerges for us, for the church? How can Christ become the Lord of the religionless as well? Are there religionless Christians? If religion is only a garment of Christianity--and even this garment has looked very different at different times--then what is a religionless Christianity? 

The questions to be answered would surely be: What do a church, a community, a sermon, a liturgy, a Christian life mean in a religionless world? How do we speak of God--without religion, i.e., without the temporally conditioned presuppositions of metaphysics, inwardness, and so on? How do we speak (or perhaps we cannot now even "speak" as we used to) in a "secular" way about God? In what way are we "religionless-secular" Christians, in what way are we those who are called forth, not regarding ourselves from a religious point of view as specially favored, but rather as belonging wholly to the world? In that case Christ is no longer an object of religion, but something quite different, really the Lord of the world. But what does that mean? What is the place of worship and prayer in a religionless situation? 

The Pauline question of whether [circumcision] is a condition of justification seems to me in present-day terms to be whether religion is a condition of salvation. Freedom from [circumcision] is also freedom from religion. I often ask myself why a "Christian instinct" often draws me more to the religionless people than to the religious, but which I don't in the least mean with any evangelizing intention, but, I might almost say, "in brotherhood." While I'm often reluctant to mention God by name to religious people--because that name somehow seems to me here not to ring true, and I feel myself to be slightly dishonest (it's particularly bad when others start to talk in religious jargon; I then dry up almost completely and feel awkward and uncomfortable)--to people with no religion I can on occasion mention him by name quite calmly and as a matter of course. 

The transcendence of epistemological theory has nothing to do with the transcendence of God. God is beyond in the midst of our life. The church stands, not at the boundaries where human powers give out, but in the middle of the village...How this religionless Christianity looks, what form it takes, is something that I'm thinking about a great deal, and I shall be writing to you again about it soon. It may be that on us in particular, midway between East and West, there will fall a heavy responsibility.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comments (1)

Jul 06, 2010
Rebecca Chandi Ng'ang'a said...
Thank you for posting this letter by Bonhoeffer. I am a Christian who is finding the religious ties prohibiting the message of Christ from reaching the world to which he sent his disciples. Jesus Christ lived in a religious community and yet was on the streets where the shouts of the blind would reach him, where he would interact with mourners and give back live to the son of the widow of Nain. The moment the believers organize themselves into some structure, power issues crop up, and the whole message of Christ is lost in between. I have wondered how Christ of the gospels can be traced and his message communicated to the people without the coating of religion (structures) where there lords, and his grace whose needs must be first met. I wish Bonhoeffer lived a bit longer , may be he would have come up with a way of being a disciple of Jesus Christ without the trappings of church and religion. Or is there anyone out there who has an answer. I am thinking of a system where those who claim to be under the lordship of Jesus Christ , are passionate about letting others know who Christ is , and in so doing they get into the various sectors in their world where they excel in what they do , love people genuinely, pray and disciple others. Would there be need for a church? May be the meeting in houses would make sense , as the disciples would multiply and keep going, not settling and seeking for support and titles that prohibit others. Church in it present format is increasingly becoming like a well without water yet Christ says he is the one who provides water that cannot run out. Are there any disciples of Jesus Christ out there who love hiim enough to want to keep his commandments?

Leave a comment...

 
Got an account with one of these? Login here, or just enter your comment below.
Posterous-login    twitter