HomeUnadorned: The Sacrament of the Word in Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Dietrich Bonhoeffer was at his very core a preacher. All of his theologizing and reading of Scripture was wrapped around the call on his life to preach. Indeed, from his early preaching ministry to his final sermon before his execution, his life was centered around the proclamation of the Word. [1] His Germany, much like America today, was depleted of good, biblical preaching. In the midst of the crises, Bonhoeffer produced a theology of preaching which speaks loudly beyond his time. His high view of preaching rivals the great expositors of the history of the church. What makes Bonhoeffer’s writings on any topic significant is also what makes his writings on preaching so significant; that is, Bonhoeffer’s uncanny ability to make theology practical, and the practical theological. In Bonhoeffer, the two are inseparable. Based on his several lectures on preaching in 1937-39 [2] , and select sermons, we see the heart of Bonhoeffer’s view of preaching. That view suggests that the Word of God alone has the power to effect the purposes of God. That is, the Word of God not only does not need the adornment or help of the preacher, it is hindered by the preacher who attempts to embellish the text.
Bonhoeffer’s view of preaching is sacramental. He does not develop this view, though he does use the term, Sacramentum verbi, or the Sacrament of the Word. By this, he means to suggest that the Word is full of grace (and also judgment). [3] But in order to be a sacrament, according to the Augsburg Confession, it must be a sign and testimony “of the will of God toward us, instituted to awaken and confirm faith in those who use them.” Of course the Confession never referred to preaching as a sacrament. Bonhoeffer believed that a sacrament must have the mandate of Christ [...] [an] outward sign [...]. [have an] action of the church invested with promise [...] [and convey] a saving grace to the one who receives it.” [4] Clearly, preaching is mandated by Christ, it is an action of the church, and it brings saving grace to the one who receives it in faith. Whether it is a sign or not is difficult to say. It certainly does not have the physical manifestation as the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper (the outward sign of the inward grace).
Whether or not the preached word can be fit within the category of a sacrament or not, Bonhoeffer treats it, and views it very much like a sacrament. That is, it imparts grace to the recipient. Bonhoeffer writes:
When a preacher opens his Bible and interprets the word of God, a mystery takes place, a miracle: the grace of God, who comes down from heaven into our midst and speaks to us, knocks on our door, asks questions, warns us, puts pressure on us, alarms us, threatens us, and makes us joyful again and free and sure. When the Holy Scriptures are brought to life in a church, the Holy Spirit comes down from the eternal throne, into our hearts [...] [5]
This act of preaching the Word acts very much like a sacrament in that it is a mystery, a miracle, and it imparts grace to those who receive it.
If not outright sacramental in his view of preaching, the Lutheran theologian views it as a great mystery. This mystery is similar to Bonhoeffer’s conception of the congregation being the real body of Christ in that “the proclaimed word is the incarnate Christ himself.” [6] To Bonhoeffer, there is an inseparable connection between the Word who is Christ, and the Word that is preached. Both take on humanity with its “needs, cares, fears and sins.” [7] He makes the connection by suggesting that the Word Who created the world, is the same Who became incarnate, Who speaks in Scripture, and “through the Holy Spirit, the incarnate Word comes to us from the Scripture in the sermon [...]it is one and the same Word.” [8] This view of the Word certainly lifts preaching to a high plain, but it is in danger of lowering Scripture on par with flawed human preaching, not to mention how it portrays Christ (even the incarnate, kenotic Christ).
In a discussion on how preaching is not like other secular speeches, Bonhoeffer further notes the nature of the preached Word. While secular speeches are “means to an end” or pointing to something other, the proclaimed Word “is the thing itself: the historical Jesus Christ.” [9] Bonhoeffer’s view of preaching theologically can be summed up in this incarnation view point. He offers no biblical justification for this view, and it is not readily apparent whether this view could sustain a biblical examination. What it does show is that the basis for Bonhoeffer’s view of preaching is that it is sacred, and of the utmost importance for the church.
As a result of the importance placed on the preached Word, Bonhoeffer places great weight on the preacher to be faithful to the Word of God. The preached word is not the Word of God because it is preached within the church, rather it is the Word of God because it exposits the Word of God, the Bible. Unfortunately, “the Bible is a grossly neglected book with pastors,” [10] writes Bonhoeffer. In his incessant criticisms on contemporary preachers, Bonhoeffer notes that they often inject their own views into sermons, and use the Scripture as a springboard to these views. [11] He reminds the preacher that he is “only [the Scripture’s] servant and helper. Preachers do not bring the Scripture into the pulpit for their use; they must allow themselves to be used by it for the congregation.” [12]
Within Bonhoeffer’s critique of the preacher injecting his own views into the preached word, Bonhoeffer also criticizes the notion of basing the preached word on experience and on current events. First, Christian experience cannot be the basis of the preached word. That is, the authority of the sermon cannot be sustained by “pious Christian experience [. . . ] nor the need of the hour of the congregation, nor the desire to improve and influence others.” [13] This would point us to something other than Christ. He further explains, ““I am not expected primarily to testify emphatically to my salvation but to the Savior. I cannot save anybody with my human experience. The Savior saves.” [14] The impetus for preaching must be placed in the commission of Christ. [15]
Secondly, the “contemporary situation” cannot be determinative of the content of the sermon. [16] This is because “Both God and the devil are at work in [the historical situation]. It cannot become the source of our understanding and proclamation of the Word of God.” [17] This trap is what Bonhoeffer accuses liberalism of falling into. In a warning to fellow leaders of the Confessing Church, the German theologian decried the German Christian’s desire to find the relevance of Christianity rather than the fact of the message. That is, liberalism in its attempt to be relevant to the current situation had allowed the current situation to dominate the preached word. This in effect turned the equation upside-down, placing the Scriptures at the mercy of contemporary culture, rather than placing contemporary culture under the judgment of the Word. [18] To Bonhoeffer, the Word was sufficient to speak to the current condition. But not only was the Word sufficient, but attempting relevance was insufficient and counterproductive. He wrote, “To attempt to get close to the culture of the people and to the contemporary scene is actually to get separated from both the contemporary scene and the people.” [19] To have the contemporary situation as the basis confuses the reality of “the situation of the sinner before God who wants to be assured before God and with God.” [20]
Rather than having our pious experience or the current situation be the basis of preaching, Bonhoeffer argues that the basis must be the text of Scripture. He lays out the argument that our testimony is dependant on Apostolic testimony, and therefore it is both “commissioned by and bound by the biblical witness” [21] since the message is not conceived by us. And then he adds, “It does not spring from our own private interests or initiative. Its content is biblical witness alone.” [22]
Because the text is the basis of our testimony, “we must have a reverence for the biblical word” [23] writes Bonhoeffer. One way in which the text is disrespected is when it is used as “a springboard for our own thoughts.” [24] The result is serious: it “hinders the coming of Christ” [25] to the congregation. In contrast to the one who places his own views above that of the text, a true witness desires to “stand behind their testimony.” The witness does not “want to add anything with human words to Christ’s words.” [26] The Word is effective on its own, and our words merely hinder the work that God is trying to do in the preached word.
In an effort to describe what is occurring, Bonhoeffer makes an interesting distinction between the subjective and the objective experience of the preacher by arguing that the preacher must remain objective and distant from the text. That is to say, the sermon is an interpretation of the text, not a first person account of it. This distances the preacher from being the subject of the pathos of the text and places him within the judgment of it. So when a text describes the wrath of God, it is God who is angry and not the preacher, who stands under God’s wrath himself. [27] Similarly, the preacher should not call people to repentance, but let the Word of God call them to repentance. The preacher who does this puts himself “to death for the sake of the Word, [and] dies to his own will and only wishes to be a handservant of God. The preacher must want only what the Word itself wants.” [28]
But how is this accomplished? Bonhoeffer suggests that the singularly best way to allow the Word of God to speak is through the exposition of the text. For Bonhoeffer, the goal of the sermon is clearly that the Scripture speak, and not the preacher or his outline or fancy illustrations. [29] Even the form of the sermon could hinder the Word from speaking, especially as the form contained long, irrelevant introductions and illustrations. Bonhoeffer believed that introductions could be virtually done away with, as the text is a ship “loaded to its capacity.” [30] Therefore, introductions and illustrations must be crisp and to the point. [31]
This concern of Bonhoeffer’s to let the Word itself speak is precisely the reason for his criticism of thematic preaching. He claims that thematic preaching “carries the danger that only the proposed problem and the suggested answer will be remembered; apologetic comes to the front and the text is ignored.” [32] This way of preaching also reinforces another fault of the church which Bonhoeffer points out, and that is that “the Bible has become nothing more to the congregation than a fragmented anthology of sayings” [33] through much devotional literature. This fragmentation has led to a lack of understanding of the unity of the Word of God. But not only is expository preaching preventative against such false notions, but practically, it frees the preacher from the “torment of waiting for fresh ideas.” [34] Rather than asking, “What shall I say today to the congregation?” we can now ask, “What does this text say to the congregation?” [35]
This is not to suggest that there be a dry rendering of Scripture. Preaching is not a mere summary of the text, but an interpretation. And furthermore, calls on the preacher to ask himself, “Has the old been said in a new way? Does it cause someone to want to look again into the text?” [36] It is this goal of getting the congregation into the text so that it can speak which is at the heart of Bonhoeffer’s view of preaching. Rather than evaluating a sermon on how “beautiful” the sermon was (a sure sign of a bad sermon in Bonhoeffer’s eyes), it can be evaluated on how the congregation “is maturing in scriptural knowledge and in a growing ability to judge various doctrines.” [37] When this is accomplished, it assures that the congregation is hearing the Word on their own, rather than on the thoughts and opinions of the preacher. In expository preaching then, the preacher can approach the sermon with “utmost certainty.” [38]
Several factors can derail this exercise in expositing the text, several of which have been noted. But Bonhoeffer takes issue with one factor which on its face appears noble. He describes the issue in a sermon on Psalm 98:1 (a “springboard” of his own, perhaps). In it, he discusses music within the congregation, arguing that music itself can be a hindrance to the preached word since it can become the object, rather than the instrument of worship. Even when apparently used appropriately, Bonhoeffer declares, “The word of God, as it comes to us in the Bible and in the proclamation of his gospel, does not need ornamentation. It is clothed in its own glory, its own beauty [...]” [39] He backs down a bit to suggest that the Word will be decorated by those who love it, but argues that there is no “finer” adornment than that of the obedient heart. [40] But still, the power of the Word is independent of that adornment.
There is a place for music in worship (and indeed, Bonhoeffer himself considered being a musician instead of theologian). But the place must be put in its proper perspective. In his lectures on preaching, he advises the future ministers, “The place of the organ in worship is not for the honor of the organist and the glory of music, but rather to accompany the singing and to direct the hearing of the congregation toward the preached word.” [41] So, for Bonhoeffer, the music is subordinate to and directive toward the preached word, for “Music and symbols [...]do not break down the will! [...]The word, however, conveys the Spirit and does accomplish this.” [42]
There is an even more damaging aspect in the preacher himself in attempting to adorn the preached word with preaching techniques, according to Bonhoeffer. In a discussion on the reading of other’s sermons (assumably for preaching those sermons), Bonhoeffer states that “Nothing is more dangerous than” when preaching becomes a performance. [43] This type of preaching which relies on method more than content also attempts to place natural talent above God-given giftings. These spiritual giftings lead to “great spiritual effectiveness” even among the less articulate preacher. [44] Therefore, the preacher must refuse to use “tricks and techniques, both the emotional ones and the rhetorical ones . . . This permits the Word’s almost magnetic relationship to its congregation.” [45]
Being exhausted from preaching a sermon suggests that the preacher has injected himself into the sermon too much. Allowing God to be exhausted is “a humble awareness of the Word and a belief in the power of the Word itself to make its own way.” [46] But the injection of emotionalism and other such techniques “betray [s] insecurity” [47] in the effectiveness of the Word, and in the preacher’s preparation of it.
Bonhoeffer advocates authenticity in preaching rather than technique, writing, “As [the speaker of the Word of God] I am what I am, and I must not attempt to be anything else.” [48] And against those who would suggest otherwise, he says that “In the service of Jesus I become natural.” [49] Thus, practicing and plotting hand gestures and the like makes the preacher lose “truthfulness and genuineness.” [50]
Just as the preaching teacher decried the “adornment” of the Word with music, he also decried decorating it with style. He stated that “God’s Word does not need an exclamation mark in the sermon. The Word of God itself is the exclamation mark.” [51] Such artificial inclusions cheapen the text’s own power. Indeed, Bonhoeffer goes a step further and declares that “The Word does not need to be made alive.” [52] He says elsewhere, “I do not give life to it, but it gives life to me and to the congregation.” [53] So Bonhoeffer calls on preachers to get out of the way, and humbly be instruments of the Word.
Bonhoeffer not only places great weight on the preacher, but he encourages the listeners to bear the proclamation of the gospel themselves. This is not to say that the hearers repeat the Word elsewhere (though they certainly should). It begins with the congregation being educated “to the possibility of a relevant criticism of the sermon.” [54] That is, the congregation is growing in its understanding of the Word and beginning to discern every teaching, asking, “Is this truly the gospel of our God that we are hearing? Or is it the kind of arbitrary thinking that human beings invent [?]” [55] In this charitable criticism, the congregation takes on the responsibility of proclaiming the Word and be drawn together in a unity of the body.
A final and extremely significant way in which the Word is distorted in Bonhoeffer’s view is in the sermon which serves as an application rather than an interpretation. [56] This approach of making application “indicates that we stand above the Word rather than beneath it.” [57] Indeed, the application and explanation of the text are inseparable to Bonhoeffer [58] because the text itself moves among the congregation when it is preached. He describes the complete process like this: “the word arises out of the Bible, takes shape as the sermon, and enters into the congregation in order to bear it up.” [59]
This brings us to what Bonhoeffer claims as the purpose and end of preaching. Bonhoeffer states:
This proclamation of the Christ does not regard its primary responsibility to be giving advice, arousing emotions, or stimulating the will—it will do these things, too—but its intention is to sustain us. The Word is there that burdens might be laid upon it. We are all borne up by the word of Christ. Because it does so, it creates fellowship. The Word intends that no one should remain alone, for in him no one remains alone. The Word makes individuals part of one body. [60]
In this, Bonhoeffer claims three significant results of preaching the Word. First, it sustains. Second, burdens will be taken, and third, as a result fellowship will be a reality within the body.
But he warns against placing any stock in attempting to shape this fellowship. He writes:
But preachers are not to create an image for the congregation, and certainly not a congregation according to their own image. In fact the preacher has no idea at all how it should look. God creates God’s own congregation. The face of the congregation should not be determined according to some kind of ideal for a congregation; God engraves the signs of God in ways other than I imagine.
Trying to shape the congregation into our ideals is not allowing God to shape it according to His purposes through His Word. Our desire to shape people with our vision for what they should become is a distortion of the message of the gospel itself. He writes, “Everything hinges on the question of what the gospel is.” [61]
So what is the message, according to Bonhoeffer? It is that the one true application is “God’s own self, and God alone [. . . ] It is God’s call to acknowledge the lordship of God, and beyond that there is nothing more concrete.” [62] We find this concrete reality through the exposition of the Word of God in all texts of Scripture. Therefore, we are “freed from the necessity of locating and quantitatively sorting our which texts fit our times with the least ambiguity.” [63] Bonhoeffer does not back down on this. To Bonhoeffer, the admonitions needed are subsidiary to the true need of God, who alone is “concrete.” The admonitions are there for the final purpose of leading the hearer to God Himself. “Otherwise” writes Bonhoeffer, “we create humanity according to our ideals, instead of leaving God room to create God’s own likeness in humanity.” [64]
To Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the preached word is an incarnation of Christ within the body of Christ. For this, he appears to have no biblical basis. Perhaps he is merely associating the differing biblical uses of “Word,” or the Greek, “logos,” but the ramifications of such a loose rendering equates the third Person of the Trinity and Scripture with the preached word. At its worst, this view relegates the third Person of the Trinity to a flawed human Person, and the Word of God as a flawed representation of God’s word by equating it to the admittedly flawed preached word. Such an equation obviously raises the significance of the preached word, but appears to lower the authority and purity of Christ and His Word as found in the Scriptures.
Even so, Bonhoeffer’s insistence that the Word of God speak for itself is a notion which is not new, but must be iterated throughout Christendom. The inability of preachers to allow the Word to speak is at an all-time high with the desire for relevance within the church of the 21st century. Even while his insights into preaching the Word exclusively, his criticisms may at times be overreactions. Could there not be a useful place for an introduction which does not begin with an examination of the text in order to set up the examination more fully? Are applications always wrong, and an addition to the Word? Are illustrations really as harmful as Bonhoeffer seems to imply? These are all questions which deserve further investigation and study. But even with perceived over-reactions, Bonhoeffer’s words must be taken seriously for the church today. Many similarities exist between his massively flawed German church and our American church today. We would do well to prayerfully and earnestly examine his criticisms to be sure we are not hindering the Word of God from accomplishing its purposes.
And finally, we would do well to take Bonhoeffer’s criticisms of the perceived purposes of the sermon as opposed to the purposes of God. In our day, most sermons are driven by an appetite for relevance and application, most often to the neglect of the Word itself. This has been especially true as thematic preaching has taken hold in most congregations. Again, Bonhoeffer’s view must be carefully considered and not taken lightly.
Bonhoeffer’s ultimate desire for the Word of God to be preached unadorned is exciting and admirable. It seems to me that he failed at this very task in many of his own sermons. Not only are his sermons delightfully written, but they often depart from the intended meaning of the text. Even so, his sermons have keen insight into the human condition and its need for a Savior. Could Bonhoeffer himself live up to his own standards? Assuredly not. But it does raise the question of whether his standards are ones which must be implemented as stringently as he espouses in his lectures on preaching. In all, Bonhoeffer’s insights are a brilliant addition to the corpus of preaching. They should be valued by preachers to this day and encourage them to let the Word of God speak—unadorned.
1 Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, A Testament to Freedom, eds. Geoffrey B. Kelly and F. Burton Nelson, (New York: HarperCollins Publisher, 1995), 177.
2 Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Worldly Preaching: Lectures on Homiletics, edited and translated, with critical commentary, by Clyde E. Fant, (New York: Crossroad, 1991).
3 Ibid, “The Proclaimed Word,” 104.
4 Ibid, “The Ministry of Ordination,” 108-9.
5 Dietrich Bonhoeffer, London: 1933-1935, Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, vol. 3, ed. Geffrey B. Kelly, trans. Daniel W. Bloesch and James H. Burtness (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005), 323.
6 Worldly Preaching, “The Proclaimed Word,” 101.
7 Ibid, 102.
8 Ibid, 103.
9 Ibid, 104.
10 Ibid, “The Pastor and the Bible,” 116.
11 Ibid, “The Witnesses,” 106.
12 Ibid, “The Pastor and the Bible,” 116.
13 Ibid, “The Causality and Finality of Preaching,” 111.
14 Ibid, “The Form of the Sermon,” 137.
15 Ibid, “The Causality and Finality of Preaching,” 111.
16 Ibid.
17 Ibid, 114.
18 Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, A Testament to Freedom, eds. Geoffrey B. Kelly and F. Burton Nelson, (New York: HarperCollins Publisher, 1995), 158.
19 Worldly Preaching, “The Causality and Finality of the Word,” 113.
20 Ibid, “The Causality and Finality of the Word,” 114.
21 Ibid, “The Witnesses,” 106.
22 Ibid.
23 Ibid, 107.
24 Ibid.
25 Ibid.
26 Ibid.
27 Ibid, “The Causality and Finality of Preaching,” 112.
28 Ibid.
29 Ibid, “The Sermon and the Text,” 129.
30 Ibid, “Postscript,” 150.
31 Ibid, “The Sermon and the Text,” 129-130.
32 Ibid, 129.
33 Ibid, 131.
34 Ibid, 130.
35 Ibid.
36 Ibid, “Postscript,” 149.
37 Ibid, “The Sermon and the Text,” 129.
38 Ibid, “The Proclaimed Word,” 104.
39 Dietrich Bonhoeffer, London: 1933-1935, Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, vol. 3, ed. Geffrey B. Kelly, trans. Daniel W. Bloesch and James H. Burtness (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005), 355.
40 Ibid.
41 Worldly Preaching, “The Pastor and the Worship Service,” 124.
42 Ibid, “The Proclaimed Word,” 104.
43 Ibid, “How Does a Sermon Begin?” 120-121.
44 Ibid, “The Form of the Sermon,” 143.
45 Ibid, “The Causality and Finality of Preaching,” 112.
46 Ibid.
47 Ibid, “How Does a Sermon Begin?” 122.
48 Ibid, “The Form of the Sermon,” 140.
49 Ibid, 142.
50 Ibid.
51 Ibid, 143.
52 Ibid, 140.
53 Ibid, “The Causality and Finality of Preaching,” 112.
54 Ibid, “The Witnesses,” 106.
55 Works of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, vol. 3, 322.
56 Worldly Preaching, “The Causality and Finality of Preaching,” 113.
57 Ibid, 114.
58 Ibid, “Postscript,” 149.
59 Ibid, “The Proclamation of the Word,” 103.
60 Ibid, “The Proclaimed Word,” 103.
61 Ibid, “The Causality and Finality of Preaching,” 111-112.
62 Ibid, 114.
63 Ibid.
Comments
Post a Comment
Sermons
True Love Revealed | 1 John 1:1-4
Worth Living For | Philippians 3:7-10
The God Who Is Present | Exodus 3, 33
Articles
We Don't Know What We Need: Our Crisis Reveals What We Do
Why I Love It When The Electricity Goes Out During a Church Service:
Beware Gangrene!: Treating This Deadly Disease
Biography
Blog Posts
Igniting the Fire to Be Published!
Last Time Singing
From Atheist to Believer
All Material Copyright Masterswordsmen Publications 2009-2023
No content may be reproduced without the permission of the author.