After their written comments about Macintosh's chapters, Mariel and Gene enlarged on the discussion of a false choice between scientific truth and Biblical inerrancy. Someone wished aloud to see a scientist's take on faith: try priest-physicist John Polkinghorne in a blogpost by Scott a few years ago.
Nuno reflected on the epic story of Kings. [Image: King Josiah rends his clothes when he hears the Law.] Because some of those kings consulted prophets with conflicting counsel, he related the reading to Fr. Roger's sermon on "words" and discerning truth.
Yr. D theme: Living into the Journey with God Class: Marilyn, Nuno, first year; Christine, third year; Mariel, Gene, fourth year; Scott and Susan, co - mentors. Absent: Marilyn, Christine.
- We decided to focus on a King just before battle, whether it's David or Josiah or some other:
- The world is in God's hands, but the stakes are high for the King: everyone depends on you. ("No pressure," Mariel quipped.)
- Backing down would be the unthinkable, unfaithful option. But it did happen with (we think) King Saul.
- Going into battle is the test, the judgement.
- Redemption would be booty, wealth for the kingdom. We reminded ourselves that war wasn't for ideals, but solely for land, possessions, and prisoners for slaves.
- Looking for "king"experiences in other sources, we thought of
- the recent elections, and the weighty responsibility and hope in leading students on field trips far away;
- Joshua's speech encouraging the Hebrews who had heard they would face "giants" in the Promised Land; Paul leading missionary teams into places where persecution was likely; Jesus' sending apostles out in pairs with nothing.
- Dorothy at the start of the yellow-brick road; all superheroes; many professional athletes; the framing of the Bagavad-Gita
King of kings, Lord of lords, may Your assurances and admonitions to kings in holy scripture strengthen our resolves that we, who sometimes feel like monarchs of unruly realms, may work Your will as we face outside challenges and inner enemies. Through Jesus Christ we pray, amen.
12 comments:
Year One: 1 Kings, 2 Kings, Collins Chapters 13 & 14
What an epic story! The stories of Elijah, Elisha, and other prophets capture the imagination. How are they able to wield such power with free will practically at whim? How is it their words and writings stay and last? How is it that some flaunt kings and customs? They are amazing.
It bothers me that Collins suggests that Elijah was using flammable liquid to perform trickery at Mt. Carmel. His accusation that the authors engage in victim blaming against Israel seems laughably anachronistic. I wish his primary lens wasn’t a skeptical ideology.
I’ve struggled through Kings a few times before. I think I had a much more successful reading this time with a timeline, map, and notes to refer to. I felt more able to follow the progression of the narrative without getting bogged down by the very formulaic repetitions and some interchangeable names. History was never my strong suit.
It delighted me when the scribe found the book in the temple and read it to King Josiah. The reader knows what prophecy they are referencing but they don’t share the words. You are left to wonder if he only believed the words at last because he was mentioned by name.
“How do you discern truth in the midst of uncertainty?”
In the moment I rely on my senses and what I know to be true. Given more time- research, study, and prayer. Speaking with trusted, knowledgeable, faithful friends and family.
I think uncertainty plays a role in the God journey in that we have to surrender ourselves as we draw near. We cannot try to preserve our notions of being in control, of needing to name and understand everything, or having to do it all ourselves. We can’t master God and if we try and approach it that way we don’t leave a lot of room for God to be in charge, for his Spirit to move. Even in the places where we come in contact with the divine, where we can feel His presence, we have to remain humble remembering that we cannot fully comprehend God.
I read Powells' chapters about NT letters and Paul. Powell draws on some letter-writing handbooks of the time to show that the letters mostly follow the conventions of the time. In the bodies of the letters, we find pieces of hymns, various lists, topical discussions, autobiography, and parts of prayers, creeds, and liturgies that give us a peek into the early church.
The order of letters in our Bible is based first on authorship. Paul's #1, from longest to shortest. In Greek, Ephesians may be a few words longer than Galatians, but Powell writes that some scholars have too much spare time. Anonymous Hebrews comes next. Then James, Peter and John appear in the order they're mentioned in Galatians 2.9. Then there's Jude.
He deals gingerly with the question of "pseudopigrapha," i.e. false ascription. "According to the dominant theory, the authors for some of these letters attributed their writings to famous church leaders [but] in ways that were never intended to be misleading or dishonest"(238). Others oppose that view "in principle." He gives both parties voice as he discusses the ins and outs. I'm delighted that he raises the question, "Why does this matter?" Interpretation sometimes depends on the context, so knowing whether the author lived under Nero or in the following century can make a big difference, I was also delighted by an example of "honorable psuedopigraphy" from our own time, learning that Martin Luther King, Jr. published a "Letter of St. Paul to the American Churches."
I'm delighted by Powell's formulation about Paul: "a man willing to kill for his convictions transformed into a man willing to die for them" (249). Powell suggests that "conversion" might not be the best word for what happened, "as it implies quitting one religion to join another." That's not what Paul saw himself doing; rather, he saw himself receiving a prophetic call that redirected his efforts to a new purpose.
Powell gives helpful tables of info: ways that Paul's Jewish beliefs changed (regarding Jesus, last days, the cross, the law, Gentiles, circumcision, and persecution); what sources say about Paul's appearance (2nd century: short, hook nose, bowed legs); chronologies of life and letters; and ten different images that Paul uses to explain the importance of Christ's crucifixion (265).
There's a "new perspective on Paul" that Powell sets apart in a highlighted box. "When Paul talks about justification 'by faith apart from works prescribed by law,'" (Rom. 3.26) he means by "works" those Jewish codes that set them apart from the Gentiles. This fits well with Paul's arguing over and over against the idea that Jews have what we would call an "ethnic privilege" in getting right with God.
Near the end of the chapter, Powell's longest paragraph is a list of contradictions in Paul, as Paul says "this," but/and also says "that." Powell's bottom line is, unless we recognize Paul's balancing act, we may have a one-sided or oversimplified view of him.
After exploring the mysteries of faith and the Trinity in the first two chapters, McIntosh moves to creation and revelation.
In Chapter 3, “Splendor of God: Mystery of Creation,” McIntosh sees the universe as an expression of the loving relationships of the Trinity, but concedes that it doesn’t always seem this way because not every creature is living out the gift of its existence with equal clarity. McIntosh describes how Hadewijch of Brabant, a mid-13th century poet, envisioned all creation as “a kind of abyss of love, a vortex of self-giving, that is drawing the whole cosmos toward consummation.” In Christ’s crucifixion, she “sees this abyss of divine love in the open mouth, the stretching apart, the wounded side of the crucified Christ, drawing the whole world to himself,” making us into more fit “Word-bearers.”
In Chapter 4 “The Voice of God: Mystery of Revelation,” McIntosh writes that God restores us to our rightful identity through revelation of His truth, and by “revelation,” the author means the whole sweep: the biblical stories, prophecy, poetry, letters, as well as our daily encounters with scripture, the sacraments, and fellow believers. The meaningfulness of scripture, McIntosh concludes, is not so much the history behind the text or our existential feelings beyond the text, but the fact that God speaks to us and “claims our words and our lives to become the very language by which he speaks most intimately in our midst.”
RRG question: What is the relationship between God’s revelation and personal transformation?
As we wrestled with Paul’s road to Damascus experience last week, I think we realized that we, too, probably harbor certain stubborn, my-way-or-the-highway beliefs that God would like us to re-examine through a new lens. McIntosh talks about biblical language as a place of encounter that “becomes the new lens through which we begin to recognize and respond to all the myriad ways God is with us.”
Mysteries of Faith, Chapters 3 & 4
Mariel’s summary of these two chapters is spot on. I’d like to add what struck me as the what had the biggest impact on me is the way the author treats the idea of “revelation”, not as a specific event that took place a long time ago or an even that may have taken place in one’s own lifetime, but as a continuing event that encompasses all of that an much more as we travel the journey – the “whole sweep” as he calls it.
In doing so the author notes that the way we look at revelation since 1600 has changed with the advent of Science and the reactions to it. One side wants to reduce religion to only those things provable and discard the rest, basically throwing out the baby with the bathwater in the process, which leaves us with maybe a few niceties to live by but which hardly explains the depths of faith. Meanwhile, the opposite side has tried to hang their hat on seeing the scriptures as historical and scientific facts, with the obvious ensuing problems. And both of these approaches miss the much deeper point that to understand the revelation of God, we must be caught up in the Trinity itself before we can even begin to understand God, the creation or our place in it.
MacCulloch Chapter 12
A Church for All People (1100-1300)
Section 1. Theology, Heresy, Universities (1100-1300)
Industry was expanding which placed more people living in towns and cities. This affected the church financial stability as it had been established strongly from stable parish life in the countryside. The angst, fears, and new life structures and situations for people, and for clergy to contend with as well, was a root cause of “religious dissent.” In the eleventh century the Church termed this heresy. King Robert III of France set the precedent of burning heretics, those who posed a threat to the common and accepted thought of the church.
By the beginning of the 13th C. “Self appointed” leaders began roaming Europe preaching that “individuals could meet God through an inner light...” (p.397). These “brethren of free spirit” found great support in times of crisis. Which then was also not in the church’s control.
Education and inspiration was coming from places outside the church. Schools of higher education were developing and were “attached to certain notable cathedrals.” The study of Christian teaching, Theology, concentrated on the commentary of “that endlessly fascinating and diverse library of texts, the Bible.” These institutions modeled themselves after the Muslim institutions of higher education. Aristotle’s writings began to be studied by by Christian theologians (scholasticism). The Church faced challenges during the 12th century from both heresy and scholastic thought bred in these new “universities.”
Section 2. A Pastoral Revolution, Friars and the Fourth Lateran Council (1200-1260)
Orders of friars developed in the late 12th century. Dominic and Francis were two great religious leaders who founded two of the first orders of friars. Dominic brought practicality and closeness to ordinary life. He led a life of poverty and simplicity and convinced people that the Church was a “worthy vehicle of love and forgiveness.” Pope Honorius III named Dominic’s organization as an Order of Preachers. They wandered preaching and serving community.
Francis began his order after he rejected his wealth and “obsession of his father’s world”. He was inspired to cast away all his possessions and would be an “outcast for Christ.” He shouted Christian messages to the birds in a graveyard and annoyed the Church by saying “Christ was a down-and-out with no possessions.” Francis was the first person known to have suffered stigmata.
Pope Innocent III with extensive knowledge in cannon law and theology bridged the communication between church and secular rulers. He held the monastic orders to high standards and saw friars as an instrument in the church. He called a meeting of bishops in his Lateran Palace. This “fourth Lateran Council” imposed regulated holiness on the laity and ensured uniformity in belief and devotional practice. (405). This is where receiving the Eucharistic elements at Mass at least once a year preparing for such through confession began. This put on the priests a new task, they were now expected to instruct as well as tend to their “flocks.”
Transubstantiation was expected to be understood by the faithful as they received the Eucharist. Christ’s body and blood are truly in the sacrament in the form of bread and wine, the “bread and wine having been changed in substance” by God.
That was beautiful.
The idea that a man willing to kill must be a man willing to die hits me profoundly. I think of the current political climate, the crusades, the wars, suicide bombers...such commitment, dedication, blind loyalty, fear of non-compliance. It is a heavy thought.
I loved Mariel's quote about how God claims our words and our lives to become the very language by which He speaks. Oh my, that says it all, doesn't it?
The inner light, so true. And in light (pardon the pun) of the fact that God transforms the bread and wine into the body of Christ...he is, literally, within us. I love that idea, and, that inspiration and education come from outside the church...looking around everywhere, seeing evidence of Heaven in our midst...incredible.
Revelation as ongoing...the daily revealing of God's hand in all things. It gives me such a sense of peace, knowing that He has it ALL.
To discern truth, I am often quiet. I listen to what feels right. I take time to look and see and evaluate whether something makes sense or not. In then God journey, there seems to be a lot of uncertainty up to a point. I feel with faith increasing, uncertainty is decreasing. As fear is replaced by faith and hope, my doubts and uneasiness are reduced. I've seen evidence of God all around. I know what I know, and although I cannot physically see Heaven, I am recognizing and embracing the hints that are being revealed. I think a certain amount of uncertainty is natural, and is required to inspire hope and foster faith.
P.S. With Kings, it was barbaric and bloody...but what struck me was that the evil continued on through family lines...generations, the repetition of the idea that they did evil in the eyes of the Lord. And that even when there was a good one, there was definitely an overshadowing by the sins. I found it contradictory to the ten commandments - though shalt not kill...yet murderous behavior was required, commanded by God to purge the world of those who worshipped other gods. That is difficult for me to accept. I understand the reason, but it's hard. It's not OK to kill on our own, but ok if God requests it. Hmm. As far as the God journey through the years - I would say that it's a history of fighting the good fight; the struggle between being good and loving vs. Being intent on evil-doing, promoting wealth and power on Earth, which is fleeting. It is interesting to note that Collins states that the Deuteronomistic History ended on a positive note with the release of King Jehoichin. He did evil things. I'm guessing he meant it was positive for him, because he was no longer a prisoner, but a guest of honor, who was treated kindly. Or maybe I missed something.
Post a Comment