I’ve been pondering what it means to be a disciple. Before
now, I’ve thought it meant “one who is obedient” (i.e. someone who observes the
Christian teachings and commandments). I guess I’ve backed away from this
definition because I realized that nobody is completely obedient—we all fall
short in one way or the other.
So, maybe being a disciple just means that you genuinely try to be obedient. I think there are
many well-meaning people who do this. While some of these people may be content and essentially Christian with this kind of “discipleship,” others could easily become either pharisaical
or totally overwhelmed and despondent. They would either idolize the law or feel
crushed by it, both of which stray from what I understand to be the Christian
way.
Then if discipleship isn’t fundamentally about obedience, what
is it? The closest I’ve come to an answer is this: A disciple is one who
follows Christ. Perhaps that definition is simply tautological (A=A), but I
feel like there’s something more substantial to it. I do not expect you to be satisfied with this definition--I am not. It is incomplete, but I think it is a beginning.
What do you think? What does it mean to follow Christ? Is it obedience or
something else entirely? If obedience and discipleship are different, what is
that difference?
Here are a few biblical passages that might illuminate your research:
PS--I feel like this is a particularly important issue, and that we would all be enriched by a variety of perspectives. Please share your insights.
ReplyDeleteMy first reaction is to say that I think discipleship and obedience really are the same thing. I think the real question is what is obedience. If we think about obedience in terms of the two great commandments, love God and love your neighbor (Matthew 22:36-40), I believe that many of the problems you mention with merging the terms obedience and discipleship with disappear.
ReplyDeleteExample 1, We are imperfect: The first point you make against the merger of the two terms is that we cannot be perfectly obedience and therefore could not be disciples if discipleship equaled obedience. However, this logic assumes that a disciple must be a perfect disciple. The scripture seem to describe a different kind of discipleship: "you are my disciples if you love one another". Just as there is a spectrum of feelings that bridges the void between hate and love, I believe there can be a spectrum of discipleship. As we increase love for God, we increase our discipleship.
Example 2 Overwhelmed by obedience or Pharisaical obedience: When obedience is viewed in terms of the two great commandments, striving to be obedient becomes less a matter of check the commandment boxes and more a matter of striving to love God and your neighbor. It could be that true obedience and discipleship are both simply a subset of love, that is love directed toward serving God and his children.
For sake of time I won't respond to the third point, but I think you get my point.
Excellent thoughts, Ryan. I really like the idea that there are multiple kinds of discipleship, just as there are multiple kinds of love. And I think you're right that if we think about obedience in terms of loving God and others, it becomes much less problematic. We could say that a disciple is one who loves God and others--and if you do that, you are actually obeying the commandments. I wonder, though, if the converse is true (i.e. if you obey the commandments, then you will love God and others). I guess I feel like in some way discipleship transcends obedience, at least in terms of motivation: It's about following Christ, not following rules (even though, at times, they might require identical behaviors).
DeleteIt’s interesting that several of the passages of scripture you suggest emphasize the ideas of “continuing” and “abiding” in the Love/Word of God. To my mind this suggests a metaphor: discipleship can be thought of as a path. To be a disciple, then, is to “continue” on the path. This implies obedience (not straying from the ordained path), but also suggests, more importantly, a vision of the destination to which we journey. And, of course, the metaphor works best if we think of it not as a solitary expedition, but as a guided journey. Above all, the journey's success depends on our faithfulness in the bonds of friendship, commitment, and love that tie us to our leader and to our fellow pilgrims.
ReplyDeleteI really like that metaphor, and especially your last sentence of explanation. I think Paul's words to the Philippians capture some of this idea.
Deletehttp://www.lds.org/scriptures/nt/philip/3.3-14?lang=eng#2
Part 1. (don't judge. I'm wordy.)
ReplyDeleteAs I've been processing some of the comments on this post -- about love, obedience, etc, I've had some thoughts that might address a few sidebar issues, sorry I didn't address the question very directly. But here it is!
I've been thinking a lot lately about covenant theology. I don't know if you've heard of Michael Polanyi but he's been somewhat formative as I've been processing how we come to know and act out what we know. I'm going on a round-about-rabbit trail thought process, so hopefully it all makes sense.
I think there is something to be said about obedience and discipleship (specifically the aspect of knowledge in discipleship) as being a reciprocal process. The best place to start might be an illustration.... I don't know too much about the LDS position on baptism. I'm under the impression that you are baptized after the age of accountability (?) or when one enters the priesthood. My brother and sister in law are in the Presbyterian tradition of Protestantism and they practice infant baptism. Growing up, my brother and I were baptized as teens, what someone might called "adult" or"believer's" baptism so I had to do a lot of thinking when they baptized my nephew.
The idea of covenant theology is that you are brought into the covenant and community as a child and that sense, that atmosphere of belonging TO the community eventually teaches you HOW to belong IN the community. It makes knowing more holistic, because it's not just about intellectual assent. Polanyi argues that there are certain things we know, without knowing how we know them (ie: riding a bike. You just know how even if you don't know the physics of a bicycle). Of course you do eventually assent to certain affirmations in the faith, it's just that faith and knowledge doesn't necessarily start by intellectual knowledge but is more about belonging and being in the faith community.
So, how does that apply to discipleship and obedience? It's a similar reciprocal process. Being a disciple implies being in relationship, you know the one you are following, you talk with him, spend time with him (and other followers), you are existing in community.* You obey because you trust the one you are following, you know that he is wise and has your well being in mind, as well as your holiness and sanctification.
Part 2 (again -- no judging!)
ReplyDeleteAnd yet, obedience is a part of how we come to know the one to whom we are discipled. When I decided to go to graduate school I quit a job, moved to a new apartment, took out loans. It was quite a leap of faith. But I have learned about the One I follow in this. He is a provider, sometimes miraculously, He is generous, He is patient, He is forgiving and kind. He's also firm and just and speaks rebukingly at times. My obedience in that moment, when I signed for loans, lease and class schedule was a moment in which I obeyed and then came knowledge. That knowledge has increased my heart, willingness and ability to follow as a disciple.
It's sort of like Pascal's idea of practicing the sacraments even when one doesn't feel like it. We obey and that provides the place and opportunity for God to continue to draw us into relationship with him -- discipleship: following the master we know.
So I think it goes both ways. We are disciples and so we obey. But we obey in order that we may be disciples and know the Rabbi. (Some of this, in my mind, goes back to performative speech act in Scripture -- it is always calling out a response in us, God's word makes things happen.)
That's probably not very well said. And there are five million other things I want to say... but I'm sitting in on a class for which I'm a TA (they have a midterm tonight). So I'm distracted and ought to be paying more attention.
*This is one of the reasons that the Protestant/Catholic/Eastern Orthodox doctrine of the Trinity is a big deal -- existing in community among humanity is part of what it means to be in the image of God as he is also existent in community before creation.
Thanks Sara! I think the idea of discipleship and obedience as a reciprocal process is very useful. Perhaps like any other relationship, we must sometimes act out of duty and even obligation (obedience) rather than living constantly in the throes of ecstatic passion. But that too is a kind of love, and it reinforces the more passionate kind. Then, even when such obedience is no longer obligatory, it will be freely offered out of love, and not just duty.
DeleteDavid, I think it's really important to keep in mind what you said -- that sometimes we act out of duty in every relationship, rather than always acting out of ecstatic emotion. This, I think, is where the Jewish context and Hebrew mindset is really helpful. The jews would have said "I'm married and thus I act this way toward my spouse, because being married is a gift, privilege, commitment, etc." The Greeks would have said "I act this way towards you because I feel thoroughly in love with you in this moment."
ReplyDeleteObviously, we've drawn quite a bit on the Greek heritage rather than the Hebrew and perhaps that mindset is behind a number of relational problems in our culture. I see this as a very pervasive issue in the church regarding how we "feel" about God. The Jews would have looked at us and said (perhaps quite adamantly), it doesn't matter how you feel. The fact is you're a Jew (or Christian) and this is the behaviour and attitude that comes out of it regardless of your current emotional state (which can change so significantly so quickly).
Duty, in our culture has a very negative connotation, but it didn't to the Jews...Because it was a privilege and honour to be in various situations (marriage, covenant, discipleship)...
Just some more thoughts while I'm avoiding my Greek homework (ironic?).