As I read the messages that we post to this list, I am impressed with our diversity. Some of us receive the writings of Bonhoeffer as devotional texts, sources of comfort and inspiration. Others mine his writings for ideologies that support their own adjudications of history. Some of us venerate him as a saint; some view him as an historical figure, and some as just another German philosopher who speculated about what the rest of us are able only to "see through a glass, darkly," if at all. I myself try to read his texts as a philologist might, challenged to try to understand what Bonhoeffer meant by them, what other readers understand these texts to mean, and most important, what these texts tell me about my own secular and religious experiences. I emphasize the diversity of our readership because I fear that some of the questions which seem inescapable to me may embarrass or offend those who read Bonhoeffer with intentions different from mine. Perhaps this warning will serve as prophylaxis against the injuries which unconventional considerations might unintentionally inflict. For the purposes of dialectical examination one may not presuppose that what Bonhoeffer has written will coincide with what is true for oneself, that it is necessarily consistent, or even that it necessarily makes any sense at all. Not only does one need the freedom to entertain the possibility that Bonhoeffer was "wrong", but more importantly, I need the freedom to test the various modes of being in the wrong myself, and to take the risk that my thoughts fall into one of the many categories condemned by Bonhoeffer. Perhaps I am one of the practitioners of the occidental godlessness that he laments. Perhaps such insights as I can muster are the fruits of satanic wisdom (Satanswahrheit). In any event, it seems to me that potentially the greatest benefit of discussions such as ours is to experience what Kierkegaard described as "the edification implied in the thought that against God we are always in the wrong." Ernst Meyer