Bonhoeffer’s Discipleship Part II – Reflections (37)

 

 

From page 252 through page 257 Bonhoeffer addresses church discipline. This is a challenging section since it is so foreign to our experience, yet the fact that this should not be the case is demonstrated in Bonhoeffer’s use of Scripture throughout the passage. Church discipline is integral to church-community, yet it is so removed from our experience that it is difficult to think about it, talk about it, and pretty much impossible to practice it. Yet, Bonhoeffer considers church discipline so important that this section may be the longest sustained argument he makes in Discipleship.

 

I wrestled with how to approach this section, and I thought about giving it passing acknowledgment and then moving on to the next section. On the one hand it seems futile to explore deeply Bonhoeffer’s (and the Bible’s) teaching on church discipline because the likelihood of us practicing it is remote, on the other hand providing an outline of the section is in keeping with our journey through Part II of Discipleship.

 

As with the rest of Discipleship, there is no substitute for reading and pondering the text for yourself, what I write is not intended to take the place of the text, not with Bonhoeffer, not with the Bible; never, never, never.

 

While Bonhoeffer makes an extended argument for church discipline, grounded in Scripture, it may not seem long enough in that he raises questions that he does not answer. While they may not be questions in his mind, they are questions that most of us will have, we will ask, “Just what does he mean?” Yet, the section is long enough in that it gives us plenty to ponder, and the questions are such that there is likely no closure to them – there will always be facets to discover – after all, we are dealing with God, Scripture, and human experience…a never-ending journey.

 

“For the church-community to live a life worthy of the gospel, it must maintain the practice of church discipline” (page 252). If we keep in mind that this chapter is titled The Saints, then perhaps we will see that Bonhoeffer is saying that to live as saints in Christ, we must live within the visible church-community and that living in this community means that we practice church discipline.

 

Before we move into the text I want to make some observations as to why this subject can be so challenging.

 

A.      We seldom, if ever, see church discipline Biblically practiced. When it is practiced it is typically in a harsh and heartless manner or it is on the other extreme, without backbone and definition. As a rule, we avoid church discipline; it is too uncomfortable and unpleasant and we don’t want to be misunderstood or offend people.

B.      We don’t understand the Nature of the Church. The Church is the Temple of God, the Body of Christ, and God disciplines those He loves. He has given the responsibility of discipline, as Bonhoeffer demonstrates, to the Church – not as a option but as a command. The Church is not a social – service organization, it is not a civic club, its roots are not of the earth but in heaven, we are to live under the authority of Christ and His Word; we are accountable to Christ, to His Word, and to one another.

C.     The Church is to be holy as God is holy. This holiness is holistic, it begins in the depths of the soul and expresses itself in our hearts, minds, and bodies. We are called to holiness because we are called into intimacy with the Holy One, and we are called to His holiness for the blessing and sanctification of one another and the ultimate blessing of the world. We are no more to tolerate sin in our souls than we are to tolerate cancer in our bodies. I do not take offense if my dermatologist removes a cancerous cell from my body, why do I take offense when a brother helps me identify and remove (by God’s grace!) sin from my life?

D.     The Church is not a necessity in our lives. We are consumers, and if one local congregation doesn’t suit us, we will move on to another. If one congregation offends us, we will find one that caters to our desires. Church discipline doesn’t mean much if our relational bonds do not mean everything to us, by that I mean that unless our koinonia is such that the Body of Christ is our life, then it means little if we come under discipline…we will simply move on to another congregation; or we will go it alone.

E.       There is no unity in the professing church. That is, we have multiple franchises, each competing for attendees and members, each seeking greater market share. We ignore Christ’s words about unity in John 17, we think we know better. This means that we will typically receive someone into our fellowship who has been disciplined by another congregation with no questions asked. We will accept professing Christians as immediate members without looking into their backgrounds, without obtaining references from a previous congregation.

I recall interviewing a prospective member at a church (two deacons were with me) and asking her to tell me about not only coming to know Jesus, but about her church background. She said, “No one has ever asked me about this and I’ve belonged to a few churches."

 

I once pastored in an area in which most pastors required premarital counseling prior to officiating at a wedding. This united front was helpful to pastors, churches, and couples; though some couples sought to avoid it. If we were united in our service to Christ and others, we could at least attempt to honor church discipline, teach it, practice it, and cooperate in it.

F.       We don’t care about sin, we don’t name it, we tolerate it, accept it, and at times promote it. We tend to approach sin as a sickness that requires therapy rather than confession and repentance. We don’t dare deal with sin Biblically lest we lose members and alienate those attendees who are considering membership. Pastors can easily lose their jobs by preaching against sin and calling us to obedient discipleship. Sin is old fashioned and unenlightened, it makes us uncomfortable…Jesus wouldn’t want that…would He? (See Revelation chapters 2 – 3).

 

For sure the above raise their own questions; this seems simple, but it can be complex, and it seems complex, but it is also simple. Bonhoeffer insists on church discipline and bases his insistence on the Bible, not on our feelings. I don’t pretend to know all the answers, and as a pastor I have seldom done a good job in this area – the reasons for this are likely many.

 

However, in my friendships I am thankful that I have brothers who I can talk to and who can talk to me; who I can speak the truth to and who will speak the truth to me. Because of my age there are less and less of them (there have never been many), but as long as there is still one then I have the protection of such a relationship.

 

For protection it is. We are protected from ourselves, the world, the flesh, and the devil when we speak the truth to one another, when we do not hide from one another. (Much of what passes for “church” is a grown-up form of “hide and seek,” a game we play much of our lives.) If we must be concerned about what others think, let us hope they will think enough of us, care enough for us, to tell us the truth and to invite us to speak the truth into their own lives. Otherwise, what others think doesn’t matter.

 

We’ll return to Bonhoeffer’s text in our next post in this series, the Lord willing.

 

 

Ernest Gordon (1)

 

Angus McGillivary

 

In a Japanese prison camp in Thailand during WWII:

 

“He’s dead.”

 

“Dead? How?”

 

For a moment Dusty could not speak. I could see that he was deeply moved. I wondered why, for he could scarcely have known McGillivray.

 

“It’s hard to say. He was strong. In fact, he was one of those you’d expect would be the last to die. But then I suppose he needn’t have died.”

 

“Then why did he?”

 

Dusty sat down on my bed.

 

“It has to do with Angus’s mucker,” he began, ‘who became very ill.”

 

It was the custom among the Argylls for every man to have a ‘mucker’ – that is, a pal or friend with whom he shared or ‘mucked in’ everything he had.

 

“It seemed pretty certain to everyone,” Dusty continued, “that the mucker was going to die. Certain, that is, to everyone but Angus. He made up his mind that his mucker would live. Someone had stolen his mucker’s blanket. Angus gave him his own. Every meal-time Angus would show up to draw his ration. But he didn’t eat it. He would bring it round to give to his friend. Stood over him, he did, and made him eat it. Going hungry was hard on Angus, mind you, because he was a big man, with a big frame.”

 

As Dusty talked on, I could see it all happening – Angus drawing on his strength through his will and depleting his own body to make his friend live.

 

“His mates noticed that Angus had taken to slipping out of the camp at night,” Dusty went on. “These excursions could have only one purpose. He was visiting the Thai villages. It was taken for granted that he had joined the black-marketeers! Angus, of all people! This shocked the others, for he was known as a man of high principles."

 

As men died in the camp, it became possible for others to come into possession of objects of some value – watches, shirts, shorts, knives and so on. These were highly prized by the Thais, who would gladly pay for them in their paper money known as bahts’, worth about one-and-sixpence each. Or they would barter for the goods, offering medicine or duck eggs.

 

“Although Angus’s mates thought that he was trying to make a bit of money for himself, they didn’t begrudge it to him,” said Dusty. “Perhaps you can guess the end of the story. The mucker got better. Then Angus collapsed. Just pitched on his face and died.”

 

“And what did the docs say caused it?” I asked.

 

“Starvation,” answered Dusty, “complicated by exhaustion.”

 

“And all for his friend?”

 

Dusty sat in stillness.

 

(Excerpted from To End All Wars, by Ernest Gordon, Zondervan, pages 99 – 100).

 

Ernest Gordon, a British officer and a Scot, had been given up for dead in the POW camp, but Dusty and others were determined to nurture him back to life. Gordon entered the camp not believing in God, that would change. Gordon would later come to the US and become the dean of chapel at Princeton, serving at Princeton from 1954 until 1981.

 

The Bridge Over the River Kwai (movie and book) is a fictionalized account of the railroad of death, Gordon’s To End All Wars (published earlier under other titles) is the true story, a story from which we can learn much. (Believe me when I say that Gordon’s book is far better and deeper and moving than the movie by the same name.)

 

The prisoners became subhuman, stealing from one another, unfeeling toward one another, driven by hate and despair. In the few, however, there was sacrificial love, and in the midst of hell, love prevailed – there was, as Gordon writes, a “miracle on the River Kwai.”

 

The prisoners became a community of love, serving one another, caring for one another, seeking Christ, serving Christ, and ultimately offering water, food, and aid to wounded and defeated Japanese soldiers. Jesus Christ transcended their suffering, He transcended war.

 

Love makes no sense. The Cross of Christ makes no sense. When Jesus says, “Love your enemies,” we respond, “Yeah but.” When Jesus says, “Lay down your life,” we reply, “Yeah but.”

 

During a conversation with Dusty, Ernest asked, “Why doesn’t He [God] do something, instead of sitting quiescently on a great big white throne in the no-place called heaven?”

 

Gordon writes, Dusty considered for a moment. Then he said, “Maybe He does…maybe He does…but we can’t see everything He is doing now. Maybe our vision isn’t very good at this point, for here we see in a glass darkly.”

 

Then Dusty quoted from a poem by Ernest Howard Crosby:

 

No one could tell me where my soul might be;

I sought for God, but God eluded me;

I sought my brother out and found all three –

My soul, my God, and all humanity.

 

“We love, because He first loved us. If someone says, “I love God,” and yet he hates his brother or sister, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother and sister whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. And this commandment we have from Him, that the one who loves God must also love his brother and sister” (1 John 4:19 – 21).

 

“We know love by this, that He laid down His life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for our brethren” (1 John 3:16)

 

Ernest and Dusty saw Jesus Christ in Angus McGillivray, what do others see in our congregations?

 

In me?

 

In you?