Family Worship
Andy Beard
Luke 5:1-11 Family Worship Ideas

Bonhoeffer: Are there limits to revolution? (pt.2)

Bonhoeffer’s early warning about the inevitability of idolatry was well founded. Himmler was head of the SS, and in 1935 he ordered every SS member to resign from any religious organisation. Later the same year Himmler and Heydrich met with Hans Gisevius, a military leader, a Christian, and someone who would later be involved with the conpiracy against Hitler. ‘Just you wait’, he was told, ‘You’ll see the day, ten years frmo now, when ADolf Hitler will occupy precisely the same postion in Germany that Jesus Christ has now’ (Metaxas, 2010, p.170).

This was no idle (idol?) theory. The Nazi party made strident attempts to control and neturalise the German Church. Their plans included the cessation of publishing and disseminating the Bible in Germany; that a copy of Mein Kampf was to be displayed - along with a sword - on Church ‘altars’; that the Christian cross must be removed from all Churches, to be replaced by the swastika (Metaxas, 171).

Hitler’s contempt for the Church, and it’s leaders, soon became more evident: ‘You can do anything you want [to Christians] … they will submit … they are insignificant little people, submissive as dogs, and they sweat with embarrassment when you talk to them’. It wasn’t long before pastors who dissented were being arrested, exiled, or forbidden to preach. They began to see Gestapo officers in their congregations. Some were audacious. Niemoller (another leader in the Confessing Church) would ask his congregation to pass ‘our policeman friend’ a Bible. Bonhoeffer - with his usual prophetic prescience - saw that ‘the question at stake in the German Church is no longer an internal issue. It is the question of the existence of Christianity in Europe’.

It didn’t take long before most serious Christians understood the situation they were in. The famous theologian, Karl Barth, spoke for many when he declared that Christianity was separated ‘as by an abyss from the inherent godlessness of National Socialism’. In such a context it is perhaps unsurprising that Bonhoeffer found himself identifying with the propeht Jeremiah. In early 1934, he preached a famous sermon on this Jewish prophet. That in itself was inflammatory. Bonhoeffer painted a picture of a reluctant prophet, held captive by the call of God. God will not let him go, and he will never be rid of God. It’s hard to see whether Bonhoeffer is explaining the mind of Jeremiah, or of himself. ‘[His] path will lead right down into the deepest situation of human powerlessness… [He] is taken for a fool, but a fool who is extremely dangerous to people’s peace and comfort, so that he must be locked up, if not put to death right away. That is exactly what became of the man Jeremiah, because he could not get away from God’. It is also what became of the man, Deitrich Bonhoeffer.

In 1939, Bonhoeffer’s course was set: ‘There is no way to peace along the way to safety … Peace is the opposite of security. To demand guarantees is to want to protect oneself. Peace means giving oneself completely to God’s commandment … battles are won not with weapons, but with God. They are won when the way leads to the cross’.

It becomes apparent that for Bonhoeffer the way of the cross is not the way of passivity. It is the way of death, but not passivity. He remained in Germany in spite of the opportunity to escape, he worked tirelessly training and supporting pastors for the Confessing Church, he established semi-monastic communities in which Christians could find the strength to remain faithful in the face of increasing hostility, he preached, and he established international relationships with the Church elsewhere in Europe. And at some point, he became involved in a plot to assassinate Hitler. It is unclear when or how this happened, and for many it has seemed an enigmatic decision. But Bonhoeffer himself seems to have had little doubt that it was the right thing to do, or at least the less-wrong thing to do. When the decision was made to plant a bomb close to Hitler, Bonhoeffer gazed pensively out of the window. Finally he muttered ‘Those who live by the sword…’ (a reference to Matt.26:52). Rather than hearing Jesus’ words as a prohibition, he took them to mean that he needed to be willing to live (die?) by the consequences of his decision to take up the sword. He was. ‘Death is only dreadful for those who live in dread and fear of it’. He confided to his diary:

‘I am never quite clear about the motives for any of my decisions. Is that a sign of confusion, of inner dishonesty, or is it a sign that we are guided without our knowing..? The reasons one gives for an action to others, and to one’s self are ceratinly inadequate. One can give a reson for everything. In the last resort one acts from a level which remains hidden from us. So one can only ask God to judge us and to forgive us … ’.

As we have seen, Bonhoeffer believed the very existence of the Church was imperilled. Such a situation brought unprecedented obligations for Christians. In such a situation to confess Christ is to resist the State. Failure to appreciate this equation was to cooperate with the State - a State that Bonhoeffer considered to be criminal. Bonhoeffer’s decision to join the conspiracy had some unexpected conseqeunces. Among them was a startling change in his behaviour. At a superficial level, he shifted from being an antagonist, to being a model citizen. He knew such behaviour was open to misinterpretation, but he also had bigger fish to fry. He didn’t want to draw attention to himself and so risk the larger conspiracy.

This opens for us a deep question about ‘truth’ and ‘deception’. It’s worth saying up-front that many of his contemporaries, even in the Confessing Church, felt unable to follow Bonhoeffer in his convictions. He didn’t ask them to. Each must make up their own mind.

Bonhoeffer felt that truth should not be reduced to the easy legalism of only saying and doing that which accorded with fact. He wrote an essay whilst in prison, exploring what it means to tell the truth. Our obligation is not fulfilled simply by ‘not lying’. There is, argued Bonhoeffer, a deeper level of truth, a way of being true to God that was relational. Being a Christian in the midst of the Reich meant going beyond the inadequate ‘rules and regulations’ version of Christianity into a living faith. Sometimes truth and deciet were perilously close, and a truthful way to behave could only be discerned by considering the wider context. Many Christians felt Bonhoeffer was trying to justify the unjustifiable. Bonhoeffer’s response was that being true to the Church’s call to take direct action against a manifestly criminal State, embodied a truth that ran deeper than the deceptive pretense of political subserviance the State demanded. And so he raised his hand to salute, and worked in Military Intellegence, whilst helping Jews escape to Switzerland, and plotting the death of the Fuhrer.

The conspiracy failed.

On 5th April 1943, Bonhoeffer was arrested, initially on the charge of corruption. But following the failure of the attempt on Hitler’s life on July 20, 1944, documents were discovered that linked Bonhoeffer directly with the conspiracy. He was hanged 9th April 1945. His final words: ‘This is the end—for me, the beginning of life’.

Bonhoeffer: Are there limits to revolution? (pt. 1)

When it comes to Christians wrestling with the question of Civil Disobedience, few have given us such insight into their soul’s struggle as the young Lutheran pastor Deitrich Bonhoeffer.

Born in Germany in 1906, Deitrich’s theology of the Church’s relationship with the State was anything but theoretical and academic. As he witnessed the rise of National Socialism, Bonhoeffer sensed from an early stage the acute tensions that were over the horizon. To begin with he was almost a lone voice. In fact, many Church leaders were initially positive toward the policies of Hitler, feeling that he was perhaps restoring a moral context in which the Church would feel at home. Hitler would explicitly (though duplicitly) promise that his government would make Christiantiy the ‘basis of our collective morality’.

But in spite of the rhetoric, Bonhoeffer and others recognised the peril Christians - and Christianiity - would face under the Nazi party. He was appalled at the powerless state of the Church which he sensed would be unable to stand against the coming terrors. He railed against the spiritual blindness and moral weakness of pastors and theologians, preaching as early as October 1932 that the Protestant Church was in its eleventh hour, and that its congregations needed to realise they were attending its funeral service. He saw that many were sleepwalking towards a terrible precipice in thier refusal or inability to recognsie the dangers that were looming in the future. The Church’s unwillingness to speak and act in the face of growing darkness was spiritually catastrophic.

The Nazi policy of total politicisation of life in Germany still didn’t raise the alarm for many pastors and theologians, and some even saw their seeking to create a single national Church as a positive move. The theological and spiritual issues are complex, and it is easy for us to be bewildered at how badly many seemed to mis-interpret the signs of their times. I’d caution against taking the moral high ground, which is often a temptation that accompanies hindsight. I wonder what, in future years, the Church will look back to and be equally bewlildered that we didn’t speak up against or act on. In 1930’s Germany there were powerful theological and cultural forces at play that meant the issues weren’t anything like as clear cut as we might assume (in part because of the Lutheran heritage of the German Church). The hideous enormity of Nazi policy was only incrementally revealed; the German Church was devestatingly weakened by theological liberalism and ethical confusion; and many Christians felt that certain compromises were justifiable in terms of perceived gains in the public life of the nation and the prestige of the Church. Amongst those who did recognise the danger signs, there was no clear agreement on how to best respond. This is an important point to meditate on. The question of how and when to disobey civil authority is rarely asked or answered with any degree of unanimity, even in situations where in retrospect it may appear to have been obvious. Often many Christians will still believe the state should have their loyalty and support, while others will maintain that critical spiritual, political and theological issues hang in the balance. The question often divides the Church at the key moment.

None of this is to legitimise the mistakes some Christians made in 1930’s Germany. Tragic and costly errors of judgement were made, and they led the Church into sin. But it is to recognise that it requires a prophetic insight and uncommon courage to look past the superficial cultural and religious milieu that is often the limits of what others see. In the moment, things are rarely as clear cut as they seem like they should have been when those from later years look back. But some pastors possessed both the insight and the courage. When Hitler was democratically elected Chancellor, it took all of two days for the 26 year old Bonhoeffer to write and deliver a speech on the radio in which he explained that such a leader would inevitably become an idol and a ‘mis-leader’. Immediately, Bonhoeffer was anxious to show that political leadership in a nation must recognise the limitations of its authority.

By the end of 1933, it was clear that democracy, in any meaningful sense of the word, had ceased in Germany. Hitler became de facto dictator when Hindenburg signed an emergency decree in the wake of the Reichstag fire. A nation surrendered its civil and personal liberties in the name of national security.

As the reality of Nazi-ism slowly became apparent, the German Church was in turmoil. Open division, with allegations of schism, quickly came to the surface. In May 1934, a group of dissenting theologians and pastors met at Barmen and brought into existence the ‘true evangelical Church of Germany’, known to posterity as ‘the Confessing Church’. At its foundation was the famous Barmen Declaration (primarily authored by Karl Barth), which understandably focussed on the question of the relationship between the Church and the State. The logic of the Declaration is brilliant in its simplicity. It affirms that the message and order of the church should not be influenced by the current political context; that the Church should not be ruled by a Fuhrer (or any civil government), or made subordinate to the State, but that both Church and State should function within their legitimate sphere of authority and God-given responsibilty. Bonhoeffer developed this point: ‘The Church must reject the encroachment of the order of the state, because of its better knowledge of the state and of the limitations of its actions’.

It was, for Bonhoeffer, entirely appropriate for the Church to question the state, and to challenge the legitimacy of its actions. And further, the Church must stand with and aid the victims of unjust state action (this obviously in the light of Nazi-ism’s persecution of the disabled, Gipsys, the Jews etc.). But Bonhoeffer’s final step was the most dangerous. It is not enough, he argued, to help those who are oppressed by a ungodly state. When the Church sees its very existence as threatened by the state, when the State ceases to be the State as defined in Scripture, then the Church must take direct action against the State to stop it from perpetrating evil.

Where this led Bonhoeffer, we’ll see in the next article.

Bible Read Through 2020 - a personal story

Thanks Jean for being willing to share your story of reading through the Bible this year. For those of you who don’t know Jean, she worships at Bixley Farm, and was very involved in getting MIE Christmas Cards produced and delivered to every home in our community. Over to you…

For me the story really started earlier in 2019 when I came across a book entitled ‘The Gospel according to Judas’ giving a different version of Judas Iscariot to the one commonly read in the gospels. Discussing this at some length with my next door neighbour, a retired Methodist lay preacher, led to some interesting Christian literature novels based on the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948 written by two people, one of whom was a Christian novelist and the other a professor of Jewish history. It was interesting to me because my late father served in the then Suffolk Regiment for 21 years of his life and what was then the British Protectorate of Palestine in particular during a larger part of the second world war. Although he was back in England by 1948 his regiment was the last to leave Jerusalem in 1948 when they handed the keys to the gates of the Jewish quarter to the Chief Rabbi, the first time a Jewish Rabbi had held those keys since 70AD after the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple. Thus my interest was gained and as I love history I wanted to find out more about recent Jewish history and their beliefs.

Roll forward a few months towards the end of 2019 and the discovery that we were going to study the bible in a year and to do it in a chronological order offered a chance to discover the more distant history of the Jews and their relationship with God. Yes we have all read parts of the old testament, some are very familiar passages, but what did it all mean to the Jews at the time certain events happened and as a historical record to them later particularly at the time of Christ.

So starting off on 1 Jan I did have some misgivings about whether I was reading just for the history interest. However I soon realised that reading the passages and books chronologically was so liberating and the familiar stories came alive for me in a new way, especially with the bible study Saturdays each month in Jan to March. All was well until we got to Leviticus where I came unstuck. So many why questions in my mind! Why would God treat his people harshly, particularly striking down Aaron’s brothers and Aaron not allowed to mourn for them either? And, the exacting details of the wilderness tabernacle and the rules for the people. I got to the point of not wanting to read more, but feeling compelled to find out what God was saying. After praying about it I decided to take Mark’s advice and obtained a copy of ‘Exaltation of Jesus in Leviticus’. Even this book took me months to get through way past the time of us reading Leviticus. But the first few chapters did turn my thinking around and I realised I was looking at Leviticus from a purely human point of view and I needed to look at it from God’s point of view. From this point on it became much more than just a history with familiar readings at various points. God was saying so much more and I was praying more for guidance as I was experiencing frustration and even anger at times, sometimes at the Jews and sometimes with God.

And then COVID struck with what some might say biblical thoroughness and all our lives were turned upside down. Just like the Jews in the bible some people blamed God for what was happening forgetting that he gave us freedom of choice on this earth and that all actions have consequences. And yes the prophets suddenly made more sense in this different world, Isaiah’s well-known and wonderful prophecies concerning Jesus almost a comfort blanket. But then came Jeremiah another stumbling block on my journey so I decided to read ‘Exalting Jesus in Jeremiah’ which again took me a long while to read and made me feel very uncomfortable. I realised I was holding back some things from God, not trusting him enough. He could see all my thoughts even the ones I didn’t really want him to see. The crunch came when I was getting towards the middle of the book and I had to keep going back to Jeremiah in the bible. I remember remarking to Mark one Sunday afternoon at Tower Hall how uncomfortable I felt about it all and his reply that I was not alone and was the reason that not many sermons were ever preached on Jeremiah. Here I feel I must repeat part of a chapter in the book based on Jeremiah 21:1-22:10 because this was a particularly uncomfortable session for me but took me deeper into prayer for forgiveness and resolve to change with the Lord’s help. I certainly couldn’t do it on my own.

Steven Smith the author of Exalting Jesus in Jeremiah writes:

‘Imagine that you are taking an elevator down into your soul. You go down and down all the way to your heart. You get out and you look around. And there you see all that God sees. You see the areas you have blocked from God. Some rooms say, “Keep Out!” God is not allowed to see what is in there. You see the things you pray no one else sees. Down in the locked closets and deep crevices of your heart, you see everything God sees. Do you see it? Now that you see what God sees, will you repent?’

‘As these words form on the page, I can imagine that those not raised in my tradition of altar calls and invitations will cringe at a rhetorical strategy intended to probe the heart so deeply. I get that. But it’s no matter. God used the evangelist that day. And if no one else needed it, I deeply needed the challenge. Sitting here years later, I remember the metaphor like it was yesterday. Sinking down, down to the place where no one sees but God. Wow! Even now it is convicting. The metaphor helps me to visualise the dark crevices, closets I have closed off to God and to spiritual introspection. It’s really scary what lay down there, down where there is no spiritual oxygen. If I were a miner, my canary would be dead.’

‘In Jeremiah 22 the Jews have reached a tipping point, they have been accused of idolatry and now injustice. . . . Their heart is turned away from God and therefore from others. It is clear that they are unwilling to take the elevator trip down to examine their hearts, so God warns them to change their behaviour.’

‘In the end it’s easy to be dismissive about all of this. The excuses are legion: “God does not care that much about this issue. Think of all the money I give to the church. With that money others can do this. We all have our gifts. I’m good at serving the church. I’ll be gracious to people after they get here, but I’m not going to go and get them.” Yet in one story Jesus destroys all of that, Matthew 25:31-46, separating the sheep and the goats . . . . “Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me. . . .” In the story the sheep do not understand what good they did and goats do not understand what bad they did . . . . the difference is mercy. It’s not that mercy gets us into heaven, but mercy demonstrates that we have heaven in our hearts . . . . the kind of people who have received mercy are the kind of people who show mercy. It’s a hallmark of salvation’.

The following bible books on the prophets made me realise just how great was their faith despite the ridicule heaped upon them in their own time. History now regards them as great men, but in reading the books in the bible, parallels with today’s world are very much in evidence. As another Christian friend said to me in the summer ‘God didn’t cause COVID but maybe he allowed it to try and turn us to Him again and teach us that our decisions have consequences for all’. And so onto the Gospels where there are so many parts that are familiar to us all, BUT reading them chronologically again and with the benefit of having read all of the old testament brought new insight into the words of Jesus particularly when he references old testament quotes when replying to the Pharisees. All human action and emotion is there both good and bad, and again parallels can be seen with what is happening today. It is amazing that God does not give up on us.

The other important point that struck me forceably again is that just how small a part of the bible the gospels are, detailing His birth and just three years in Jesus’s life. But what treasure and promise in those few pages. God chose a time when an empire had advanced so much that travel to far flung places was possible and the words of His Son could be carried to all nations not just the Jews. And here again in Acts we find men and women of faith spreading the ‘good news’ and some suffering for it as did the prophets.

Reading the letters was again a very different experience because of having read the Old Testament. Here was Paul and others trying once again to bring people to the ways of Jesus , much easier for Gentiles than Jews who had many centuries of rules and regulations to change and to accept that the world was full of God’s chosen people and not just the Jews.

Finally as I write this we are coming to the book of Revelation which I know I shall struggle again with, so have once more ordered an Exalting Jesus book to help me through. I started this year and the Bible 2020 cause with some misgivings, but have found it a truly enriching experience especially through the year we have all just had. In fact I have just bought a second hand chronological bible which gives a reading and some explanation for every day of the year and which I am sure I shall find equally rewarding.

All through this experience the following verses from hymns have been reverberating through my mind.

Praise God from whom all blessings flow

Praise Him all creatures here below

Praise Him above ye heavenly hosts

Praise Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

Bless the Lord, O my soul,

O my soul

Worship His Holy name

Sing like never before, O my soul

I’ll worship Your Holy name

The sun comes up,

It’s a new day dawning

It’s time to sing your song again.

Whatever may pass and whatever lies before me

Let me be singing when the evening comes.

Meditation before the Manger (iv)

The Church

Suggested Reading: I Peter 4:12-19

Suggested Carol: Angels from the Realms of Glory

Almighty God

come among us we pray with your power

and help us with your great might

so that, although we are hindered by our sins and wickedness

from running the race set before us,

your grace and mercy might help and deliver us

through the work of your Son our Lord

to whom with you, and the Holy Spirit

be honour and glory, now and forever

Amen

Collect for 4th Sunday of Advent

Meditation before the Manger (iii)

The Dragon

Suggested Reading: I Peter 4:1-11

Suggested Carol: Let All Mortal Flesh Keep Silence

O Holy Spirit,

who in all ages has comforted and strengthened martyrs and confessors;

who has ever been the sustaining comfort and sweet refreshment of the sorrowful and suffering

who sheds abroad love, joy and peace in the hearts of the faithful and obedient followers of Christ;

grant that we may be filled with all the fullness of your gifts of grace;

so that, by your holy inspiration, we may perceive that which is holy and true,

and by your merciful guiding, perform the same,

Amen.

Treasury of Devotion

Meditation before the Manger (ii)

Mary

Suggested Reading: I Peter 1:10-21

Suggested Carol: The Angel Gabriel from heaven came

Almighty and most merciful God,

who has taught us to love our neighbour as ourselves;

we remember before you this night

…all who are burdened and oppressed;

…those who are afflicted by poverty;

…those worn down by disease and illness;

…the weary and the heavy-laden;

…those oppressed by darkness and despair;

…those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake.

Help them to rest in you this night.

through Jesus Christ our Lord

Amen

William Knight, Parish Prayers 1215

Meditation before the Manger (i)

Welcome to the Nativity for grown ups…

Suggested Reading: I Peter 1:3-9

Suggested Video: O Come, O Come Emmanuel

Eternal God, Heavenly Father

who through your Son has revealed to us that heaven and earth will pass away

We ask that you would keep us steadfast in your Word, and in true faith;

…that you would graciously guard us from all sin

…and that you would preserve us amidst all temptations;

so that our hearts may not be overwhelmed by the cares of this life,

but rather be watchful and prayerful as we await the coming of your Son,

and joyfully anticipate our salvation,

through that same Jesus Christ,

Amen.

Parish Prayers 27, United Lutheran Church

Civil Disobedience is in an Anglican's blood...

We tend to think that as an established Church, the Church of England should probably think of itself as part of the, well, the establishment. As such we might imagine benign insitutional compliance. In fact, at its best, the Church of England has been prophetic and remarkably willing to disregard dictats from the ruler of the realm. This is particualrly interesting in the light of Article 37, which recognises that the sovereign has ‘chief power in the realm of England’, and that as such ‘holds supreme government in this realm’. Crucially the Article goes on to state: ‘…we do not grant our rulers the ministry of either God’s Word or of the sacraments … By this title we acknowledge only the prerogative which we see in Holy Scripture God has given to all godly rulers’. Note the description of the kind of ruler that the Church delights to be subject to.

As in so much of the Church of England’s foundational documents, there is a commitment to stand firmly within the limits of Scripture. The transition from studying the text of the Bible directly (which we’ve been doing up to this point in the series) and reflecting on the Church’s practise and example, should feel seamless. Art.37 also goes on to explain that Christians are subject to the laws of the realm, and to the penalties incurred in the breaking of those laws.

Unfortunately the working out in practise has been a much more ambiguous affair. It’s worth being honest about that up front. The Church of England has consistently struggled to remain faithful to her spiritual heritage and ambition. And it hasn’t always ended well for those who have sought to stand against rulers. We may not always agree with the stands that were taken, or the politics of those taking them, but what they all have in common is a vision of a Church that has a right, indeed a Divine mandate, to stand against the civil and religious authorities when they step away from their responsibilities before heaven.

Again, the context is one of recognising the Church’s obligation to pray for and to support God’s appointed governements wherever possible. Intercessions for the sovereign and his / her parliament were offered in services of Divine worship by every Anglican minister. As well as collects, the old BCP intercessions during Communion put it like this: ‘We pray that touwoud save and defend all Christian rulers, and especially your serrvant Elizabeth our Queen, so that under her we may be governed in godliness and peace. Grant that all who exercise authority may truly and impartially administer justice, restrain wickedness and vice, and maintain you true religion and virtue’.

But those Anglicans who have felt the responsiblities of their ministry most acutely have always understood that they answered first to the Living God. And that has frequently lead to a tension in the relationship between the Government and the Church.

You might have in mind Henry II famously wanting rid of that ‘turbulent priest’ Beckett in 12th Century. Beckett was Archbishop of Canterbury at the time (so pre-Reformation), and despite having been appointed by Henry, decried the king’s habit of meddling in Church affairs. He was exiled for 6 years, but on his return immediately launched again into his harsh criticisms of what he saw as the over-reach of the those with temporal authority. Henry’s exasperation found expression in a moment of particular (probably rhetorical) frustration: ‘Will no-one rid me of this turbulent priest?’ Four knights took him at his word and on 29 December 1170, murdered Becket at the altar of Canterbury Cathedral. They were excommunicated were excommunicated for their initiative, and in 1174 Henry walked barefoot to Canterbury Cathedral in penance. Henry’s plans to curb the power of the Church ended in failure.

Or perhaps - more controversially - we could think of the role of Anglican clergy in the events around England’s brief experience of republicanism. Church ministers were on both side of the political divide, some supporting Charles I, and some agitating on behalf of Parliament. One of the most politically active ministers was John Owen, who is heralded as possibly the most brilliant English speaking theologian the Church has known. His political legacy is more ambiguous. He preached to Parliament on the day after the execution of Charles I, and hoped for the reformation of church and society in the transformation of politics under Cromwell. He was quickly disillusioned, and in the late 1650’s found himself involved in a conspiracy to destabilise the republic. It failed, and instead created the crisis that led to the restoration of the monarchy, and the persecution of dissenters (such as Owen himself).

We’re likely to find the example of Tyndale more clear-cut. We’re in the 1520-30’s now, and the Reformation is getting underway. But in England it is still illegal to translate the Bible into, or even read the Bible in English, without episcopal permission. Indeed it is illegal to have any part of the Scriptures in the English language. Tyndale challenged the King (Henry VIII) over the annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragorn, and then sought refuge in Belgium. For this, and for his defying the order of the Bishop of London by translating the Bible into English, he was hunted down by member of Henry’s equivalent to MI6, arrested and imprisoned near Brussels. In 1536, he was convicted of heresy and executed by strangulation, after which his body was burnt at the stake. His dying prayer was that the King of England's eyes would be opened; this seemed to find its fulfilment just one year later with Henry's authorisation of the ‘Matthew Bible’, which was largely Tyndale's own work. A copy of the Bible in English would be provided in every parish Church - though it would have to be chained to prevent people stealing it!

The list of Anglicans who have felt duty bound over the years to defy the law of the land is fairly long. We could re-visit the stories of the Bishops who insisted on teaching the Bible during the reign of Mary I, and who were variously imprisoned, exiled, or burned at the stake; or closer to home, the stories of the Ipswich Martyrs. We could remember Wycliffe, or the Lollards, or those ejected in 1662 after they refused to sign the Act of Uniformity, or the subversive ministries of Whitefield and Wesley, which defied again both the law of the land and the Church. Or in more recent years Bishop George Bell’s propensity to run into members of the German Confessing Church during his trips abroad. Bell’s advocating the cause of the Confessing Church, and the conspiracy against Hitler in which several members of the Confessing Church were involved, did not sit well with Churchill who was deeply sceptical that any such Church or plot existed.

But whatever we may think of any individual circumstance, the point remains that a willingness to engage in civil and ecclesastical disobedience has consistently been a feature of Anglicanism. When Governments, or Bishops create a sitaution where those who understand their first allegiance to be to Christ face pressure to compromise their commitment to Him, Anglicans have willingly stepped out in disobedience - and have often faced the consequences (Art.37). In recent years it is easy to think that, in terms of civil disobedience (ecclesiasitcal disobedience has been another story), there has been little need for such action. That is a situation that is perhpas changing faster than we realise.

As we begin to re-consider these questions of discipleship, it is worth us being aware of our history. Whilst for many of us, questions of conscientious objection (in society, in Church or in the workplace) are largely unprecedented, there is a long and strong tradition within Anglicanism. It is, as they say, in our blood.

Bible Read Through: Revelation (pt 1)

Here is the first half of this morning’s overview of the Book of Revelation. Hope it’s helpful. I mentioned about listening to the sermon series I preached through Revelation back in 2016. I checked on it earlier - don’t be put off by the timings!! It looks like some ofthe sermons are about an hour and forty minutes - i assure you that isn’t the case! They are big old sermons - but not that big!

The Limits of Revolution (viii) Revelation

The Book of Revelation explores the matrix of relationships between Christ, the Church and the world throughout the age between the Ascension of Christ and His return. It deals with immense reality, and its comprehensive and consuming insight can be amongst the most traumatic reading in the Bible.

The Apocalypse as it used to be called (‘apocalypse’, means ‘reveal / disclose’; it does not mean ‘the end of the world’!) paints a vision of a world that has descended into an arena of war. The ancient serpent, the dragon, rages against the Living God and is hurled to the earth. Unable to assail the throne of the Lamb, He instead ‘leads the whole world astray’ (12:9), into a posture of sustained hostility to Christ and His people. The world, as A.W.Tozer so memorably put it, is a battleground, not a playground.

The brutal reality of that battle is underscored early on in the Book. As we read through Jesus’ 7 letters to the (angels of the) Churches, we are introduced to the strategies and tactics of our enemy. Amongst them is the weaponisation of the structures of authority within human society. In His letters we find both religious and civil authority bearing against the people of God, with terrifying consequences. In tune with the purpose of the Book, Jesus unveils the spiritual animosity that lies behind those structures. ‘…[T]he devil will put some of you in prison to test you and you will suffer persecution…’ (3:10). It’s likely something we had already understood, but it’s worth noting that even structures of authority that have been put in place by the Living God can and do fall under ‘the control of the evil one’ (I Jn.5:19), and when they do they can become weapons of war.

We see this most fully and fearfully portrayed in Chapter 13, and the vision of the beasts that crawl out of the sea, and come out of the earth. We’ll look on Saturday (in the Bible Read Through breakfast) how to go about interpreting the imagery of the book of Revelation, but for the sake of brevity in this series, let us grant that this beast from the sea represent to us the brutal realities of a totalitarian (or at least, authoritarian) government. It is worth stressing - as we have done repeatedly in this series - that there is nothing wrong, per se, with political government. But when a structure of political and civil authority over-reaches its God-given mandate and demands a loyalty and final allegiance that belongs only to the Living God, then it becomes something that is represented by this beast in Rev.13. It doesn’t matter what ideology that political system embodies. It could be facist, communist, a theocracy or a liberal democracy. But when it seeks to politicise every aspect of life and being, it becomes a blasphemous phenomenon.

Similarly the beast that comes out of the earth. Again we see a human power structure, but this time with a spiritual / religious focus, rather than political (both these interpretations are explored in my series on Revelation on the website). Christless philosophies, false religions, godless spiritualities, all find themselves expressed in this monstrosity. The interconnectedness between politics and religion is worth being aware of in the chapter. Through this part of the Book of Revelation Jesus is teaching us to recognise that Satan is at work in the midst of all such conspiracies to marginalise and destroy the Church (Rev.1:1; 13:1). The genesis of both beasts is found in the presence of the ‘dragon’.

And so it is little surprise when we read that Christians will be imprisioned and indeed martyred under such a regime (13:10&15). Christians are particularly vulnerable as a state or religious culture becomes totalitarian. We cannot give our final allegiance to any authority, no matter how precious our national, cultural or even religious heritage. We would rightly understand such a claim to be idolatrous. As we have seen, we give to Caesar what is Caesar’s until to do so means we could not also give to God what is God’s. In the wake of such denial we see Christians suffering social marginalisation and economic privation (13:15-17).

The picture that comes through is of Satan as a bully who seeks to force the Church to conform to his vision of human society, spirituality and culture. He intimidates, deceives, and forces people to walk his way. Fear of the consequences of dissidence leads to conformity and capitulation. And he is remarkably effective. In ways that deliberately parody the heavenly vision of Rev.7:9, we are told that the dragon’s beast is given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. More disturbingly, it is given ‘power to wage war against God’s holy people, and to conquer them’ (13:7).

The call to the Church in the midst of all this is for patient endurance, faithfulness and wisdom (13:10&18). Jesus doesn’t suggest that there is nothing to worry about; He doesn’t intimate that the dragon’s bark is worse than his bite. There is a bite. There are consequences for a refusal to worship the beast (13:4). But Jesus expects us to remain faithful to Him and to bear those consequences patiently and humbly, confident that our names are written in the Book of Life and that as such we will be vindicated (13:8); confident that those authorities will be judged on the basis of how they have treated the Church (18:20); and confident that the death of the saints is not outside of the sovereignty of our God, and will be avenged (6:9-11; 19:1-3)

So, what do we take away from this? That the strucutres of religious and political authority are not spirtually neutral realities within human society and culture. That they can be inhabited by and weaponised by the spiritual forces that are deeply hostile to Christ and the Church. That to be faithful to Christ will at times demand that we do not conform to the way of life and being that the dragon would seek to impose. That such defiance will not be tolerated, and will lead to very tangible consequences for Christians that will have to be endured in a posture of patient hope for the Day of Judgement.

Many of our spiritual forbears have discovered that in laying our these dynamics, the Scriptures have lef tus with a profoundly accurate diagnosis. How did they navigate those dynamics? That is the question we will seek to answer in the second half of this series.