My Lutheran upbringing has left me with a predilection
for reading texts in the original.  I trust I shall be
forgiven, on this Bonhoeffer discussion list, for letting
Bonhoeffer's words, and to a lesser extent, Martin Luther's,
speak for themselves.  I neither approve nor disapprove
of the texts which I quote. I wish only to understand and
to learn from them. My own views, which are very different,
I consider irrelevant to our discussion. 

I have followed the discussion about Totalitarianism in
Germany with interest and sympathy.  I believe it is important
for us to consider the possibility that some, if not many of
the views that have been expressed in this context have
little, if anything to do with Bonhoeffer's experience or with
his thoughts as these are reflected in his writing; which is
not to say that the expression of such different views should
not be welcomed.

I have three comments to contribute to our discussion
of Totalitarianism, for the first of which
I will defer to J.W. Goethe:

    "Mein Freund, die Zeiten der Vergangenheit
    Sind uns ein Buch mit sieben Siegeln;
    Was ihr den Geist der Zeiten heiszt,
    Das ist im Grund der Herren eigner Geist,
    In dem die Zeiten sich bespiegeln."
                              (Faust, 1. Teil)

which I translate: "My friend, the times of the past
are for us a book with seven seals. What you call the
spirit of the times, is fundamentally the gentlemen's
own spirit in which the times of the past are mirrored."
                              (Faust, Part 1>

2. While dictionary definitions of totalitarianism
are a dime a dozen, I have difficulty in applying this term
to particular situations. I have observed it to be a
characteristic of _all_ societies to demand some measure
of conformity to public mores and a high degree of 
subjection to governmental authority.  At what point does
government become totalitarian?  Is potential totalitarianism
limited to nations, or can subdivisions such as states or
provinces exhibit totalitarian characteristics ? What about
the military ? What about public and private corporations ?
Churches ? Monasteries ?  Nunneries ? Prisons ?  Orphanages ?
Does the fact that one is "free" to emigrate from a society
(love it or leave it) mitigate its totalitarian characteristics?
Remember the account of Roger Williams fleeing from Puritan
Massachusetts to Rhode Island?

In the Appendix to his "Ethik" Bonhoeffer refers repeatedly
to the beast of Revelations 13. Am I correct in construing
these references as allusions to the Nazi tyranny? Luther's
interpretation of Revelations 13 is more explicit and
leaves nothing to the imagination:

 "Hij sind nu die zwey Thier / Eins / ist das Keiserthum/
Das ander mit den zweien Hoernern/ das Bapstum / welchs
nu auch ein weltlich Reich worden ist / Doch mit dem schein
des namens Christi. Denn der Bapst hat das gefallen Roemisch
reich / wider auffgerichtet / und von den Griechen zu den
Deutschen bracht / Vnd ist doch mehr ein Bilde vom Roemischen
reich / denn des Reichs coerper selbs / wie es gewesen ist ...
Was aber fur grewel / wehe und schaden solch keiserlich 
Bapstum gethan hat / ist jtzt nicht zu erzelen. Denn erstlich
ist die Welt durch sein Buch vol worden aller Abgoetterey /
mit Kloestern / Stiften / Heiligen / Walfarten / Fegfewr /
Ablas / Unehe / vnd unzeliche mehr stuecke der Menschenlere
und werck etc. Zum andern wer kann erzelen / wie viel blut /
mord / krieg vnd jamer / die Bepste haben angericht / beide mit
selbs kriegen und mit reitzen die Keiser / Koenige / Fuersten
vntereiunander." (Martin Luther, Vorrede auff die Offenbarung
S. Johannis (Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag 1974 S 2465)

I translate:

 "Here now are the two beasts. One is the Empire. The 
other with the two horns is the Papacy, which has also
become a worldly power, but with the guise of the name
of Christ. For the Pope resurrected the fallen Roman Empire
and brought it from the Greeks to the Germans. Yet it is
rather a semblance of the Roman Empire, than the Empire's 
substance (body) itself as it (really) was ...
But what abomination, pain and destruction such imperial
papacy committed is not now to be told. For in the first
place through its book (?ordinances) the world has become
filled with all (sort of) idolatry, with monasteries,
convents, saints, pilgrimages, purgatory, indulgences,
adultery and uncounted further instances of human teaching
and work(s) etc. In the second place, who can relate
how much blood, murder, war and misery the popes have
brought about, both with wars of their own and by
instigating the emperors, kings, princes against one another.
 - Martin Luther, Preface to the Revelation of St. John,
             (Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag 1974 p 2465)

To what extent is Luther's exegesis malicious, to what extent
is it realistic ? Is their identification with the Beast
a valid common denominator among the Roman Empire,
the Papacy and the Third Reich? If so, is this common
denominator something other than totalitarianism?
Is it possible to make a systematic distinction between
the claims of temporal authority, such as the Third Reich,
upon the human spirit, on the one hand, and the claims of
ecclesiastical authority as exemplified, for example,
by the Summa Theologica of Saint Thomas, Calvin's Institutes
or Luther's voluminous writings on the other? At what point,
if at all, do the claims of Jewish, or Muslim law become
totalitarian?

3. Bonhoeffer drafted tentative answers to some of the
questions raised in our discussions of totalitarianism.
Eberhard Bethge compiled them as an appendix (Anhang)
to Bonhoeffer's "Ethik".

a) Jesus beschaeftigte sich so gut wie gar nicht mit der
Loesung weltlicher Probleme; wo er dazu aufgefordert wird,
weicht er merkwuerdig aus (Matt. 22,15 ; Luke 12, 13),
wie er ueberhaupt auf Fragen der Menschen fast nie direkt,
sondern von einer ganz anderen Ebene her antwortet. Sein
Wort ist nicht Antwort auf menschliche Fragen und Probleme,
sondern die goettliche Antwort auf die goettliche Frage
an den Menschen. Sein Wort ist wesentlich nicht von unten,
sondern von oben her bestimmt, nicht Loesung sondern ERLOESUNG
Nicht aus der Entzweiung menschlicher Problematik des Guten
und des Boesen, sondern aus der vollstaendigen Einheit des
Sohnes mit dem Willen des Vaters kommt sein Wort. Es steht
jenseits aller menschlichen Problematik. Das musz zuerst
einmal verstanden sein. Weil Jesus statt der Loesung von
Problemen die Erloesung der Menschen bringt, darum bringt
er aber auch wirklich die Loesung aller menschlichen
Probleme - "es wird alles zufallen" (Mat. 6, 33) -
nur von ganz anderer Warte her.

b) Wer sagt uns eigentlich, dasz alle weltlichen Probleme
geloest werden sollen und koennen? Vielleicht ist Gott 
die Ungeloestheit dieser Probleme wichtiger als ihre Loesung,
naemlich als Hinweis auf den Suendenfall der Menschen
und auf Gottes Erloesung. Vielleicht sind die Probleme
der Menschen so verstrickt, so falsch gestellt, dasz
sie eben wirklich nicht zu loesen sind. (Das Problem von
Armen und Reichen wird sich eben nie anders loesen lassen,
als indem es ungeloest bleibt.)

c) Der organisierte Kampf der Kirche gegen irgendwelche
weltlichen Uebel - "campagne" (sic) , "crusade" -, eine
Fortsetzung der mittelalterlichen Kreuzzugsgedanken, der
im Luthertum fast vollstaendig ueberwunden worden ist,
gehoert in den angelsaechsischen Laendern zu den charakteristischen
Merkmalen kirchlichen Lebens. Beispiele: Sklaverei, Prohibition,
Voelkerbund - aber gerade diese Beispiele zeigen zugleich die
Krisis dieser "Kreuzzuege". Die Aufhebung der Sklaverei geschah 
eben gleichzeitig mit der Entstehung des englischen Industrie-
proletariats (man koennte sagen: die Welt laeszt sich nicht
um ihr Recht bringen. Die Prohibition, hauptsaechlich von
Methodisten erzwungen, fuehrte zu schlimmeren Erfahrungen als die
Zeit vorher, so dasz die Methodisten selbst fuer ihre 
Abschaffung eintraten (eine entscheidende Erfahrung fuer die
amerikanischen Kirchen). Der Voelkerbund, der die Ueberwachung
der Nationalismen zum Ziel hatte, fuehrte zu dessen aeuszerster
Verschaerfung. Solche Erfahrungen geben fuer die Frage, wieweit
die Kirche zur Loesung weltlicher Probleme berufen sei, ernstlich
zu denken. "Gott in der Faust" (Hiob 12, 6)_

d) Das Denken das von den menschlichen Problemen ausgeht und
von dorther nach Loesungen fragt, musz ueberwunden werden;
es ist unbiblisch. Nicht von der Welt zu Gott, sondern von
Gott zu der Welt geht der Weg Jesu Christi und daher der Weg
alles christlichen Denkens. Das bedeutet, dasz das Evangelium
sein Wesen nicht darin hat, weltliche Probleme zu loesen, und
dasz darin auch nicht die wesentliche Aufgabe der Kirche bestehen
kann. Daraus folgt nun allerdings nicht, dasz die Kirche in
dieser Hinsicht gar keine Aufgaben haette. WELCHES IHRE LEGITIME
AUFGABE IST, ERKENNEN WIR ERST, WENN WIR DEN RECHTEN ANSATZPUNKT
GEFUNDEN HABEN.

I translate:

a) Jesus occupied himself virtually not at all with the
solution of wordly problems; where he is asked to do so,
he is curiously evasive (Matt. 22:15; Luke 12:13), as
he in general makes no direct replies to the inquiries of
men, but makes answer from an entirely different level.
His word is not answer to the questions and problems of men,
but the divine answer to the divine question to man. His
word is essentially determined not from below but from above,
is not solution but REDEMPTION. His word derives not from
the partition of human problems of good and evil, but from
the perfect unity of the Son with the will of the Father.
His word stands beyond all human problems. That is something
one must understand at the outset. Because instead of the 
solution to problems Jesus brings the redemption of mankind,
therefore he truly brings the solution of all human problems -
"all these things shall be added unto you" (Matt. 6:33)
only from an entirely different standpoint.

b) Who, by the way, is it that tells us that all wordly
problems _should_ and can be solved? Perhaps such unsolved
problems are more important to God than their solution,
namely as a pointer to the sinfulness of mankind and to
God's redemption. Perhaps the problems of mankind are
so involved, so misstated, that they are actually not
susceptible to solution. (The problem of the poor and
the rich will just never admit to a different solution
than to remain unresolved.)

c) The organized battle of the church against various
worldly evils - "campagne" (sic) , "crusade" -, a continuation
of the medieval concept of crusade, almost entirely 
overcome by Lutheranism, is in Anglo-Saxon countries
among the most characteric emblems of Christian life.
For example: Slavery, Prohibition, League of Nations -
but just these examples demonstrate the crisis of such
"crusades". The elimination of slavery occurred simultaneously
with the appearance of the English industial proletariat.
(One might say, the world will not forgo its claims.)
Prohibition, primarily extorted by Methodists, led to worse
experiences than the preceding period, so that the Methodists
themselves advocated its repeal (a decisive experience for the
American churches). The League of Nations, which had the
surveillance of nationalisms as its goal, led to their utmost
exacerbation. Such experiences occasion serious consideration
of the question to what extent the solution of wordly problems
should be the church's vocation. "Peace have they who rage against
God, and carry their god in their fists." (Job 12:6 - [please see
my note below])

d) The thinking which proceeds from the problems of mankind
and from thence asks after solutions, such thinking must be
overcome: it is unbiblical. The journey of Jesus Christ
goes not from the world to God but from God to the world, 
and thus (in the same direction) goes the way of all Christian 
thought. That means that the Gospel has its essence not in
solving worldly problems, nor can this be the essential task
of the church. From this, however, does not follow that
the church has no tasks in this respect. WE WILL ONLY RECOGNIZE
WHICH IS THE LEGITIMATE TASK OF THE CHURCH, WHEN WE HAVE FOUND
PROPER POINT OF APPLICATION.

[ Bonhoeffer alludes to an obscure passage in Job 12:6, merely
with the cryptic "Gott in der Faust", (God in the fist). I don't
know Hebrew. I find nothing like this in the Septuagint. 
St. Jerome translates:"abundant tabernacula praedonum et audacter
provocant Deum cum ipse dederit omnia in manibus eorum." Luther
follows him with: "Der Verstoerer huetten haben die fuelle / vnd
toben wider Gott thuerstiglich / wiewol es jnen Gott in jre
hende gegeben hat." as does the King James Version:"The tabernacles
of robbers prosper, and they that provoke God are secure; into
whose hand God bringeth abundantly." The modern German Bible on which
Bonhoeffer may have relied: "Der Verstoerer Huetten haben die Fuelle,
und Ruhe haben, die wider Gott toben, die ihren Gott in der Faust
fuehren."]

From the foregoing quotations and from the context in which they
appear, I infer that at the late date in his life when he composed
them, Bonhoeffer would have countenanced political activity by the
church solely in defense of the church's evangelical mission. He
did not, to the best of my knowledge, elaborate political theory 
independent of his ecclesiology.

                                         Ernst Meyer