From: christm@stolaf.edu (Mark C Christianson)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: True Faith
Date: 10 Oct 92 07:02:55 GMT

From: mglassey@diana.cair.du.edu (Michael Glassey):

>In article <Oct.2.01.05.39.1992.1846@geneva.rutgers.edu> bbs.skeezix@tsoft.sf-bay.org (Fred Felli) writes:

>>I'd be interested in any divergent views on this excerpt from "The
>>Cost of Discipleship" by D. Bonhoeffer. I think it is a pretty good
>>analysis of real faith, as opposed to professed belief. Does anyone
>>agree/disgree?
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>While I do have much agreement, I would ask you to consider two very
>important provisos:  (1) D. Bonhoeffer was not American (his Christian
>brothers and sisters were not volunteers), and (2) some study of the
>changing historical meanings of the words faith and belief (from NT
>Greek to our current "belief" (in spite of all evidence) is quite
>rewarding.

I find great fault with point number 1.  D. Bonhoeffer did not live
only in Germany, but also abroad.  In fact, he returned to Germany
after Hitler came to power because he felt it was his duty to suffer
with his people, and purhaps could do some good while there. 

Indeed he was a leader in the "Confessing Church"  This was a movement
agenst the nazification (if that is a word) of the chruch in Germany.
The Nazi influenced Germans formed the "German Lutheran Church"  They
rejected the Old Testament and portions of the New Testament as being
to Jewish, and greatly distorted the Christian Gospel and the teachings
of the Lutheran Church.  The Confessing Church worked against this aposty.
It formed a seminary, which along with the whole church, was declared
illegal very quickly.  Please forgive the historical digression, but
there is a point to this that I will get to in a bit.

In Bonoeffer's Germany, even though there was a certain amount of
connection between church and state, the people were not coerced into
the Christian Chruch.  The situation is quite different than our own,
but it is simular in many respects.  In America, despite the legal
seperation of church and state, there has been a *cultural* establishment
of Chritianity as our national religion.  This has varied in degree from
time to time, and now it seems to be declining (which could be good or bad).
There are many people who belong to a church because it is what people do,
or they do it for peaceful family relationships, or to maintain a certain
reputation in the community, purhaps even for business or professional
reasons.  Although, techniqually thay may "volunteer" for membership,
essentially there is no difference, they "join" because they should not
because they believe.  The point is that, like the German Luthran Chruch,
there are many people in American society, and in churches in the United 
States, who are esentially non-Christian in almost every way but externals 
and stated belief, but not in there faith toward God.  People will join 
churches, and think of the church as if it were some sort of club, some
sort of social organization, and not what it is, the Holy Church, the
Body of Christ.  In this way, the Chruch today, especially as it exists 
in the United States, really needs to here the message of D. Bonhoeffer, 
and the Gospel as expressed in a theology of the Cross.  There really is 
not much difference in that state of the Church between Bonhoeffer and 
here.  Of course the historical climates are quite different, we are not 
under a facist regiem, but the lack of real commitment to God and the 
Church among many, and the lack of willingness to tell church-goers this, `
makes Bonhoeffer's message particularly appropriate today.

Mark C. Christianson
christm@stolaf.edu