An evangelical German wants his compatriots to go further in atoning for the Holocaust and embracing Israel
By B.C. | TUBINGEN
THE university town of Tubingen in Germany, with its lovely medieval buildings and sparkling river (pictured above), is an important part of Europe's Christian patrimony. And like every other such place, its history has been studded with moments of dark and light. Some of the most distinguished Protestant and Catholic theologians have taught or studied here, and that tradition continues. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a revered Protestant thinker who was hanged for his part in an anti-Hitler plot, did his first degree in the town. But the university's prominent scholars of Christian history included some Nazi apologists who argued for the compatibility of their religious beliefs with fascist ideology. On Kristallnacht in 1938, the local synagogue was burned down.
These days, one of the first things that greets your eye in the town's central square is the office of a movement founded by a German pastor who believes his compatriots have not gone far enough in their contrition for the nation's crimes against the Jews. Jobst Bittner is a charismatic evangelical cleric who thinks the present-day generation of Germans must investigate and in some deep sense repent for the sins of their forebears: the misdeeds of the nation as a whole and their immediate relatives. He is also a passionate supporter of Israel who insists that criticism of Israeli policies (or indeed failure to support Israel actively) can be a mask for anti-Semitism. He encourages people to ask searching questions about their families' behaviour during the Nazi era, even if this puts a strain on relationships. His movement, TOS ministries, has organised "Marches for Life" in scores of places in Germany and eastern Europe affected by the Holocaust, which are billed as public acts of remembrance and contrition.
Within the wider worlds of both Christianity and Judaism, Mr Bittner's approach to Christian-Jewish reconciliation is controversial, to put it mildly. He has close ties with "Messianic Jews" in the United States who embrace Jesus Christ while staying very close to their own Jewish heritage and culture. Secular and conventionally religious Jews often say they are disturbed by the implication that their tradition can only find its fulfilment in Jesus of Nazareth. Meanwhile, most mainstream Christian churches would accept the proposition that their members have further to go in absorbing the message of the Holocaust, and in reflecting on the responsibility of some Christians for that unspeakable crime; they also affirm Israel's right to exist in security. But as emerged clearly during the recent papal visit to the Holy Land, Christian leaders generally combine those beliefs with concern for the welfare of the Palestinians, both Christian and Muslim.
One of the most controversial bits of Mr Bittner's message (and in fairness, it is a controversy he does not dodge) is his view of repentance. In his book, "Breaking the Veil of Silence" he devotes a chapter to an intricate argument designed to show that "collective guilt" does exist, and that people must therefore repent for things done by their compatriots and forebears, even if they had no direct involvement. His argument is partly rooted in a traditional Western Christian view of "original sin", as a condition all humans inherit from Adam. (Eastern Christians reject this idea of human nature as too pessimistic, and based on a faulty Latin translation.) Repenting for our forebears' crimes cannot change their fate in the eyes of God, in Mr Bittner's bleak view, but our own eternal destiny might be at risk if we fail to do so.
Theology aside, his argument also has implications for people who are interested in guilt and accountability from a secular perspective. One of the arguments in favour of war-crimes trials, in Nuremburg or The Hague, is that by focusing on the guilt of certain key individuals, they can help to lift the stain of collective responsibility from entire peoples and make reconciliation between former belligerents easier. That offers too easy a way out, the book insists. Secular thinking does, in practice, accept some degree of collective guilt, in that defeated powers are often made to pay reparations which weigh on the whole population; but these regimes are of finite duration.
If Mr Bittner were simply encouraging a deeper sense of collective self-awareness, that would be nothing but good. There are many places of conflict and persecution where things would be a lot better if members of a group or nation that was responsible for perpetrating terrible wrongs had a keener and more sympathetic sense of why some people regarded them with suspicion or even hatred. It also seems a good idea for people to reflect on whether material goods and benefits they now enjoy are the fruit of criminal misdeeds by their forebears. And it is clearly a good thing if people can empathise deeply with the victims of atrocities committed by "their own" side. Most people lack that ability and that is why wars rage on and on.
But the notion of "repenting" for somebody else's misdeeds goes a lot a further. As I have written in another context, I believe that such an idea relativises or even trivialises any contrition we might show over bad things we really have done ourselves. In an important way, a new moral clock starts ticking with every human life.
