This thesis has been submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for a postgraduate degree (e.g. PhD, MPhil, DClinPsychol) at the University of Edinburgh. Please note the following terms and conditions of use: This work is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, which are retained by the thesis author, unless otherwise stated. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. ‘DARK, DEPRESSING RIDDLE’: GERMANS, JEWS, AND THE MEANING OF THE VOLK IN THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL ALTHAUS RYAN TAFILOWSKI A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH, NEW COLLEGE IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY EDINBURGH, UK 2017 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It has been a joy to study at New College. On that account, I am first of all deeply indebted to my supervisors, Dr. Hannah Holtschneider and Dr. David Grumett. Dr. Holtschneider’s support for the project began over five years ago, when she graciously read (many, many) poorly-crafted drafts of my initial research proposal. Since that time, her vast insight and expertise, sharp editorial eye, and dependable oversight have made the thesis a much better product than it otherwise would have been. Thanks are due also to Dr. Grummet, whose careful proofing improved the quality of the work greatly. I would like to express my gratitude to the various institutions which made this project possible. I am grateful to the governing bodies of the Edinburgh Global Research Grant and the School of Divinity for funding this research. A term of study and research at the Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen was funded by an Erasmus grant, for which I am thankful. I owe a special debt to Professor Gotthard Jasper, who supported my research by providing access to the Althaus Nachlass in Erlangen. I wish to thank also the research support staff at the Friedrich-Alexander Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg for helping to coordinate the logistics of my research trip. Thanks are also due to Dr. Stephen Hamilton and Dr. Nadine Hamilton for their hospitality in Erlangen. I wish also to thank the senior scholars who took the time to answer naïve and/or tedious questions about Althaus, read drafts of my work at various stages of the project, or gave me the opportunity to present my research: Professor Nicholas Adams, Professor Matthew Becker, Professor Robert Ericksen, Professor Paul Hinlicky, Professor Jeff Mallinson, Dr. Christopher Probst, Dr. Joshua Ralston, Professor Paul Rorem, Professor Hans Schwarz, Professor Christoph Schwöbel, Professor Kevin Spicer, Professor Kirsi Stjerna, Professor Scott Wenig, and Dr. Joe Wright. I have been blessed beyond measure to meet so many wonderful people during my time at New College. I am grateful for the warm and collegial community in the School of Divinity, and I have made many close friends here: Dr. Kengo Akiyama, Dr. Andrew Blaski, Tom Breimeier, Josh Bruce, Cory Brock, Dr. Zach Cole, Cameron Clausing, Andrew Johnson, Dr. Will Kelly, and Steve Stiles all made my time in Edinburgh memorable. But special thanks are owed to two colleagues: Dr. David Robinson and Benj Petroelje. David didn’t realise that when he came to New College he’d really be doing two PhDs—his own, on Bonhoeffer’s reception of Hegel, and mine, about a little-known Lutheran named Paul Althaus. David read countless drafts and offered invaluable insight, for which he received far too little compensation. The same is true for Benj, who, after long hours of wrangling with Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians, ended up learning more about Althaus than anyone would ever want to know—every single weekend. Thanks for your friendship, Benj. I owe you a great many breakfast sandwiches. I offer my love and gratitude to my parents, Ed and Jeanie, whose deep piety and respect for learning inspired my love for theology at an early age. I want to thank you for challenging me to study in Britain. Usually, parents are disappointed when iii their children move far away from home—you would have been disappointed if I didn’t. I also owe a great deal to my sister, Allyson, whose free spirit and zest for life is a much-needed corrective to my subdued personality. My love and thanks also to my parents-in-law, Eric and Merri, and my brother-in-law, Justin, who trusted me enough to drag their daughter across an ocean on very uncertain venture. Thank you for giving of yourselves to support me in this work. I am indebted (on a number of levels) to Louise and Audrey, without whom none of this would have been even remotely possible. I am thankful also to the congregation at Foothills Fellowship Church, who never forgot us even while we were thousands of miles away. I could not have completed this project without the support of these three families. These last three years I have truly eaten my bread ‘by the sweat of my Frau.’ I have written these 100,000 words, but I still can’t seem to find the vocabulary to express my gratitude to my wife, Adrienne, who put her own dreams and aspirations on hold so that I could pursue mine. I will never forget your sacrifice, your grit, and your unconditional love and support. Thank you for always reminding me that there is (mercifully!) more to life than dead German theologians. In the end, each of these was a grace from the giver of every good gift: the relentlessly faithful God, the Father of Jesus Christ, who is the strength of my heart and my portion forever, even while my flesh and my heart may fail. Ryan Tafilowski Ph.D. Candidate Summer 2017 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE .............................................................................................................................................. i DECLARATION......................................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................................. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ...............................................................................................................................v ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................................. vii I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................1 i. Statement of the research question .......................................................................................4 ii. Biography and intellectual influences ..................................................................................7 iii. Between guilt and innocence: the legacy of Paul Althaus .................................................. 13 a. Suspicion .............................................................................................................. 15 b. Sympathy ............................................................................................................. 24 c. Ambivalence ........................................................................................................ 34 iv. Method, scope, and structure .............................................................................................. 37 a. A dialectical approach .......................................................................................... 37 b. A chronological approach .................................................................................... 40 MOVEMENT I: THE VOLK WHO BELONG EVERYWHERE AND NOWHERE: ALTHAUS’ SOCIETAL VISION FOR THE JEWS DURING THE WEIMAR REPUBLIC (1918–1933) II. INVISIBLE OTHERS: THE ‘JEWISH QUESTION’ IN THE ALTHAUSIAN IMAGINATION ...................... 47 i. Althaus in the context of the Weimar Republic ................................................................. 47 ii. The Jews as social and spiritual threat – ‘Kirche und Volkstum’ (1927) ........................... 53 iii. The Jews as the bearers of a ‘difficult fate’ – Leitsätze zur Ethik (1929) ........................... 64 iv. Conclusion: inclusion and exclusion ................................................................................. 77 III. ‘OPEN WOUNDS’: THE MYSTERIOUS PURPOSE OF JEWISH EXISTENCE ......................................... 79 i. The Jews as exploders of ‘ethnic national community’ – ‘Gott und Volk’ (1932) ............ 79 ii. The Jews as riddle of the coming Kingdom – Der Brief an die Römer (1932) .................. 87 iii. Conclusion: pathology and performance ............................................................................ 95 MOVEMENT II: AT THE CHURCH’S ‘GERMAN HOUR’: GERMANS, JEWS, AND ECCLESIAL SPACE UNDER NATIONAL SOCIALISM (1933–1945) IV. VOLK BEFORE CHURCH: THE ERLANGEN OPINION ON THE ARYAN PARAGRAPH AND THE ANSBACH MEMORANDUM .................................................................................................................................... 104 i. Althaus in the context of the Kirchenkampf .................................................................... 105 ii. The theological framework