This is part two in a two part series on The Bonhoeffer Institute. Allow me to start by saying…Theology divides people.
That is not necessarily wrong, however it is a fact. And honestly, sometimes doctrine needs to have a certain clarity to make sure what is going on is actually orthodox Christianity. Especially in our era which I have affectionately called, “The no-doctrine, doctrine age”. So, I completely understand when people have, on occasion, asked about the theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and to what extent is The Bonhoeffer Institute tied to his theological positions.
Honestly, when I first started getting those questions it took me by surprise. It probably shouldn’t have, but after the success of Eric Metaxas’ biography on Bonhoeffer and the renewed interest in his ministry, his engagement with evil and his moral courage, I simply did not connect the dots that people would want to know more about the potential doctrinal connection between the institute and the man. For me, Bonhoeffer was simply the face of a pastor confronting tyranny and an evil civil government. For others, they wanted some clarity concerning some of his writings and statements in light of a conservative theological orthodoxy. I never considered that tension.
Silly me…
Let me start by stating that I am not a Bonhoeffer expert. I have read several of his books and consider them to be challenging on several levels. The challenge primarily for me is:
1. He was an academician in his early years which demonstrates the initial impact of the 1930’s German liberalism in which he was educated. In other words, he reflected his professors’ thoughts more than his own. Later in life, his theology was synthesized into a more evangelical position (in my opinion) by travel and experience.
2. His writing and thought expression is that of a professor who was both a Ph.D and post doctoral academic before he was 25. He is just plain hard to understand and follow at times.
3. He never systematized his personal theology which makes it appear disjointed and disconnected at times. This fragmentary approach (which others have coined) causes historians to come to totally different conclusions. Of course, his early death only exasperates this question.
I will stipulate that Bonhoeffer makes statements that read alone would not fit into Christian orthodoxy much less theological conservatism. I want this to be plainly heard, I am not a Bonhoeffer apologist. I will not try and make him someone or something that the written record would not support. However, much of the criticism of Bonhoeffer comes from people who treat his writings far too linearly without recognizing aspects of his life’s journey and transformational moments. Let me give an illustration…
Most people accept the historical statement that John Wesley was an orthodox, Christian minister whose writings are acceptable within the general framework of conservative, evangelical belief. In other words, Wesley was no heretic. However, Wesley’s thought dramatically shifted after May 24, 1738, at 8:45 pm as he walked down Aldersgate Street to a prayer meeting and heard Luther’s Preface to the Epistle to the Romans being read from a window. He testifies that his “heart is strangely warmed”. Whatever Wesley experienced that night, it changed his ministry and theology in profound ways. So if you read Wesley pre-1738 and then post-1738, you may find some contradictory or confusing statements, as if they came from two different men and not the same man. Why? The journey of life effects us all. Who among us that has walked with the Lord for decades believes exactly the same things today as they did in year one of their journey? I know in my 39 years of walk and ministry, my theology is not the same as it was in 1978. This is to be expected. Add on top of that, John Wesley lived to be 87 years old which was 52 years past his Aldersgate experience and we have an incredible record of writing that details those changes.
Now consider this…
Bonhoeffer gets his doctorate at age 24. He is hanged at age 39. His journey is only 15 years. IF there had been any epiphany or change in his theological understanding, it would be much harder to detect. His later years were spent more as a pastor and not an academician. So any quotation from Bonhoeffer has to be interpreted in light of where he may have been on this journey. I can tell you that after his travels in America, the association with the African-American Churches in America, his assistance in founding the Confessing Church in Germany, the underground seminary at Finkenwald, and the theological and ethical wrestling with how tyranny and evil is confronted biblically makes his doctrinal positions very fluid. Again, I’m not enough of an expert to declare Bonhoeffer a card caring, born-again, evangelical who upheld the fundamentals of the faith. At the same time, it is sloppy historical analysis to simply post random Bonhoeffer quotes and declare he was not Christian.
This is why I have clearly stated that The Bonhoeffer Institute is NOT tied to the theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Bonhoeffer is the face of courage as a pastor confronts tyranny and evil in civil government. And the greater question becomes that if we who claim to hold to a conservative, orthodox, reformed doctrine cannot do what he did if times demanded it, then what exactly has our theology produced?
I recognize that a doctrinal statement can be vitally important. I recognize that doctrine has a thousand trails upon which we all have convictions and profound beliefs. The Bonhoeffer Institute, as a biblical worldview training organization and think tank, would make the following statements regarding our doctrine:
1) We believe . . . that the Bible is the verbally inspired Word of God. It is the complete revelation of God’s will for salvation and the only unfailing rule of faith and practice for the Christian life.
2) We believe . . . in one God, Creator of all things, eternally existing in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and that these three are co-eternal, and of equal essence, dignity, and power. God the Father has created all things within the universe to demonstrate His glory and all things exist for the sole glory of God alone.
3) We believe . . . in the deity of Jesus Christ; His miraculous conception by the Holy Spirit; His virgin birth; His sinless life; His substitutionary atoning death on a cross; His bodily resurrection; His ascension to the right hand of the Father; and His personal, imminent return.
4) We believe . . . in the deity and present ministry of the Holy Spirit who regenerates the spiritually dead unto life, enabling saving faith, permanently indwelling all believers, and empowering spiritual life, health, and ministry to every believer which is called sanctification. The Church universal is comprised of baptized believers who with the empowerment of the Holy Spirit exist to love God, seek His presence and kingdom on the earth, encourage and equip the saints, and minister the gospel to all peoples throughout the world.
5) We believe . . . that man was created by and for God; that by man’s disobeying God, every person incurred spiritual death, which is separation from God, and physical death as a consequence; and that all people are sinners by nature, choice, and practice.
6) We believe . . . the Lord Jesus Christ died for all sins and that all who believe in Him will be redeemed and declared righteous (justified) because of His perfect life, sacrificial death, glorious resurrection, and imputation of His righteousness to the believer, resulting in the believer remaining in right relationship with God.
7) We believe . . . in the bodily resurrection and eternal judgment of everyone who has ever lived, the everlasting blessedness of those in right relationship with God to go to heaven, and the everlasting punishment of those who have rejected God’s forgiveness in His Son to remain in hell.
Obviously, more can be said if we desired to dig into the depths of doctrine. The Bonhoeffer Institute is a cultural reformation organization that teaches within the framework of the historic, orthodox, Christian Faith. I understand that there are various branches of Protestantism which have “in-house” disagreements on certain points. These disagreements do not necessarily place one outside orthodoxy. There are essentials and non-essentials to the faith which I would readily acknowledge.
The point of this post is to relieve any concern that The Bonhoeffer Institute is directly tied to its namesake theologically. We greatly respect and admire the work of Bonhoeffer as he stood against Hitler, but recognize that this institute has a ministry call to engage the civic arena based upon a clear biblical worldview.
Hopefully this helps to clear up any ambiguity.
No Comments