Martin Luther is to have said, "The Word of God is Jesus Christ, and the Bible was the manger in which the Word was laid." He also said there was a lot of straw in the manger, and for him the Epistle of James was an Epistle of Straw. So the leader of the Reformation did not give equal weight to each part of Scripture.
The movement to make the entire content of the Bible inerrant or without error is a relatively new phenomenon. It happened in this country and Britain in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and was a reaction to the rise of science, biblical literary criticism, Darwin's Theory of Evolution, and archeological findings to name a few things. The rise of this approach to the Bible was a vast departure from Early Church Fathers such as St. Augustine of Hippo and Origen. Augustine said that the mystery of the the story of creation as told in the first chapter of Genesis has to be taken somewhat allegorically because we do not know the mind of God as God created. We needed to be open to learn more about what that all meant over time as inspired by God. Origen interpreted much of Scripture in an allegorical fashion, which surprise many folks today.
Biblical Inerrancy was a reaction to a world that seemed to be changing so rapidly, and that rapidness has only accelerated over time. But there has to be some logical gymnastics to take all parts of the Bible as literal and factual. There are contradicting statements in the Bible, such as in the first and second Creation Stories. In the first story in the first chapter of Genesis God creates everything and then creates humanity in God's image. In the story of the Garden of Eden, in the second chapter of Genesis, the human (Adam) is created first and then all the other creatures. Then God creates woman as a companion to man. So which story is factually correct - humanity created at the end or beginning of creation by God?
This question misses the point. These Biblical stories were not meant to be scientific accounts, and their truth is much deeper than just on the surface. The first story of creation is meant to show that God created everything and that is it good, including humankind made in God's Image. The second story of Adam and Eve shows that humanity is to be stewards of what God has given, but we humans put ourselves in the center of things and not God.
To me giving literal truth to every word of the Bible trivializes much of it, and misses the more significant truth that is sometimes in poetry, story, or commentary. Biblical Inerrancy almost makes the Bible an item of worship, and if one part is proven not to be literally true then one's faith could come tumbling down.
Those ordained bishops, priests, and deacons in the Episcopal Church have to sign a document stating that they believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments contain all things necessary for salvation. So we take the Bible very seriously. On Sundays we read most of the Bible in a three year lectionary cycle consisting of four parts each Sunday - Old Testament, Psalm, New Testament, and Gospel reading. But we believe that the Scriptures have to be interpreted with guidance of the Holy Spirit and in light of history, scientific learnings, archeological findings, and the tradition of the faith. After that we can say, "What is God saying to us (not just me) today?"
A significant teacher of Bible Study in my tradition, the late Dr.Verna Dozier, said that there was a Golden Thread running through the Bible, and that thread was that "God is for us". Every passage has to be played off that thread, and to take it out of context or that thread was to miss the point. She also said that we don't necessarily go to the Bible to find God. We go to the Bible because God has already found us, and we want to know how others have known God and how that can inform our relationship as God's people today. To me that speaks of the profound wonderful truth of the Bible, and not just as a laundry lists of "do's" and "dont's", or a scientific manual. The Bible is the story of salvation with God's people, and we are continuation of that today.
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Thoughts on Heaven
I was recently asked by a local newspaper columnist about my thoughts on heaven to be part of an article she was doing. So below is what I contributed
I recently read something about one person's thoughts on heaven. He said that there would be three surprises for him when he got to heaven 1. Some people he expected to be there would not be there. 2. Some people he expected not to be there would be, and 3. He was there.
I do not know what heaven will look like. I think streets of gold and pearly gates are just metaphors to try to explain something grand and beyond words. My thought is that it is being in the fullest presence of God. It is not necessarily a place but a state of being.
In the Episcopal Church there is a prayer used at funerals which states: "Grant that, increasing in knowledge and love of thee, he/she may go from strength to strength in the life of perfect service in thy heavenly kingdom." (Book of Common Prayer, p.481). So I see heaven as not as static, but as growth. C. S. Lewis in his book The Great Divorce pictures heaven as a process of going from darkness to light and the journeying soul transforming along the way. So I take it as not just a place where people just sit on heavenly thrones, but of activity.
Getting back to my original statement about - who would be in heaven and who won't be; I don't think that just because someone says "I accept Jesus Christ as my personal lord and savior" automatically guarantees entrance into heaven. Jesus said his disciples would be known by the fruit they produced - the way they loved and lived. Also Jesus says in the Gospel of Matthew that those who fed the hungry, clothed the naked, visited those sick, alone, and in prison were serving him and would be welcomed into the Kingdom. Those who did not were not welcomed. There are a lot a people who talk a good game about God, but don't live it. And there are folks who don't talk a lot about it, but do it; and they may not even be believers. I think those are some of the folks some might be surprised to be in heaven; and some of the others, who just talk it, may be those not to be seen there.
Patrick+
I recently read something about one person's thoughts on heaven. He said that there would be three surprises for him when he got to heaven 1. Some people he expected to be there would not be there. 2. Some people he expected not to be there would be, and 3. He was there.
I do not know what heaven will look like. I think streets of gold and pearly gates are just metaphors to try to explain something grand and beyond words. My thought is that it is being in the fullest presence of God. It is not necessarily a place but a state of being.
In the Episcopal Church there is a prayer used at funerals which states: "Grant that, increasing in knowledge and love of thee, he/she may go from strength to strength in the life of perfect service in thy heavenly kingdom." (Book of Common Prayer, p.481). So I see heaven as not as static, but as growth. C. S. Lewis in his book The Great Divorce pictures heaven as a process of going from darkness to light and the journeying soul transforming along the way. So I take it as not just a place where people just sit on heavenly thrones, but of activity.
Getting back to my original statement about - who would be in heaven and who won't be; I don't think that just because someone says "I accept Jesus Christ as my personal lord and savior" automatically guarantees entrance into heaven. Jesus said his disciples would be known by the fruit they produced - the way they loved and lived. Also Jesus says in the Gospel of Matthew that those who fed the hungry, clothed the naked, visited those sick, alone, and in prison were serving him and would be welcomed into the Kingdom. Those who did not were not welcomed. There are a lot a people who talk a good game about God, but don't live it. And there are folks who don't talk a lot about it, but do it; and they may not even be believers. I think those are some of the folks some might be surprised to be in heaven; and some of the others, who just talk it, may be those not to be seen there.
Patrick+
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Love One Another
In the Gospel of John at the Last Supper Jesus told his disciples to love one another as he has loved them. I think when many hear this we are comforted by Jesus' words, but I think we ought to be disturbed by them.
To love as Jesus loves is very radical. It means putting another's welfare ahead of our own. It means looking at the world through another's eyes, and trying to see what we say and do will affect the person's feelings and thinking. It means walking in another person's shoes for more than a mile.
It has been my experience that many Christian folks take loving one another as oneself to mean strangers or people "out there". But it really means practicing this radical love to those who are closer to us. It means loving our family and friends with Jesus' self-denying love. It means loving one another in Christian congregations in this way.
What would it look like if we took this directive from Jesus very seriously - loving one another as Jesus loves us? I think we would more carefully edit what we say, do and how we react. I think we would behave as I heard someone else say speaking about this: "we would hold one another in the highest possible regard". This would apply to those in our families, our friends, the cashier at the store, those behind and ahead of us in traffic, people in our associations and faith communities - young and old, our neighbors, and strangers on the street.
This is a tall order. That is why we need to continually pray for the mind of Christ to accomplish it, confess and ask forgiveness when we don't live up to it, and forgive others when they do not treat us as we would want them.
Fr. Patrick
To love as Jesus loves is very radical. It means putting another's welfare ahead of our own. It means looking at the world through another's eyes, and trying to see what we say and do will affect the person's feelings and thinking. It means walking in another person's shoes for more than a mile.
It has been my experience that many Christian folks take loving one another as oneself to mean strangers or people "out there". But it really means practicing this radical love to those who are closer to us. It means loving our family and friends with Jesus' self-denying love. It means loving one another in Christian congregations in this way.
What would it look like if we took this directive from Jesus very seriously - loving one another as Jesus loves us? I think we would more carefully edit what we say, do and how we react. I think we would behave as I heard someone else say speaking about this: "we would hold one another in the highest possible regard". This would apply to those in our families, our friends, the cashier at the store, those behind and ahead of us in traffic, people in our associations and faith communities - young and old, our neighbors, and strangers on the street.
This is a tall order. That is why we need to continually pray for the mind of Christ to accomplish it, confess and ask forgiveness when we don't live up to it, and forgive others when they do not treat us as we would want them.
Fr. Patrick
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Fighting Fair
One can not tell whether the vitriol in today's political discourse had an impact on the shooter in Tucson earlier in this month. But as the President has asked, I believe we need to seriously take a look at how we disagree with one another. It needs to happen at all levels - between nations, between political opponents, in families, between spouses and partners, and within congregations.
I think it all revolves around treating another human being as a creation of God, and not an object. I was appalled that a Congressman of my own political party called Republican members' tactics in the health care debate comparable to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels. All that was necessary to say it that he didn't think they told the truth.
But this is a basic in how we disagree with one another on a interpersonal level. It is what I teach in premarital counseling, that is, one needs to focus on the action, not the person. We do not like another person's idea, an action, or word used. We can say that and not call someone a name in the process. It is also about saying "I think", "I feel", not "you are" "how could you".
The Golden Rule is the order of the day. I think prayer and humility will only get us to that spot.
Fr. Patrick
I think it all revolves around treating another human being as a creation of God, and not an object. I was appalled that a Congressman of my own political party called Republican members' tactics in the health care debate comparable to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels. All that was necessary to say it that he didn't think they told the truth.
But this is a basic in how we disagree with one another on a interpersonal level. It is what I teach in premarital counseling, that is, one needs to focus on the action, not the person. We do not like another person's idea, an action, or word used. We can say that and not call someone a name in the process. It is also about saying "I think", "I feel", not "you are" "how could you".
The Golden Rule is the order of the day. I think prayer and humility will only get us to that spot.
Fr. Patrick
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Friendship
St Gregory of Nyssa said that there was nothing greater than being friends with God. The Episcopal Church in San Francisco dedicated to Gregory uses that as its motto.
I just returned from a week's vacation visiting family members in the Mid-South, and I also took time to renew a friendship with a clergy colleague. It was a wonderful time of catching up on too many years gone by. Over a good meal and several glasses of wine I was struck by how I am so blessed by people who have come into my life over the years.
It seems to me that if being friends with God is to be so highly prized and we are people of Incarnation, it would follow that our friendships, at their closest level, can reveal the face of God to us.
Nurture your friendships for at their best we are touched by God through them.
I just returned from a week's vacation visiting family members in the Mid-South, and I also took time to renew a friendship with a clergy colleague. It was a wonderful time of catching up on too many years gone by. Over a good meal and several glasses of wine I was struck by how I am so blessed by people who have come into my life over the years.
It seems to me that if being friends with God is to be so highly prized and we are people of Incarnation, it would follow that our friendships, at their closest level, can reveal the face of God to us.
Nurture your friendships for at their best we are touched by God through them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)