Over the past several decades, increased attention has been given to how friendship can enrich our understanding of the moral and spiritual life; but much less attention has been devoted to the political significance of friendship. In Politics in Friendship, Guido de Graaff aims to overcome that deficiency through an extensive analysis of the political character of friendships and how they might both anticipate and witness more hopeful possibilities for society as well as the church. What makes this book unique is the methodology de Graaff adopts. Instead of being guided by a strictly theoretical account of friendship, he frames his study around the friendship between Dietrich Bonhoeffer and George Bell, the Anglican bishop of Chichester. The book can fittingly be understood as a sustained dialogue between the fascinating story of their friendship and a systematic analysis of the political nature of friendship.
De Graaff builds his argument by turning first to Aristotle and then to Hannah Arendt. While he rightly notes that the elitism of Aristotle's account of friendship is problematic, he values Aristotle's insight that harmony among friends is best expressed by their acting together for the sake of common purposes. Because concord among friends is inherently practical—because it is geared to action for the sake of common goods—there is an inescapable political nature to friendships. De Graaff sees this exemplified in the friendship between Bell and Bonhoeffer as they sought ways for the churches to contribute to healing and peace after the war. Similarly, de Graaff contends that Arendt's appreciation of the relational dynamics in all human action illumines the political significance of friendship by underscoring how friends are mutually empowered to do together what neither of them could achieve on his or her own.
The pivotal argument of the book—and its most significant contribution—is de Graaff's treatment of the crucial role of moral judgment by friends at times when it is most needed (as in Germany during World War II), but cannot be expected, from government leaders. What is the responsibility of friends when an entire society has lost its moral bearings? Then friends must help one another discern “how to respond to a failure of judgement that affects society as a whole” (111).
This is what Bell and Bonhoeffer enabled one another to do, and it is in his interpretation of this phase of their relationship that Politics in Friendship becomes explicitly theological. De Graaff argues that Bell and Bonhoeffer recognized that any judgment they might make regarding how German Christians could best respond in the aftermath of the war was always subservient to God's redemptive judgment in the death and resurrection of Christ. Moreover, that God's judgment is definitive frees Christians to express judgment not vindictively, but in acts of service and fellowship, both of which are sustained through practices of forgiveness and hospitality. Finally, Jesus' befriending of his disciples constituted a communion of friendship characterized by each person attending to the needs of others and sacrificing on their behalf. This communion of friendship is to be continually embodied in the church as a hopeful witness to the world.
Politics in Friendship is an impressive and ambitious work that recognizes the political character of friendships in ways that are seldom noted. It also appreciates the indispensable role that friends can play in helping one another remain faithful to the demands of discipleship. But some questions linger. One might ask if, by focusing exclusively on the friendship between Bonhoeffer and Bell, de Graaff overreaches on some of the claims he makes about the political character of friendships in general. And one can wonder if more attention to the role of worship in Christian life would provide a fuller account of what it might mean to speak of the church as a community of friends. But these questions in no way detract from what de Graaff achieves in this original and significant book. The highly scholarly nature of Politics in Friendship makes it far too advanced for undergraduates. It is more suitable for a doctoral seminar and deserves to be carefully studied as a welcome addition to the growing scholarly literature on friendship.
