The following report was prepared forCHRISTIANITY TODAYby Dr. Harold B. Kuhn, professor of philosophy of religion, Asbury Theological Seminary:
Meeting in Dortmund July 24–28, the eleventh Deutscher Evangelischer Kirchentag (All-German Protestant Congress) continued the eighteen-year attempt by German Protestantism to make itself vitally effective in the life of the German Federal Republic. To a significant degree, the tone of the congress was set by its location. Reminded by Dortmund of the energetic quality of life in the massive industrial complex of the Ruhr valley, the Kirchentag was led to an emphasis upon the practical qualities of Christian living and of Christian responsibility within the Church.
In addition to the standing issues which face the German Protestant church, this year’s congress faced some specific issues with a new vigor. The problems of life in the industrialized society were far more urgent this year than at Munich (1959) or Berlin (1961). The complexities of life for the “industrial man” have brought German Protestantism face to face with the question: Will Christianity continue to exist as a force in German life in the half-century ahead? Many church leaders fear that Christianity may become little more than a pious hobby of the very young and the very old. This sombre possibility entered in some way or other into most of the discussions.
At a time when the chairman of the Montreal Faith and Order Conference of the WCC was calling for increased attention to the Bultmannian theology, surprisingly little was said about “demythologizing” or “communication.” Instead, emphasis lay on the quality of Christian life which will make the Gospel relevant to the complexities of the modern age. In this connection, the speakers and discussion leaders were at times surprisingly blunt. No effort was made to bypass painful subjects. Deep concern was expressed lest the German church continue to be merely culture-conforming and culture-affirming. Sharp criticism was offered of the practical, creeping type of materialism which infects the West. Predictably, Dr. Martin Niemoeller reminded the Kirchentag that the “practical atheism” of the free world is spreading more rapidly (and certainly more insidiously) than the “official atheism” of the Communist empire.
Two major concerns seemed to trouble a number of German leaders. First, some of the presentations were haunted by the manner in which large segments of the Church had capitulated to the totalitarian state from 1933 to 1945. Second (and even more noticeable), the genocidal attack of the Nazi state upon Jewry seemed a continuing burden upon the German conscience. Most encouraging was the emphasis upon projects for reparation and reconciliation in areas outside Germany where the decimation of the Jewish community was so great during Germany’s “great apostasy.”
The major thrust of the Kirchentag in the area of the individual Christian life was toward a realization of personal responsibility. Over and over the speakers and group leaders laid emphasis upon the necessity for responsible individual action—upon sincere participation in public life at all levels. In this connection the programming included evening street-preaching missions in blighted districts and youth witnessing in one of the nearby cabarets.
The role of Protestantism in a pluralistic society seems at first glance to be the same everywhere, but the discussions of the relation of the Church to education in West Germany indicated that the problem has different dimensions here than in the United States. In this area, too, German Protestantism is trying to find her way.
Most encouraging to this reporter was the manner in which several of the speakers faced the problem of maintaining a vital Christianity in a situation in which 95 per cent of the population are, almost by virtue of birth, members of some church. With great forthrightness the speakers called the congress to face the fact that when the Church becomes “naturalized” in the world, the world in turn loses interest in her message and her ministration. How can the Church be “not of the world” and yet effective in the world? The answer proposed—and this with much emphasis—was a responsible, personal relationship of the individual to the Lord of the Church by which the resources of his life are brought into the Church’s service.
It is scarcely necessary to note that the Kirchentag is a movement whose basic thrust comes from the laity. While clergy were in evidence, Christian laymen from all walks of life were vocal at all planes of the congress’ activity. Unfortunately, no representatives were present from Eastern Germany, despite every effort to secure the necessary permits for delegates from the Soviet zone. To maintain some contact with the “separated brethren,” leaders of the Kirchentag have during past weeks encouraged East German Christians to hold brief Kirchentag-like meetings at Erfurt, Zwickau, and Goerlitz.
With respect to the physical arrangements for this year’s Kirchentag, it was laudable that mammoth crowds were handled with typical efficiency and great courtesy. As of Saturday morning, there was an enrollment for the congress of nearly 14,000, with an equal number of single day-registrations for the day preceding. The opening gathering numbered 50,000. Attendance was reported to be 300,000 at the mass, open-air meeting on the closing Sunday afternoon. At this final assembly—with such noted leaders in attendance as Heinrich Luebke, president of the German Federal Republic, Bishop Otto Dibelius, Kurt Scharf, and D. Ernst Wilm—the overall theme of the Kirchentag, Mit Konflikten Leben (“How to Live with Conflicts”), received dramatic presentation.
Happily the Kirchentag was not smothered by masses of registrants or by statistics. Careful planning served to distribute the participants in such a way that none needed to feel lost in the totality of the congress. But this effect was produced quite as largely by the emphasis of the Kirchentag upon the element of individual responsibility.
There was relatively little of the “Let us, therefore … and much of the “Accept therefore your own obligation for …”
To this reporter this was the sign and token of hope for a renewed effectiveness of German Protestantism in her land.
There were discussions which obviously concerned the German participants most deeply. Other efforts dealt with issues which are meaningful to Christians as a whole. Several scores of visitors from other lands, including this reporter and his wife, found not only a deep warmth of welcome but also a time of spiritual uplift and intellectual stimulation. One got the feeling that the Kirchentag contains many deeply earnest persons—predominantly lay persons or clergymen who are lay-minded. Having lived under gray political and spiritual skies for some decades, these persons now deeply feel that Jesus Christ has something to say through them to a nation which is obviously taking a large place in the world. These thousands of persons profoundly hope that this new place in the sun may be informed by the Sun of Righteousness.
The Illusion Of Silence
Bishop Otto Dibelius charged that the Kirchentag in Dortmund deliberately bypassed the conflicts and problems caused by Germany’s political situation, although the theme of the congress was “How to Live with Conflicts.”
The plight of millions of Christians in Communist East Germany is one on which attention must be continuously focused, he declared in a radio broadcast.
“While it was understandable,” said the head of the Evangelical Church of Berlin-Brandenburg, “that the congress wanted, as far as possible, to keep out of politics … it was hardly appropriate that the distress of our Eastern brothers was mentioned only marginally.”
Dibelius declared that “if we talk about conflicts, the conflicts which pose themselves because of the political situation of millions of Christians must be given greater expression than they received in Dortmund.”
“Otherwise,” he added, “the world might believe the German Christians are prepared to put up with just about everything, including the Berlin Wall and the unprecedented fact that of some fourteen million East German Protestants not a single one was allowed to attend the congress.”
Warning against “the illusion that one can serve peace by keeping silent,” Dibelius noted that “the Communists attacked the Dortmund congress with the same vigor as they had done in the case of earlier congresses, although they knew it was entirely non-political.”
