ethical consistency - the life of Bonhoeffer

Wheaton just completed their 21st annual Theology Conference on April 12 and 13, which was dedicated to Dietrich Bonhoeffer. My wife and I gladly attended both evening plenary lectures, the first given by Dr. Stephen Plant on Bonhoeffer's theopolitics and the second by Dr. Charles Marsh on Bonhoeffer's conversion. One question on Thursday night was about the difficulty of reconciling Bonhoeffer's ethical claims about suffering and loving others with his willingness to get involved in the assassination plots of Hitler. As I discussed Plant's answer with another colleague of mine who attended, we were not sure if we found his answer satisfactory. I'll let you find the audio of his lecture on your own as I won't go into his answer here, but this question of consistency has caused me to pause. My question is whether or not a presupposed standard of consistency, which more often than not allows us to identify the inconsistent speck in our brother's eye without noticing or reflecting on the inconsistent log in our own, is a realistic goal. I have always thought that it was a realistic goal, and I certainly am not willing to change my mind yet. However, is consistency something that can even be achieved in the changing world? Eric Metaxas, in his recent biography, has argued that Bonhoeffer's circumstances led him to believe that one cannot simply live by an unchanging set of principles if they want to be obedient to God's call. Bonhoeffer's life highlights the "anxious middle" as Charles Marsh spoke of last night. He was spared from being drafted because he had friends in high places. Many of his confirmands were not as fortunate. What is interesting is that Bonhoeffer still wrote letters of encouragement to his former students who were fighting against the anti-Nazi forces in service of Hitler. Being a conscientous objector, which meant you were weak and traitorous, would have landed these young men in the fast lane to prison, and so some did not resist being drafted. Bonhoeffer tried (and it appears he was quite successful) not to impose on his students the beliefs that were unique to him, which means that he had to be quite aware of himself, a task that is far from easy. And if Plant is right in saying that Bonhoeffer believed he was in some way vicariously taking upon himself the sinful act of assassination and all the deception that came with it, then he was actually sinning so that other would not have to. Bonhoeffer's later years are a display of the life application of Luther's pecca fortiter, sin boldly, which is only successful if the application is matched by a confidence in God as the Justifier; that is, Luther's pecca fortiter only works if you believe in Luther's justification by faith. Bonhoeffer embodies an ethic that resists any extreme position on Christians and politics, whether pacifism or civil responsibility, which is why I am so interested in his life. Maybe consistency is only a virtue for those theologians who fail to put at least one foot in the mess which is the world.

"we have no king but Caesar"

This cry found in John 19.15 has become for me one of the most chilling lines of the passion narratives, for it is here that we see these Jews betray their monotheism - Shema Israel, the LORD our God is one LORD! What causes this betrayal? Perhaps they actually fear what Jesus is capable of doing. If he lives will the bureaucracy of the Temple change? Will the Sadducees be out of a job? Will they lose their wealth? What about the Pharisees and their devotion to the Law? Will Jesus' authority usurp their power with his teachings? Perhaps it was fear combined with the power of the mob. The crowd knows that both Pilate and Herod are puppets to their will. Perhaps their allegiance to Caesar is a sham, and they only tell Herod what he wants to hear. They already tried to persuade him that Jesus was a threat by calling him king of the Jews, the precise title assumed by the Herodians. Whatever their motivation was for chanting "no king but Caesar," it is a betrayal of their monotheism, because even if they are only feigning allegiance to Caesar, their injustice has already violated their covenant with the one true God. I wonder how many Christians have committed this same betrayal. A brief look at the Creed may help remind us of Christianity's indebtedness to the monotheism of Judaism, even though Christianity redefined the nature of this one God in light of God's revelation of the Son and Spirit.

Monotheism is maintained by the first stanza: "We believe in God, the Father, the Almighty; Creator of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen." This is fairly traditional Jewish language. It is possible that they would have put Almighty before Father, but even so this is classic monotheism. It is the second set of affirmations that provides us with elements of redefinition. "And in one Lord, Jesus Christ the only Son of God." We now, with the earliest Christians, ascribe to Jesus the title, Lord, which used to be only appropriately given to God by the Israelites of the OT. It is also the title used by the Caesars: Caesar is Lord, Caesar is divine, whether in a quasi or full sense. The proclamation κύριος Ἰησοῦς, Jesus is Lord, is a rival claim to the power of Caesar; it is a rival claim to any power, authority, kingdom in heaven, on earth, or under the earth that seeks to deceive and destroy the world. Read Phil 2.5-11 in this political light - what does every prostrated creature confess when they hear the name Jesus? κύριος Ἰησοῦς. Read Eph and Col in this light with all the talk of principalities and powers. Think of this if you are a voter. κύριος Ἰησοῦς.

If these Jews were persuaded by fear, the prospect of losing security and power, then let us all think of the ways in which these same things have blinded us to our own idolatry. If the lordship of Jesus would have changed the temple system, the Torah system, and the power structures of the Jewish people, do we not think that his lordship will also challenge every "Christian" system? I recently heard one Republican candidate who is a professing Christian give a speech to a state where he said something like, "We are the 'give us our Bible and guns' people!" Our problem is certainly not that we don't have access to the Bible, it is that nobody reads it. And the problem with guns is similar but with an important difference: we also have access to guns but unlike the Bible we actually use them! Jesus is Lord, not your security in America, not the constitution, not the EU and the Euro, not your "autonomous" will, not __________. We have betrayed Jesus for far more than 30 pieces of silver.

On this Good Friday, as my wife and I participate in the stations of the cross and our Good Friday service, I pray that I will continually renew by baptism, my death into the body of Christ, which is a simple affirmation of the truth that Jesus is Lord, not me.