ART Von Rad Defends OldTestament in Nazi Germany July 2008 Bernard Levinson

7/29/2019 ART Von Rad Defends OldTestament in Nazi Germany July 2008 Bernard Levinson

1/17

Reading the Bible in Nazi Germany:Gerhard von Rads Attempt to Reclaim

the Old Testament for the Church*BERNARD M. LEVINSON

Berman Family Chair of Jewish Studies and Hebrew Bible

University of Minnesota

This essay investigates Gerhard von Rads interpretation of the book of Deuteronomyand how his social location as a professor at the University of Jena from 19341945in Nazi Germany influenced his exegesis. It explores a particularly poignant andinstructive example of the complex relationship between hermeneutics and history. In order

to tell that story, it is necessary to tell about the history of Germany during 19331945, about

the famous church conflict (Kirchenkampf) that left the Protestant Church in Germany horribly

divided, and in particular, about the extraordinary transformation of Friederich Schiller

University of Jenaalong with its prestigious Faculty of Theologyinto a bastion of National

Socialism (Hochburg der Nationalsozialismus). One sign of the close ties to National Socialism

was the appointment of Karl Astel as Rector of the University. Astel, a leading medical scientist

specializing in eugenics and a ranking officer in Hitlers SS, served as Rector from 1939 until

his suicide in April, 1945. The photograph (opposite page) shows him in full SS uniform

congratulating a student athlete.

Jena is in the state of Thuringia, in the former East Germany. Its historic university wasthe home not only of Hegel and Schelling, but also of W. M. L. DeWette, whose 1805 doctoral

dissertation arguing that Josiahs reform must have been motivated by Deuteronomy represents

the foundation of modern work on the Pentateuch.1 Von Rads first academic appointment

From 1933 until 1945, the Hebrew Bible and the connection

between Christianity and Judaism came under attack in Nazi

Germany. Gerhard von Rad defended the importance of the Old

Testament in a courageous struggle that profoundly influenced

his interpretation of the book of Deuteronomy.

* This article, based upon a lecture at the 2006 Annual Meeting of the SBL in Washington, D. C., draws upon andupdates Bernard M. Levinson and Douglas Dance, The Metamorphosis of Law into Gospel: Gerhard von RadsAttempt to Reclaim the Old Testament for the Church, in Recht und Ethik im Alten Testament(ed. Bernard M.Levinson and Eckart Otto; with assistance from W. Dietrich; Munster: LIT Verlag, 2004), 83110. The reader isreferred there for a fuller discussion. A more comprehensive treatment will follow either in a planned volume ofmy essays on the reception history of the HB from Qumran into the modern world, or in an edited volume on thetransformation of theology and related disciplines under National Socialism. I wish to thank the editors of

Interpretationfor their assistance with preparing this article for publication. I am especially grateful to Prof. Dr.Uwe Becker, who holds the Chair in Old Testament at Friedrich Schiller University of Jena, for his encouragementand support; and to Paul Keim, Professor of Bible and Religion at Goshen College, for valuable comments.

1 W. M. L. de Wette,Dissertatio critica qua Deuteronomium diversum a prioribus Pentateuchi libris, aliuscuiusdam recentiori auctoris opus esse demonstrator, (Th.D. diss.; Faculty of Theology, University of Jena, 1805);published, idem,Opuscula Theologica(Berlin: Berolini, 1830), 14968. See further: John W. Rogerson, W. M. L. de Wette,


2/17

J U L Y 2 0 0 8 Interpretation 239

after completing his Habilitation(a

second dissertation, which is the normal

requirement in Germany for appoint-

ment as Ordinarius, or tenured full

professor) was to the University ofJena, a position that he held from

19341945.

Von Rad kept returning to Deuter-

onomy throughout his career, beginning

with his doctoral dissertation in 1929,

Das Gottesvolk im Deuteronomium, and

continuing through Das formgeschicht-

liche Problem des Hexateuchs(1938),

Deuteronomium Studien(1947), and

his commentary on Deuteronomy for the

prestigious series Altes Testament Deutsch

(1964).2 Perhaps more striking than his

preoccupation with this pivotal text,

however, is the way von Rad characterized

its textual content, its priorities, and its

theology. His rhetoric frequently took the

form of a series of antithetical formula-

Founder of Modern Biblical Criticism: An Intellectual Biography(JSOTSup 126; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1992).2 On von Rads preoccupation with Deuteronomy throughout his career, see Eckart Ottos Foreword to Recht und

Ethik im Alten Testament, v. For the works in question, see Gerhard von Rad, Das Gottesvolk im Deuteronomium(BWANT 47; Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer,, 1929); posthumously published in idem, Gesammelte Studien zum Alten

University of Jena Rector Dr. Karl Astel congratulating a student athlete. Photo courtesy ofthe Archive of the Ernst-Haeckel-House, Institute for the History of Medicine, Jena.

The Provincial Churches of the Evangelical Church inGermany (Thuringia shaded at center). Source: FredericSpotts, The Churches and Politics in Germany(Middle-town, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press), 14.


3/17

240 Interpretation J U L Y 2 0 0 8

tions: Deuteronomy is not X but is Y.3 At times it seemed that von Rad was concerned just as

much to establish what Deuteronomy is as to show what it is not. As is well known, von Rad

argued that Deuteronomy is not law but rather a series of sermons by traveling Levites preach-

ing a renewed message of redemption. He maintained that Deuteronomys law code is not a

dead text but live instruction, not demands for obedience to incomprehensible requirements,

but spiritual exhortations to remember Gods grace.

In his hands, Deuteronomy became not a law book demanding obedience, but rather a

collection of sermons pervaded with a spiritual, even a protestantischeAtmosphre.4 Written

laws became homiletic sermons meant to encourage and inspire. Israels obligation under

YHWHs covenant treaty for obedience to his statutes and ordinances became Israels uncondi-

tional election to salvation. On that basis, any sections of Deuteronomy that seem to make sal-

vation dependent on works, i.e., obedience to the law, were deftly and systematically explained

away. Either their significance was deemphasized, or they were relegated to later exilic orpost-exilic expansions of the text, like the blessings and the curses of Deut 28.5 The support for

these claims is often absent, so that von Rads analysis of Deuteronomy, particularly the legal

corpus of Deut 1226, comes closer to eisegesis than to exegesis.

My question is simple: why is that the case? My hypothesis is that these points where von

Rads claims seem inconsistent with the text of Deuteronomy reflect instead the historical situ-

ation in which he wrote during the formative part of his careerGermany, under the National

Socialist dictatorship from 19331945. Just as he was appointed, Jena transformed itself into one

of the leading German universities to promote National Socialist ideology. The Faculty of

Theology moved eagerly in the same direction. It took a leadership role in transforming the

discipline into an organ for National Socialist and German Christian ideology. A tract written

by Walter Grundmann, one of von Rads more powerful colleagues, includes a powerful Nazi

neologismThe De-Jewing(Entjudung) of Religious Life as the Mission of German Theology and

Church(Die Entjudung des religisen Lebens als Aufgabe deutscher Theologie und Kirche).6 This

specific historical and institutional context must have contributed to the way von Rad presented

Deuteronomy and its laws. Walter Brueggemann and Jean-Louis Ska have correctly noted that

von Rads concept of salvation history represents a polemic against National Socialist ideology.7

Testament 2(ed. Rudolf Smend; ThB 48; Munich: C. Kaiser, 1973),9108.See also idem,Das formgeschichtliche Problemdes Hexateuchs(BWANT 78; Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1938), 1. Reprinted in idem, Gesammelte Studien zum AltenTestament 1 (ThB 8; Munich: C. Kaiser, 1958/41971), 986. ET: idem, The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays(trans.E.W. Trueman Dicken; London: Oliver & Boyd,1966), 178.See also idem, Das fnfte Buch Mose(4th ed.;ATD 8;Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,1983). ET: Deuteronomy: A Commentary (trans. Dorothea Barton; OTL 5;Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966).

3 Jean Louis Ska connects von Rads distinction between law and grace to the dialectical theology of Karl Barth.He also hints that von Rads reconstruction of Israelite religion, whereby it has the structure of salvation history fromthe very beginnings, was an implicit rejection of natural religion, as favored by National Socialism. See idem, Intro-duction to Reading the Pentateuch(trans. Sr. Pascale Dominique; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2006), 11623.

4 Protestant atmosphere, see von Rad, Deuteronomium-Studien, 47. E.T. : idem, Studies in Deuteronomy(trans.David Stalker; 2d ed.; London: SCM, 1956), 68.

5 Ibid., 50.6 Walter Grundmann, Die Entjudung des religisen Lebens als Aufgabe deutscher Theologie und Kirche(Weimar:

Verlag Deutsche Christen, 1939). For the most extensive study of his career, see Roland Deines, Volker Leppin, andKarl-Wilhelm Niebuhr, eds., Walter Grundmann: Ein Neutestamentler im Dritten Reich(Arbeiten zur Kirchen- undTheologiegeschichte 21; Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2007); and Susannah Heschel, The Aryan Jesus: ChristianTheologians and the Bible in Nazi Germany(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008).

7 See Walter Brueggemann, The ABCs of Old Testament Theology in the US, ZAW114 (2002): 413. See alsoSka, Introduction to Reading the Pentateuch.


4/17

G E R H A R D V O N R A D Interpretation 241

However, they overlook the significance

of the situation in Jena and von Rads

passionI use the word deliberately

to retain the importance of the OT as

part of the churchs canon. Conversely,

Susannah Heschels rich histories of the

Jena faculty focus elsewhere than on OT

theology and exegesis.8

KIRCHENKAMPF: THE

STRUGGLE FOR CONTROL

OF THE CHURCH

In 1933, Hitler and his National-

sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei

(NSDAP) gained control of the German

government. During its first months in

power, the government initiated a series

of legal measures to eliminate all forms

of influence other than the National

Socialist party. Under National

Socialisms umbrella, a rising faction

within the church, calling themselves the German Christians (Deutsche Christen), sought admin-

istrative control of the various state churches (Landeskirchen). The German Christians presented

the nations resurgence as an awakening of Germanys Lutheran heritage after the moral corrup-

tion and secularization of the Weimar Republic.9 They denied the Jewish ancestry of Jesus and

erased Hebrew words like hosanna and hallelujah from church creeds and hymns.10 The

German Christians also launched virulent attacks against the OT. In November, 1933, Dr. Reinhold

Krause, a German Christian leader in Berlin, demanded that the church make itself more appeal-

ing to all National Socialists by ridding itself of everything Un-German in worship and confes-

sion; liberation from the Old Testament with its Jewish morality of profit and its stories of cattle

traders and pimps(Undeutschen im Gottesdienst und im Bekenntnismigen; Befreiung vom Alten

Testament mit seiner jdischen Lohnmoral, von diesen Viehhndler- und Zuhltergeschichten).11

8 Susannah Heschel, The Theological Faculty at the University of Jena as a Stronghold of National Socialismin Kmpferische Wissenschaft: Studien zur Universitt Jena im Nationalsozialismus(ed. Uwe Hofeld et al.; Cologne:Bhlau, 2003), 45271. The same article appears in two additional versions: idem,The Theological Faculty at theUniversity of Jena as a Stronghold of National Socialism, History of Universities18.1 (2003): 14369; and idem,ForVolk, Blood, and God: The Theological Faculty at the University of Jena during the Third Reich, in Nazi Germanyand the Humanities(ed. Wolfgang Bialas and Anson Rabinbach; Oxford: Oneworld,2007),36598.Unless otherwiseindicated, all citations here to the triune article will be to the version published in Kmpferische Wissenschaft,whichseems the most comprehensive.

9 Shelley Baranowski,The Confessing Church and Anti-Semitism: Protestant Identity, German Nationhood,

and the Exclusion of Jews, in Robert P. Ericksen and Susannah Heschel, eds., Betrayal: German Churches and theHolocaust(Minneapolis: Fortress, 1999), 9495.10 Doris L. Bergen, Storm Troopers of Christ: The German Christian Movement and the Ecclesiastical Final

Solution, in Ericksen and Heschel, Betrayal: German Churches and the Holocaust, 41.11 Hans Buchheim, Glaubenskrise im Dritten Reich: Drei Kapitel nationalsozialistischer Religionspolitik (Stuttgart:

Deutsche Verlagsanstalt,1953), 129. See also Reinhold Krause, Rede des Gauobmannes der Glaubensbewegung Deutsche

Walter Grundmann (19061976). Photo courtesy ofLandeskirchenarchiv der Evangelischen Kirche inMitteldeutschland, Eisenach.


5/17


Opposition to the German Christian power grab organized itself under the banner of the

Confessing Church (Bekennende Kirche). In the Barmen Declaration of 1934, in which Karl

Barth played a major role, the Confessing Church strongly resisted the German Christian adop-

tion of the National Socialist agenda.12 Indeed, as Shelley Baranowski notes, The muted protestsof the Evangelical opposition to the persecution of the Jews and other undesirables contrasts

markedly to its spirited defense of ecclesiastical autonomy.13 However, the Barmen Declaration

did not speak to the contested role of the OT in the church. The biblical passages referenced in

the Declaration were taken exclusively from the NT. The German Church remained seriously

divided throughout the war.

THE UNIVERSITY OF JENA

IN THE VORTEX

The University of Jena stood at

the forefront of the attempt to cre-

ate the ideal National Socialist

University.14 This extended to the uni-

versitys most prestigious depart-

ments, including Law, Medicine, and

Theology. For example, the Faculty of

Medicine established a close working

relationship with Buchenwald, theconcentration camp twenty miles dis-

tant, where some medical students

trained in pathology.15 Two university

medical clinics were involved in the

forced sterilization of approximately

14,000 people between July 14, 1933

and the end of 1943, under a program

directed by Rector Karl Astel.

Von Rad arrived at Jena in 1934

just as this process of the universitys

Christen im Gro-Berlin: Dr. Krause. Gehalten im Sportpalast am 13. November 1933 (pamphlet in LandeskirchenarchivBielefeld 5, 1/289), 2. Cited in the ET by Bergen,Storm Troopers of Christ, 53.

12 Baranowski, The Confessing Church and Anti-Semitism, 9091.13 Ibid., 99.14 Much of the difficult history of Friedrich Schiller University of Jena (the name it acquired in 1934) during the Third

Reich has become available only since 1989, once the reunification of Germany permitted access to important archivalsources that were previously unavailable under East German rule. The University administration should be commended forthe way it has encouraged and supported critical evaluation and public exposition of its past. This support is particularlyevident in two significant edited volumes: Herbert Gottwald and Matthias Steinbach, eds., Zwischen Wissenschaft und

Politik: Studien zur Jenaer Universitt im 20. Jahrhundert(Jena: Bussert & Stadeler, 2000); and especially Hofeld et al.,eds., Kmpferische Wissenschaft: Studien zur Universitt Jena im Nationalsozialismus. Equally striking is the commit-ment even of the official university website to document this history openly in both English and German (see, forexample, www.uni-jena.de/ History-lang-en.html).

15 See Mike Bruhn and Heike Bttner,Studieren in Jena 1933 bis 1945: Eine Fallstudie, in Gottwald andSteinbach, Zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik, 116.

Gerhard von Rad (19011971) in Jena. Photo courtesy ofEstate of Gerhard von Rad; made available by ProfessorManfred Oeming (Heidelberg).


6/17


transformation into a National Socialist stronghold began.16 The Chronology of von Rads Kampf

um das Alte Testament, immediately following this essay on p. 249, illustrates that an even more

extreme branch of the German Christian movement had gained control in the state of Thuringia

in 1930, the German Christian Church Movement (KDC). By 1933, they were able to plant one of

their own in the State Ministry of Education,Siegfried Leffler.17 He in turn worked to install in the

Faculty of Theology professors whose primary qualification was party membership or ideological

conformity. All standard German

civil service and academic proce-

dures, including academic quali-

fications, were subverted.18

Wolfgang Meyer, appointed

to the Chair of Practical

Theology, had neither his doc-torate nor his Habilitation, but

he was a radio preacher in

Bavaria and an avowed member

of the KDC.19 His one fear was

that he might be thought to be a

Jew because of his last name,

which he promptly changed to

Meyer-Erlach, lest his advance-

ment be hindered.20

In less thana year, he became Dean of the

Faculty of Theology. Within

another year, on April 1, 1935, he

was appointed Rector of the

University, despite having gained

only eight of 129 faculty votes.

16 The two most helpful sources on von Rads battle to maintain the integrity of OT scholarship in a Faculty of

Theology that step by step devoted itself to National Socialist ideology are Rudolf Smend, Deutsche Alttestamentler indrei Jahrhunderten: mit 18 Abbildungen(Gttingen:Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989); ET: From Astruc to Zimmerli: OldTestament Scholarship in Three Centuries(trans.M. Kohl; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007); and Heschel,The TheologicalFaculty at the University of Jena as a Stronghold of National Socialism. Additional sources that largely summarize exist-ing publications are Eberhard H. Pltz,Art. Jena, TRE16: 559563; and Rudolf Smend,Art. Rad,Gerhard von, TRE28:88991.

A valuable source cited by Heschel on von Rads experiences at the University of Jena during the Nazi period isSusanne Bhm, Gerhard von Rad und der Streit um das Alte Testament unter besonderer Bercksichtigung seiner Zeitin Jena, (Diploma thesis, Faculty of Theology, Fredrick Schiller University of Jena, 1996). One part of this thesis has beenpublished: Susanne Bhm,Gerhard von Rad in Jena, in Das Alte Testamentein Geschichtsbuch?! FS fr Joachim Conrad(ed. Uwe Becker and Jrgen van Oorschot; Arbeiten zur Bibel und ihrer Geschichte 17; Leipzig: EvangelischeVerlagsanstalt,2005), 20340.

17 Anja Rinnen, Kirchenmann und Nationalsozialist: Siegfried Lefflers ideelle Verschmelzung von Kirche und Drittem Reich(Forum zur Pdagogik und Didaktik der Religion 9; Weinheim: Deutscher Studien 1995), 67. Cited in Heschel,Theological Faculty, 453.

18 Smend, From Astruc to Zimmerli, 235; and Heschel, Theological Faculty, 453.19 Rudiger Stutz,Wissenschaft als Dienst an Volk und Vaterland: Die Rektoren der Universitt Jena und das Dritte

Reich, in Gottwald and Steinbach, Zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik,138. See also Klaus Raschzok, Wolf Meyer-Erlach und Hans Asmusen, in Zwischen Volk und Bekenntnis: Praktische Theologie im Dritten Reich(ed. Klaus Raschzok;Leipzig, 2000), 174. Cited in Heschel, Theological Faculty, 466, n. 15.

20 Archive of the University of Jena, Bestand J, Nr. 92, Promotionsakten der Theologischen Fakultt, 19411947.Cited in Heschel, Theological Faculty, 454.

Wolfgang Meyer-Erlach (18911982). Photo courtesy of Landes-kirchenarchiv der Evangelischen Kirche in Mitteldeutschland,Eisenach. [Notice the lapel pin.]


7/17


Although von Rad had completed his Habilitation(at Leipzig under Albrecht Alt), it seems

likely that his appointment to Jena had little to do with academics, but rather was based on an

assumption that he was a member of the Nazi party and that he sympathized with German

Christian ideology.21 Several factors contributed to this impression. One was almost certainly his

early association with Gerhard Kittel, the Protestant theologian whose devotion to National

Socialism has long been recognized.22 Von Rad served as OT editor of the influential Theological

Dictionary of the New Testament(Theologisches Wrterbuch zum Neuen Testament).23 Perhaps the

most important factor was von Rads early membership in the Sturmabteilung(SA),24 the so-

called brown shirts, which had a quite high middle-class membership, including theology pro-

fessors. I am not particularly troubled by this membership, which may have been motivated

more by professional necessity than by personal allegiance. He resigned from the SA in

1937. In any case, even before he went to Jena, von Rad was giving public lectures stressing

that there is no access to Christ except through the OT. Had this material been read, it is

hard to imagine that he would have been appointed.

The use of ideology as the primary qualification for academic office continued with the next

appointment, Heinz Eisenhuth, in 1937 as Professor of Systematic Theology. Walter Grundmann,

the author ofDie Entjudung, was appointed to the NT Chair without his Habilitation, and before

the publication lists of two much more qualified candidates had even arrived, let alone been

discussed.Von Rad fought a losing battle in resisting faculty appointments of this kind, fruitlessly

complaining to the State Ministry, who of course supported the process. In this way, by 1937, the

radical German Christian Church movement controlled three of the six academic chairs in Jenas

Faculty of Theology. They were often able to force a majority that effectively controlled the direc-tion of the Faculty of Theology, leaving von Rad and Waldemar Macholz, Chair of Ecumenical

Studies, as minority dissenters.

The majority within the Faculty of Theology began systematically to reshapeand subvert

the historically rich German theology curriculum. Hebrew was the first target. Jena became the

first theological faculty in Germany to eliminate the requirement for theology students to study

Hebrew. In announcing this resolution, the faculty explained that in the study of Jesus Christ,

the study of the OT could be set aside.25 Von Rad and Macholz opposed this move, arguing

that the OT was critical to understanding Jesus,26 but once Macholz retired in 1938, the resolu-

tion easily passed. That retirement left von Rad completely isolated in his passionate com-

mitment to the OT as Christian Scripture.

21 Heschel, Theological Faculty, 455.22 On Gerhard Kittels support of National Socialism, see Robert P. Ericksen, Assessing the Heritage: German

Protestant Theologians, Nazis, and the Jewish Question, in Ericksen and Heschel, Betrayal: German Churches and theHolocaust, 3337. See also Wayne A. Meeks, A Nazi New Testament Professor Reads His Bible: The Strange Case ofGerhard Kittel, in The Idea of Biblical Interpretation: Essays in Honor of James L. Kugel(ed. Hindy Najman and Judith H.Newman; Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 83; Leiden: Brill, 2004), 51344.

23 Gerhard Kittel et al., eds., Theologishes Wrterbuch zum Neuen Testament(Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1932).24 As a member of the Confessing Church who answered the call to come to Jena to study with von Rad, Konrad von

Rabenau refers to von Rads membership in the SA as having helped establish his credentials for appointment to

the faculty. See his fascinating brief memoir in idem, Als Student bei Gerhard von Rad in Jena 19431945, in DasAlte Testament und die Kultur der Moderne(ed. Manfred Oeming, Konrad Schmid, and Michael Welker; ATM 8;Munster: LIT Verlag, 2004), 10. For additional documentation of von Rads SA membership, see S. Heschel, TheAryan Jesus.

25 Archive of the University of Jena, C 358. Cited in Bhm, Gerhard von Rad, 32.26 Heschel, Theological Faculty, 458.


8/17


His other colleagues introduced new

courses to bring the traditional theology

curriculum into conformity with National

Socialist priorities, such as eugenics, racial

science, and the Jewish question. As the

Chronology makes clear on p. 252, the

new courses included Jesus and the Jews,

Luther and the Jews,Fundamentals of

Aryan Anthropology and Religion, and my

personal favorite,The Concept of the Reich

as the Fundamental Question for German

Theology (Die Idee des Reiches als

Grundfrage deutscher Theologie).27 Von Rad

made his own counterstatement by holding

lectures and seminars on Exodus, Psalms,

Jeremiah, and OT Theology.28

Graduate student research was held to a

litmus test of ideological conformity. One

students dissertation argued that the ideas of

Jesus must be understood in an OT context.

This dissertation was rejected even after a

revision because, as Meyer-Erlach explained,This theologian lacks the important insight of National Socialism that the question of race is

the fundamental question for everything else (Es fehlt dem Theologen die Erkenntnis des

Nationalsozialismus, da die Rassenfrage die Grundfrage fr alles ist).29

The creation of the Institute for the Investigation and Eradication of Jewish Influence

on German Religious Life (Institut zur Erforschung und Beseitigung des jdischen Einflusses

auf das deutsche kirchliche Leben), which was housed at the Thuringian state churchs train-

ing seminary in nearby Eisenach, advanced the cause of National Socialist ideology. Several

members of the Jena theology faculty published under that Institutes name. At its opening

ceremonies, Grundmann argued that the Jewish OT was a roadblock to German Christianity.

To eliminate this obstruction, von Rads colleagues edited the NT, the hymnal, and the cate-

chism so as to eliminate Hebrew words, OT references, and all links between Jesus and Judaism.

Widely sold throughout Germany, these various publications by academic authors added

a patina of scholarship to the Institutes positions.30 They transformed their anti-Semitic

ideas into respectable teachings of Christian theology.31

27 Ibid.28 Bhm, Gerhard von Rad, Appendix 2.

29 See Heschel, Theological Faculty, 460, citing Archive of the University of Jena, Bestand J, Nr. 90,Promotionsakten der Theologischen Fakultt, 19391941.30 Heschel, The Aryan Jesus, 73.31 Ibid., 80.

Waldemar Karl Ludwig Macholz (18761950).Photo courtesy of Thringisches HauptstaatsarchivWeimar, Personalakten aus dem Bereich der Volks-

bildungsministeriums, Nr. 19517, Bl. 36.


9/17


While hundreds of North American and European scholars during the 1960s turned the lec-

ture hall at Heidelberg where Gerhard von Rad later taught Bible into an international pilgrimage

destination, I cannot stress enough how different the situation was during the critical formative

period of von Rads career. From his arrival at the University of Jena, he failed to gain any

significant student support. In Winter Semester 19351936, the first academic year after

von Rads appointment for which full data is available, there were 155 students registered in the

Faculty of Theology.32 Von Rads Psalms course enrolled just four students that semester,

while his Jeremiah course and Deutero-Isaiah seminar enrolled two each.33 By Winter Semester

19411942, enrollment for the Faculty as a whole declined to just ten students.34 Von Rads

enrollments remained static every semester from his appointment through Summer 1944.35 The

Confessing Church resorted to sending between two and four students to Jena in order to make

certain that von Rad had an audience at his lectures.36 Most indicative of his academic isola-

tion is the fact that not a single one of the forty-five doctoral dissertations submitted to the

Faculty of Theology during his tenure at Jena was directed by von Rad.37

VON RADS RESPONSE IN HIS WRIT INGS

At this point, I need to move from narrating the context to reflecting on the impact of this

context upon von Rads work. In a previous article (see note below the title of this essay), Douglas

Dance and I have chronicled how von Rad took over the idea of the sermon Gattungfrom

Ludwig Koehler. He applied it first to Chronicles and next to the narrative frame of Deut 111.

Then, belatedly, in Deuteronomium Studien(1947), after von Rad went to Gttingen, he extended

the idea of the sermon to the legal corpus of Deuteronomy, despite thereby creating a substan-

tial inconsistency with his own earlier analysis of the legal corpus as a public reading of the law

in the context of the cultus, which he had outlined in The Form Critical Problem of the

Hexateuch(1938). This tells me that the law was a major problem for von Rad, one that he

to a large extent avoided, and had a hard time explaining, even as he remained fascinated by the

power of the oral sermon, and actively sought textual evidence for this form. There is evidence

that his recourse to the sermon form as a model to explain the composition of Deuteronomy

was arbitrary. Moshe Weinfeld points out that the account of the Sitz im Lebenfor the Levitical

activity that gave rise to the sermon was contradictory, dated in some contexts to the exilic

32 Bhm, Gerhard von Rad, Appendix 1. The statistical analysis in this section drives home the importance offurther checking the available data against the archival sources in order to provide a clearer reconstruction of this his-torically fraught period. At a number of points, the data provided by Bhm and Heschel is mutually inconsistent. Inher analysis of the decline of overall student enrollment in the Faculty of Theology, Heschel notes an enrollment ofthirty students for 19381939, without specifying which semester (Theological Faculty, 461). For Winter Semesterthat same year, Bhm notes fifty students; and for Summer Semester (closer to Spring Semester in North America),thirty-one (Gerhard von Rad, Appendix 1).

33 Bhm, Gerhard von Rad, Appendix 2.34 Bhm, Gerhard von Rad, Appendix 1. Contrast Heschels only four students (Theological Faculty, 461).35 Bhm,Gerhard von Rad,Appendix 2.36 Heschel,Theological Faculty, 461 (mentioning twostudents sent in 19411942). The fascinating memoir by one

such student speaks of being called to Jena as one offourstudents in Fall 1943, primarily in response to von Rads fearsthat without sufficient numbers the Faculty would be altogether closed by the university Rector, Karl Astel (Rabenau,Als Student bei Gerhard von Rad, 7).

37 Bhm,Gerhard von Rad, 31; note that the calculation of the total number of dissertations actually begins ayear prior to von Rads appointment. Heschel provides a breakdown of the dissertation supervisors and a fascinatingreport of the debates to enforce or circumvent academic standards (Theological Faculty, 45961).


10/17


period when the Levites are displaced after centralization, while in other contexts, it is dated

prior to centralization when the Levites remained rooted in their local sanctuaries.38

So let us back up. What is at stake? Why did von Rad focus on the sermon and why

must Deuteronomy be a sermon? A number of possible answers may be suggested.

The OT is important as a Christian Scripture.Von Rad spoke out courageously, frequently,

and publicly on this issue, in Leipzig and in Jena, as well as in his publications. Thisstatus of the OT was completely rejected by the neo-Marcionite attacks of the German

Christians and his own colleagues in the faculty. The opposition argued that the OTwas Jewish and, moreover, that Jewish elements of the NT, the liturgy, and the hymnal,must be excised in order to create a proper Aryan Christianity based upon a purified

canon. The tract Die Entjudung des religisen Lebensis a prime example of this.

The importance of the OT is that it is a witness to Christ; properly understood, it is a

Christian Scripture.Von Rad had therefore to argue that the OT is not Jewish but Christian.It is not law but grace. It does not demand worksas the condition of covenantal election,

which would be a Jewish position of legalism. Instead, it offers salvation and election inand through the speaking voice of the text.

The antinomian and antithetical categories that von Rad inherited as a trained pastor andas a theologian forced his hand. If Jewish law is a dead letter, the antithesis of law is, in

the words of Khler, from whom von Rad acquired the concept,the sermon, the greatestand best form of human instruction. . . . (Die Predigt, die grte und beste Form derMenschenbelehrung. . . .).39 Understood as a sermon, Deuteronomy becomes a familiar

form of Christian spiritual pedagogy akin to kerygma.

Deuteronomy could not be lawlest it be Jewish. Nor could Deuteronomy be textwithoutbecoming tainted as a dead letter, associated with legalism and with fossilization of thespirit. Deuteronomy had to be oral in order for it not to mark the beginning of Judaism.

Once again, the sermon, as a form of oral proclamation, came readily to hand. The familiarsermon form provided an excellent means to rehabilitate Deuteronomyone might

say, to circumcise Deuteronomy, or perhaps, to de-circumcise Deuteronomy.

It is important to stress the extent to which this was an intra-Christian debate. The

defense of the OT was not a defense of Judaism. Von Rad was constrained by the theo-logical categories he inherited. He took for granted the stereotypes about Judaism and

never challenged them.The entire difficult question about whether the Old Testamentbelongs to the Jews or to the Church can only be decided by Jesus Christ alone (1934).40

I seriously doubt that von Rad ever imagined his work might find a Jewish reader.

It is possible to demonstrate that the need to understand Deuteronomy as non-law

forced von Rad to explain away anything that did look like law or sound like law. Such

38 Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy: The Present State of Inquiry,JBL86 (1987): 25253; essay repr. in A Song ofPower and the Power of Song(ed. Duane L. Christensen; Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 3; WinonaLake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1993), 2135.

39 Ibid., 113. Von Rad quotes Ludwig Khler, Die hebrische Rechtsgemeinde, Jahresbericht der Universitt Zrich

19301931, 17.40 Gerhard von Rad, Das Ergebnis, in Fhrung zum Christentum durch das Alte Testament(Leipzig: Drffling

& Franke, 1934), 70.


11/17


material is either diminished in importance, relegated to other literary layers that are

either pre-Deuteronomic or post-Deuteronomic, or simply overlooked.

Only through such procedures was Deuteronomy redeemed from being law and transformed

into a homily by von Rad. The two remain mutually exclusive categories. In von Rads view,it was only through secondary additions that Deuteronomy began to show a certain prepon-

derance of Law over Gospel (eine gewisse Prponderanz des Gesetzes gegenber dem

Evangelium).41

41 Ibid., 50.


12/17


1NationalsozialistischeDeutscheArberiterpartei(NSDAP),popularlyknownasNazis

2KirchenbewegungDeutscheChristen(Germ

anChristianChurchMovement):Am

oreextremeformoftheDeutscheChristenintheStateofThuringia

Year

Germany

TheKirchenkampf

StateofThuringiaand

Univ.ofJena

FacultyofTheology

Gerhard

vonRad

1929

Publicatio

nof

Erlangendissertation:

DasGottesv

olkin

Deuteronom

ium

LeipzigHabilitation

withAlbrechtAlt:Das

Geschichtsb

ilddes

chronistisch

enWerkes

(published

1930)

1932

July:Nazis1become

largestpartyinReichstag

(winning37.8%ofvote

November:German

Christianswin33%of

seatsinPrussianchurch

elections

R

iseofKDC2

1933

HitlerandtheNSDAPgain

controlofGerman

government

DeutscheChristenseek

administrativecontrolof

variousstatechurches

July:winmajorityin

nationalchurchelectionsin

allbutthree

createtheReichChurch

S

iegfriedLeffler

earlyGerman

C

hristianandKDC

s

upporter

eventuallyappointed

t

oThuringianMinistry

o

fEducation(1936)

Lefflerworkstomake

FacultyofTheology

conformtoKDCideology

Novem

ber:Wolfgang

Meyer,aradiopreacher,

appointedtotheChairof

PracticalTheology

GerhardvonRad:TheChronologyofhisKampfumdasAlteTestament


13/17


3Sturmabteilung,paramilitaryorganizationa

lsoknownastheBrownShirts

Year

Germany

TheKirchenkampf

StateofThuringiaand

Univ.ofJena

Facu

ltyofTheology

Gerhard

vonRad

1933

contd.

AryanParagraphofthe

CivilServiceLawinvoked,

restrictingnon-Aryans

fromparticipatingin

politicalparties,social

organizations,andother

likeinstitutions

DeutscheChristen

intentistoreshapethe

ChurchinGermanyand-

bringitintoconformity

withNationalistSocialist

ideology

BekennendeKirche

(ConfessingChurch)

organizesinoppositionto

GermanChristians

Meyer

lacksDissertationand

Habilitation

fewpu

blications

(politicalpamphlets)

Waldem

arMacholz

abruptlyremovedto

makeroomforMeyer

1934

May:BarmenDeclaration

publishedbyBarmen

SynodoftheConfessing

Church

definesresistanceto

GermanChristians

attemptstoreassert

Churchautonomy

resistsGleichschaltung

(forcedcoordination)

Yearend:churchversionof

AryanParagraphisadopt-

edbyReichChurch

Jenabecomingoneof

th

eleadingbrown

(N

ationalSocialist)

un

iversitiesinGermany

WolfgangMeyerrapidly

advancesattheUniversity

becom

esDeanof

Faculty

ofTheology

makesconcertedeffort

toensu

rethatGerman

ChristianandNational

Socialistsupporters

appointedtoFacultyof

Theology

eventuallychanges

surnam

etoMeyer-Erlach

(1935)

Deliverspub

liclecture

DasErgebnis(The

Conclusion)

Feb.15in

Leipzig

arguesOT

isvitalwit-

nessofChristforchurch

AppointedO

rdinarius

atJena

memberof

SA3

assumedto

bemem-

berofNSDA

P

TheLevitic

alSermon

in1and2Chronicles


14/17

Year

Germany

TheKirchenkampf

StateofThuringiaand

Univ.ofJena

FacultyofTheology

Gerhard

vonRad

1935

NationalSocialistregime

withdrawsitsendorsement

ofcentralizedReich

Church

Popularoppositionto

GermanChristiansgrowsE

xtremistKDCcontrols

s

tatechurch

extendsitsinfluence

intothepolitical,

a

cademic,andtheological

s

pheres

April1:Meyer-Erlach

becom

esRectorofthe

Unive

rsity

receivesonlyeightof

129fa

cultyvotes

1937

Heinz

Eisenhuthappoint-

edProfessorof

System

aticTheology

acad

emicqualifications

notasimportantas:

NSD

APmembership

loyaltytoHitlerand

NationalSocialism

WalterGrundmann

appointedtoChairofNT

noH

abilitation

only

minorarticles

(inclu

dingmanypoliti-

calpa

mphlets)

NSD

APmembership

activ

ewithGerman

Christians

resignsfr

omSA

participatesinillegal

courseshe

ldby

ConfessingChurch

givesfrequentlectures

tostudent

andchurch

groupson

importance

ofOTforChurch

lodgesformal(but

futile)com

plaintwith

ThuringianMinistry

ofEducationabout

breachofGerman

academicprocedures

thatpermitted

Grundmanns

appointment



15/17


Year

Germany

TheKirchenkampf

StateofThuringiaand

Univ.ofJena

FacultyofTheology

Gerhard

vonRad

1938

N

ovember:Statechurch

g

overningcouncil

abolishestheHebrew

requirementfortheology

students

Macholzretires;vonRad

leftessentiallyalone

within

theFacultyin

oppositiontotheKDC

Dec.12:Facultyresolution

tomakeinstructionin

Hebrewoptional

1939

K

arlAstel,Rector(1939-

1

945)andSSHaupt-

sturmfhrer

PresidentofLandesamt

frRassewesen,Weimar

(activesterilization

p

rogram)

M

ay:Grundmann

o

rganizesInstituteforthe

Investigationand

E

radicationofJewish

InfluenceonGerman

R

eligiousLife

underthedirectionof

T

huringianstatechurch

theInstitutestiesto

theUniversityremain

p

rominent

April:Eliminationofany

Hebrewrequirement

annou

ncedand

implemented

Academicyear1939-1940:

Newc

oursesaddedto

makethecurriculum

morecompatiblewith

NationalSocialism:

LutherandtheJews,

Jesus

andJudaism,and

TheideaoftheReichasa

fundamentalquestionfor

Germantheology

Dasformge

schichtliche

Problemdes

Hexateuchs


16/17


1941

ConfessingChurchsends

studentstoJenainsupport

ofvonRad

1944

August:Draftedinto

civilmilita

ryservice

Year

Germany

TheKirchenkampf

StateofThuringiaand

Univ.ofJena

FacultyofTheology

Gerhard

vonRad

1947

Deuteronom

ium-Studien

(written19451946)

1945

March-June:

AmericanP

OW(three

months)

uponrelease,spends

timeinsum

merhome

onChiemsee

Fall:receivesRuf

(officialofferof

appointment)from

Gttingen

nowordfromHeussi

December:accepts

GttingenRuf

Denaz

ification:

HeussirebuildsFaculty

defendsNazicolleagues

(Meye

r-Erlach,

Grundmann,and

Eisenh

uth)

ignoresvonRad

G

rundmann:4

losesChair

EisenhuthandMeyer-

E

rlachdefendhimas

p

ersecutedbyNazi

a

nti-Christians

appointedRectorof

C

atecheticalInstitute

(

1954-1975)

E

isenhuthacquireshigh

c

hurchoffice

1990:Stasidocuments

c

onfirmgovernment

k

newhisNazi

m

embership

4T.A

.Seidel,DieEntnazifierungs-AkteGrundmann:AnmerkungenzurKarriereeinesvormalsfhrendenDC-Theologen

,inWalterGrundmann:EinNeutestam

entlerin

DrittenReich(ed.R.Deinesetal.;Arbeitenzur

Kirchen-undTheologiegeschichte21;Leipzig:EvangelischeVerlagsanstalt,200

7),34969.


17/17


Year

Germany

TheKirchenkampf

StateofThuringiaand

Univ.ofJena

FacultyofTheology

GerhardvonRad

1948

1949

1971

2000+

2005:Ex

hibitonFacultys

NazihistoryTheologie

ZwischenHeilundUnheil

Hebrew

reintroduced

intocurriculum

Oct.1821,2001

HeidelbergSymposium

inhishonor

Ninevolumes

published

(AltesTestam

entund

Moderneseries)

Heidelberg

appointmen

t

19491953G

enesis,ATD

19571960T

heologiedes

AltesTestam

ent

1970Weish

eitinIsrael

1971

Death

Deuteronom

ium,

2dedition

Documents

ART Von Rad Defends OldTestament in Nazi Germany July 2008 Bernard Levinson