In their 1920s expatriate theologies, Paul Althaus and Dietrich Bonhoeffer claim to be bound by a conflictual international ‘law’, which mandates violent competition while authorising the strong to displace weaker peoples. We argue that acknowledging such correspondence helps to reveal a surprising turn in their diverging ecclesiological judgements over the 1933 Aryan Paragraph. Ironically, although Althaus holds to the productivity of conflict between peoples, he supports the exclusion of Jewish pastors in Germany as a concession to fragile volkisch identity. In contrast, Bonhoeffer's new pacifist leanings coincide with his incitement to conflict on behalf of Jewish colleagues, overriding the use of Pauline admonition to defer to the ‘weak’ conscience.

中文翻译：

---

冲突与让步：牧师的国籍为Althaus和Bonhoeffer

保罗·阿尔特豪斯（Paul Althaus）和迪特里希·邦霍弗（Dietrich Bonhoeffer）在1920年代外派神学中，声称自己受到冲突的国际“法律”的约束，该法律规定了暴力竞争，同时授权强者取代弱者。我们认为，承认这种对应关系有助于揭示他们对1933年《雅利安节》所作出的不同教会学判断的令人惊讶的转折。具有讽刺意味的是，尽管奥特豪斯坚持人们之间冲突的生产力，但他支持将德国的犹太牧师排除在外，这是对脆弱的大众主义身份的一种让步。相比之下，邦霍弗（Bonhoeffer）的新的和平主义倾向与他煽动代表犹太同事进行冲突的动机相吻合，从而凌驾了波琳（Pauline）的劝告来屈服于“弱”的良心。