Jeremy L. Berg

I have been deeply influenced by Dietrich Bonhoeffer and have sweet memories of reading his ‘Cost of the Discipleship’ book for the first time in college. I have his portrait framed and hanging above my desk  — he watches over me as I write this (along with other formative influences). To underscore my admiration, I lobbied hard for ‘Dietrich’ being the middle name of one of our boys, but Keri wasn’t about to bring a German name into the family! :)

Here’s a brief overview I wrote ages ago. It hardly does justice to the book’s brilliance, but at least dips our toes into its main thrust. I scheduled this post a couple weeks ago, and didn’t realize my sermon text this week would coalesce perfectly with the heart of Bonhoeffer’s challenge. 

“Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me and for the gospel will save it” (Mark 8:34-35).

SUMMARY OF BONHOEFFER’S ARGUMENT

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in The Cost of Discipleship, launches a bold defense for obedience-driven discipleship.  His argument examines several discipleship moments from the Gospels and critiques the positive and negative responses of those involved.  From each encounter, Bonhoeffer draws certain principles to support his view of true Christian discipleship.

Bonhoeffer uses Levi and Peter as positive examples of absolute obedience and discipleship.  They demonstrate several characteristics of true discipleship.

First, discipleship is complete and unquestioned obedience.  “According to our text, there is no road to faith or discipleship, no other road—only obedience to the call of Jesus” (61).

Second, such obedience is based solely upon a recognition of and submission to Jesus’ unique authority.  Put simply, “Because Jesus is the Christ, he has the authority to call and to demand obedience to his word” (62).

Third, Jesus must become all in all.  Or, as Bonhoeffer puts it, “Beside Jesus nothing has significance.  He alone matters” (63).

Fourth, discipleship is not an “abstract idea” or “doctrinal system”, it is a personal relationship with Christ.  “With an abstract idea it is possible to enter into a relation of formal knowledge, to become enthusiastic about it, and perhaps even to put it into practice; but it can never be followed in personal obedience” (63).

Fifth, true discipleship means making a clean break with our old life and entering wholeheartedly into the new life of obedience to Christ.  “The call to follow at once produces a new situation.  To stay in the old situation makes discipleship impossible” (67).

Sixth, discipleship requires both faith and obedience; the two cannot be separated.  Bonhoeffer is at pains to illustrate the irreducible fact that “only he who believes is obedient, and only he who is obedient believes” (69, 74).

Seventh, obedience is the “first step” of faith; we must act in order to place ourselves in a situation where faith is possible.  Put bluntly, “No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot.  Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word”  (74).  Bonhoeffer has no time for self-defeating attitudes and lazy excuses.  He simply argues, “When people complain that they find it hard to believe, it is a sign of deliberate or unconscious disobedience” (73).

These seven principles of discipleship are then followed by an analysis of negative responses to Jesus’ call—namely, the three would-be disciples (Luke 9:57-62) and the rich young man (Matt 19:16-22).  Again, several lessons can be learned from these would-be followers.

Bonhoeffer finds one key error in each man’s case.  The first man illustrates that a disciple must be called by Jesus and not self-chosen.  “Jesus damps his ardour by warning him that he does not know what he is doing…No man can choose such a life for himself” (64-65).

The second man errs in that he puts obedience to a legal ordinance—burying his father—before obedience to Jesus.  “At this critical moment nothing on earth, however sacred, must be allowed to come between Jesus and the man he has called—not even the law itself” (65).

The third would-be follower is willing to follow, but only on his own terms.  “Discipleship to him is a possibility which can only be realized when certain conditions have been fulfilled…But then discipleship is no longer discipleship, but a programme of our own to be arranged to suit ourselves…” (66).

The rich young man teaches another valuable lesson of discipleship.  According to Bonhoeffer, his problem is that he is too absorbed with moral speculation and self-piety, which have replaced the thing most necessary—simple obedience to Jesus’ command.  Bonhoeffer argues that “it is no use asking questions; for it is only through obedience that you come to learn the truth” (86).  And it turns out that “the answer to the young man’s problem is—Jesus Christ” (85).

Bonhoeffer concludes, “He had hoped to hear the word of the good master, but he now perceives that this word is the Man to whom he had addressed his question…It is now only a question of yes or no, of obedience or disobedience” (84).  This, in essence, sums up Bonhoeffer’s definition of discipleship—simple obedience to the authoritative call of Jesus Christ.

EVALUATION OF STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

There is much to commend for Bonhoeffer’s argument for costly discipleship.  First, he is correct in emphasizing the relatively simple nature of discipleship.  Rather than getting bogged down with doctrinal systems, confessions of faith, and the like, discipleship is indeed merely about answering the call and following Christ at whatever the cost.  Or, as Bonhoeffer puts it, discipleship is unequivocally an “adherence to the person of Jesus Christ and fellowship with him” (84).

Second, I enjoyed his discussion over the relationship between obedience and faith.  He insists, correctly I believe, that human free will and choice is a necessary “first step” towards a life of faith.  I find his proposition—“only he who believes is obedient, only he who is obedient believes”—very helpful and true to experience.  He seems to be out on a limb as far as Lutheran teachings of his time would go.  His bold conviction is admirable.

Third, his emphasis on the personal relationship aspect of discipleship is a necessary point to be stressed.  He rightly emphasizes that the basis of faith lies not in adopting a new system of beliefs, but rather in experiencing a personal encounter with the unrivaled authority of the Son of God.  However, it would be helpful for him to translate such an encounter into what that would look like today, now that we do not have the physical presence of Jesus in our midst.

On the other hand, there are some aspects of his argument where I believe Bonhoeffer is too black and white or over the top.  For example, I believe he overstates his case when he declares that “beside Jesus nothing has any significance.  He alone matters” (63).  I am certain he does not wish to imply that loving one’s neighbor, rearing a family, being a responsible citizen, and the like are all void of any significance.

A second weakness is his criticism of the first would-be disciple who, according to Bonhoeffer, is guilty of voluntarily offering to follow Jesus.  Bonhoeffer argues that “no man can choose such a life for himself.”  While he may be right in arguing that this man does not know the nature of what he is getting himself into when he offers to follow, I do not believe he is at fault for volunteering his service.  This statement would seem to contradict his strong emphasis later in the chapter on taking the first step of obedience by one’s own free will (cf. 70-71).

Third, I believe he is again too absolute in his discussion on leaving all behind to follow Jesus.  While we can draw a valuable principle from the invitation narratives of Levi and Peter that the call of Jesus demands a total shift in allegiances and priorities, I do not believe we must literally leave our entire life situation behind in the process.  In fact, while Peter may have indeed left his nets that day, we might be going beyond the evidence if we suggest he quit the fishing business altogether.  We would not want to imply that Peter also left his wife and family behind as he entered into this new life of discipleship.

IMPLICATIONS AND APPLICATION FOR TODAY

Bonhoeffer’s powerful attack on “easy Christianity” is just as needed today as it was when first published nearly seventy years ago.  In fact, in an age of growing tolerance within the culture and increasing complacency within the church, Bonhoeffer’s bold words cut like a two-edged sword across our sensibilities.  A couple words must be said regarding the applicability of this book for today.

First, I believe that the church could benefit from Bonhoeffer’s loud trumpet blast.  The church is always in need of more radical and devoted disciples.  However, I would take issue with his claim that simple obedience is the proper motivation behind true discipleship.  Obedience, for Bonhoeffer, is based upon the unique authority of Jesus—“Because Jesus is the Christ, he has the authority to call and demand obedience to his word.”  As the church strives to make more obedient followers of Jesus, let us do so by inviting others into a relationship with the gracious and loving Christ whose authority lies not in his “lording it over” his disciples, but in his laying down of his life for them.  Obedience to Jesus will then flow out of genuine love and gratitude, rather than a trembling fear or obligation.

Second, I believe that Bonhoeffer’s authoritative portrayal of Christ presents a stumbling block for attempting to reach a postmodern world, so heavily suspicious of religious authority and absolute claims.  While Bonhoeffer’s confrontational approach may be welcomed within some sectors of the church, I believe unbelievers (and many younger Christians) will be more effectively reached by presenting Jesus in other ways.  This may be beside the point, since Bonhoeffer’s book was assumedly written for Christians and not as an evangelistic treatise.  Nevertheless, it is important to consider the cultural-philosophical shift as we let a modern thinker address an increasingly postmodern world.