 
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Theological Digest & Outlook The March 1998 issue (Vol. XIII, No. 1) NOTE: THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED IN THE SIGNED ARTICLES ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHORS AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT ENDORSEMENT BY CHURCH ALIVE.
EXPERIENCE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT:THE CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT AND OUR FOUNDING TRADITIONSHarold WellsThe remarkable testimonies we have heard about the Vineyard or Airport ministries, and longstanding awareness of the charismatic and Pentecostal movements, present a theological challenge to us in the so-called 'mainstream' churches. I believe that United Church people need to be open to and to learn from these movements. They rightly draw our attention to certain neglected aspects of the biblical witness to the work of the Spirit. They have roots in our own Methodist tradition, and we must regard them as close cousins in the great extended family of the wider church. Our Methodist tradition, stemming from John Wesley, has always had a healthy respect for Christian experience of the Holy Spirit, and it was often Methodists, disappointed at how staid and dry or ineffectual their churches had become, who formed the original Pentecostal congregations. It is perhaps the genius of our United Church, and still our great potential, to combine the excitement, warmth and evangelical passion of our Wesleyan heritage with the Reformed emphasis on the sovereignty of God, and justification by grace alone. A clear affirmation of the indispensable work of the Holy Spirit in bringing men and women not only to justification, but to sanctification and glorification, has been central to both Wesleyans and Calvinists. At the same time, our two major founding theological traditions have much to say about both personal and social transformation. Experience and Grace in our Founding Traditions It is not my intention to offer an historical paper on our Methodist and Reformed roots. However, a brief glimpse backward may help us to achieve some balance, and a deeper sense of the breadth of the Spirit's work. Wesley's emphasis on experience of the Spirit had biblical foundations of course. One of his favourite texts was that of Paul to the Romans, 8:15-16, "When we cry, 'Abba! Father!' it is ...[the] Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God...." Wesley believed that if we have indeed received the Spirit, we will know and experience that deeply within ourselves. Wesley insisted, sometimes perhaps overzealously, that the true Christian must have a conscious experience of grace. No doubt this grew out of his own experience of a heart "strangely warmed". His strong empiricist bent (congenial with the philosophy of his contemporary, the philosopher John Locke) inclined him to insist upon those aspects of the biblical testimony that speak of experience of the Spirit's work within us. We cannot, he said, have the peace, joy and love of God in our hearts without knowing that this is so. The Christian life is not some cool, rational opinion about God. It is a heart-felt relationship with God which arises out of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. And so the evangelical revival, with which Wesley was associated, was generally accompanied by warm experience of the presence and work of the Spirit. Now Wesley and his followers did not speak in tongues. But it was common, when Wesley preached, that people cried out or fainted and fell to the ground. (I must confess, regretfully, that this never happens when I preach.) For example, in his Journal he records the following on June 12, 1741: I preached on the righteousness of the law and the righteousness of faith. While I was speaking, several dropped down as dead and among the rest such a cry was heard of sinners groaning for the righteousness of faith as almost drowned my voice. But many of these soon lifted up their heads with joy and broke out into thanksgiving, being assured they now had the desire of their soul - the forgiveness of their sins.Wesley records a similar event in response to the preaching of George Whitefield in his Journal entry for July 6, 1739: ...he preached concerning "the Holy Ghost, which all who believe are to receive";... no sooner had he begun... to invite all sinners to believe in Christ, than four persons sank down close to him, almost in the same moment. One of them lay without either sense or motion. A second trembled exceedingly. The third had strong convulsions all over his body, but made no noise unless by groans. The fourth, equally convulsed, called upon God with strong cries and tears. From this time, I trust, we shall all suffer God to carry on His own work in the way that pleaseth Him.What Wesley and Whitefield witnessed was the response of whole human beings to the good news they had heard proclaimed. People responded not only with minds and souls, but with emotion and body. Our own bodily responses may more usually be limited to a lump in the throat, possibly a tear of joy, or an accelerated heart beat, but it is the same kind of holistic, Spirit inspired response to the message. It is salutary for us in our sober United Church congregations to remember that such events stand at the beginning of our own Methodist tradition. Wesley acknowledged such occurrences as marks of the Spirit's working. On the other hand, it is also evident from his Journals that he could be critical and suspicious of the genuineness of such manifestations. First, as a good Anglican, he cherished order and dignity in worship. Further, if alleged manifestations of the Spirit were not accompanied by the transformation of life he discounted them as false or superficial. He wanted to see the fruits of the Spirit, i.e., the evidence of sanctification. The inner testimony of the Spirit, wherein the Spirit witnesses with our spirit that we are children of God, must be attended by outward signs of obedience, commitment to the church, a life characterized above all by love, and participation in the transformation of the surrounding world, i.e., service to the Kingdom. The conversion and sanctification of Christians, according to Wesley, would surely lead to the social transformation of England. And so, the Spirit's work had to do not only with a heart strangely warmed. Because the Spirit is none other than the Spirit of Jesus, the gift of the Spirit meant above all the life of love. For Wesley it meant renouncing wealth and living modestly in order to share more with the poor. The Spirit of Christ led Wesley into the prisons. The Spirit inspired him constantly to be working for the relief of the destitute. On one occasion, in his old age, he nearly died of exposure, because he'd been out trudging around in the snow collecting money for the poor. Wesley already knew the need for what we today call 'systemic' criticism and transformation. At that very early stage of the Industrial Revolution, he was already critical of the domination of the profit motive as he saw it developing in his society. The Spirit also led him to oppose slavery, and to directly confront the masters of the slave trade in their stronghold at Bristol.1 If we have a criticism of this great church father of ours, and the movements that sprang from him, - the main Methodist stream, but also the holiness and pentecostal streams, - it could be the tendency to insist upon, or to overvalue particular kinds of spiritual experience. Whether it has been a conviction of absolute assurance of salvation, or (as in Methodist revivalism) a dramatic conversion accompanied by weeping and tears, or the gift of tongues, or of being slain in the Spirit, there was always the danger that these manifestations could become additional requirements for salvation. Wesley taught an unambiguous doctrine of justification by grace alone, through faith alone. But an overemphasis on particular manifestations of the Spirit could be heard as limitations on the freedom of God's grace. Now Calvin and the Reformed tradition have also had a vigorous theology of the Spirit. I think it is fair to say, howver, that Calvin put less emphasis than Wesley on dramatic spiritual experience. He also must have had a vivid experience of conversion which turned his life around, brought him into the Reformation movement, and inspired his highly effective ministry. But Calvin does not draw attention to any such personal experience. He declares simply that faith is the principle work of the Spirit.2 Faith is the one thing needful, and that faith is impossible without the gift of the Spirit. Without faith there is no justification, or sanctification, or glorification. And all of these are the Spirit's work. "It is by the Spirit alone that he [Jesus Christ] unites us to himself,"3 giving us a share in the benefits of his saving work. It is the Holy Spirit who binds us together in Christ's body, the Church, and who enables the preaching and hearing of the Word. It is a work of the Holy Spirit that the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper become means by which we truly receive Christ himself. There is a wonderful objectivity and a certain sobriety about the Reformed tradition. God's grace does not depend on our subjective experiences. Calvin does not prescribe that we must experience this or that. Nor can the authenticity of our faith and salvation be tested by any particular manifestations of the Spirit. It is God's grace alone that saves us. It is by faith alone, faith in Jesus Christ, by which we come to God with empty hands, that we have our justification and sanctification, and hope of eternal life. That is why a favourite text for the Reformed tradition is I Cor. 1:30: "Christ Jesus ...became for us our wisdom, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption..." Therefore, "Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord." We are to boast neither about our good works, nor about our spiritual experiences. However, our Reformed heritage also stresses that faith without works is dead, and calls for actual righteousness of life, as an outward sign of our election, justification and sanctification. Thus, while Calvin never asked people to have spiritual experiences, he did expect the private lives of Christians, and also the public life of Geneva, to reflect the righteousness of God. He also saw to it that the poor and the widows of Geneva were well cared for. The Lordship of Jesus Christ over all of life, both personal life and political life, is basic to the Reformed tradition. We have, then, in Calvin and our Reformed heritage, a strong sense of the depth and breadth of the Spirit's work, which may indeed be quiet and unobtrusive, yet have profound impact on the totality of personal lives and on the world. If we have a criticism of the pneumatology of Calvin and the Reformed traditions that stem from him, it is perhaps to note a certain downplay on the more visible signs and more dramatic gifts of the Spirit. Our two founding traditions, then, have within them a certain balance, breadth and depth regarding the Holy Spirit, both within themselves, and between them. Where they are deficient, each needs the other. Turning back now from these relatively recent traditions to the Scriptures, I shall explore very briefly the breadth of the Spirit's work under three headings: 1) Receiving the Spirit and Baptism in the Spirit; 2) Participation in Christ's Continuing Mission through the Spirit, and 3) The Universality of the Spirit's Presence and Work. 1) Receiving the Spirit and Baptism in the Spirit Speaking scripturally, if there is a way to define who is a Christian, or when one becomes a Christian, it is probably in terms of receiving the Spirit. Paul is quite exclusivist about this when he says, (Rom 8:9) "Whoever does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him". The letters of Paul, and the Book of Acts, speak frequently of people receiving the Spirit, or of being baptized in the Spirit, or of the Spirit falling upon them. Often the receiving of the Spirit was a dramatic, visible event. As in Acts 8:17: "When Peter and John laid their hands on them they received the Holy Spirit." Luke goes on to say that Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles' hands. Again, in Acts 10:44, we are told that while Peter was preaching, the Holy Spirit "fell upon all who heard the word," and the believers were "astounded" at this. This was evidently a visible, dramatic occurrence, possibly similar to those witnessed by Wesley, or those that occur today in Pentecostal or charismatic gatherings. Again, according to Acts 19:6, we hear that "when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied." What of this contentious term, "baptism in the Holy Spirit"? John the Baptist, according to all the gospels and Acts, said that, while he baptized with water, the One who is coming "will baptize you with the Holy Spirit." Baptism with the Holy Spirit appears to be a promise to all who would follow Jesus. In that it is Jesus Christ himself who baptizes with the Spirit, it is what Christ does, in his unity with the Spirit, to draw us to himself. Generally, in Reformed theology, baptism in the Spirit is understood to be the same as receiving the Spirit, or, to use the language of the Gospel of John, the same as being "born anew of the Spirit". These are all different ways of speaking about the beginning of the Christian life. It is the gift of the Spirit to turn us toward Christ, to enable us to respond to the offer of God's grace, and to re-create us as new persons. "Baptism in the Holy Spirit" is such a basic promise to all, that it is, I think, an error to regard it as a second blessing received by some Christians but not others.4 We see in the New Testament that speaking in tongues is sometimes an accompaniment of receiving the Spirit, and may often have been the dramatic and visible sign of this, though speaking with tongues is not usually explicitly mentioned. However, Paul makes it clear that "no one can say 'Jesus is Lord' except by the Holy Spirit". (I Cor 12:3) In the same chapter Paul declares that "in one Spirit we are all baptized into one body". (I Cor 12:13) "Various kinds of tongues" is listed as one of many gifts of the Holy Spirit. In this same twelfth chapter of I Corinthians, Paul asks rhetorically, "Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?" (v-29-30) The obvious answer is No. Paul is clear that it is not God's intention that all Christians possess all of the gifts of the Spirit, including tongues. It is an error, then, to suggest that only those who speak in tongues have been "baptized in the Spirit", or to suggest that "baptism in the Spirit" applies only to the more mature, more empowered Christians. It is difficult to imagine a more divisive doctrine than this. If there is a test or criterion as to who is a Christian, and who has received the Spirit, it is presumably just this, - that one can say, with sincerity and truth, "Jesus is Lord". One cannot do this without the Holy Spirit. He goes on then to speak of "the greater gifts" and a "still more excellent way", namely, the way of love. We do need to recognize, though, that powerful works of the Spirit do occur in the lives of Christians subsequent to the beginning of the Christian life. To insist upon this is one of the great contributions of the Pentecostal movement. Indeed, this should be regarded as normal and to be expected. We may experience memorable, decisive turning points, or we may recall several, or many occasions of a new deepening, new empowerment. These may be dramatic experiences, such as beginning to speak in tongues, or discovering a new gift of the Spirit such as healing; they may be the discovery of less dramatic gifts, such as teaching, or preaching, or administration. Sometimes we are admonished in scripture to be "filled with the Spirit". (Eph 5:18) At the event of Pentecost, we are told not that the disciples were "baptized in the Spirit", but that they were "filled with the Holy Spirit..." (Acts 2:4) Peter was "filled with the Spirit" also when he preached to the council of the Temple. (Acts 4:8) It is misleading to suggest that particular signs, especially dramatic and visible ones, must accompany the receiving of the Spirit and the beginning of the Christian life. It is also misleading to imply that no signs or gifts of the Spirit will be in evidence. Surely we should be expecting and looking for and praying for signs and gifts of the Holy Spirit. Most especially we should be expecting and praying for the gift of love. 2) Participation in Christ's Continuing Mission through the Spirit It is clear, as we move back and forth among the various New Testament authors, that the gift of the Holy Spirit is for the mission. It is not for the sake of people having "experiences". Mission has essentially to do with being sent. This is loud and clear, for example, in John 20, where the risen Jesus declares, "'As the Father has sent me, so I send you'. When he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, 'Receive the Holy Spirit'." (v. 21-22) The Spirit is for the mission. The Spirit which is received by Jesus' followers is the same Spirit which, at his baptism, inspired him for his ministry of teaching and healing, and which empowered him in his death, (Heb 9:14) and his resurrection. This same Spirit now indwells his disciples. What is the mission for which the Spirit equips us? If we want to know what our mission is, we must ask, What is Christ's mission?, since the Christian mission is nothing else but a continuation of the mission of the risen Jesus, in the power of the Spirit, and our participation in it. No text is clearer and more explicit about the content of Christ's own mission than Luke 4:18 (which is, I suppose, the favourite text of liberation theology): The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free....The Spirit's work, then, in and through the followers of Jesus, is first to bring good news to the poor. To bring good news obviously means evangelization. Preaching good news is mentioned first when Jesus describes his own mission. But bringing good news to the poor has other, practical dimensions, as both Wesley and Calvin knew well. Good news to the poor specifically also means very mundane things like a roof over your head, and food on the table. It means education for your children and good care when you are sick. It means employment and economic justice. This is very much of a piece with the parable of the Good Samaritan and the parable of the sheep and the goats. Release to captives has to do with justice for those imprisoned. Sight to the blind speaks of healing, and it is constantly evident throughout the New Testament, that the work of healing through faith and prayer is part of the Christian mission, in continuation of Christ's own mission. To let the oppressed go free, once again, has to do with the lifting up of all who are disadvantaged, persecuted or marginalized. In this respect, the mission of Christ in the Spirit is in continuity with God's work with Israel as we see it in the Old Testament. It was the Ruah (Spirit) of Yahweh who delivered the Hebrew slaves out of Egypt. The great prophets, who called out for faithfulness to Yahweh through justice in human affairs, looked for a great Messianic King or a Suffering Servant of God, who would be empowered by the Spirit to bring justice to the nations. Because the Lordship of Jesus Christ pertains to the whole of life, the work of his living Spirit is indeed broad and deep. There is no dimension of life, public or private, that is not touched by the Spirit, because the Spirit's work is to build up God's Reign in the world, - indeed in every nook and cranny of the world. The Spirit's work is holistic. The Spirit strives among us for our physical, emotional, mental and spiritual well being. The Spirit reaches out to us both in our personal life and in our social and political life. 3) Universality of the Spirit's Presence and Work I've been speaking about the particular working of the Holy Spirit with Israel, and especially with the church, - those who acknowledge Jesus Christ, - creating faith, justifying and sanctifying them, inspiring them for mission. However, it is evident in the Scriptures that the Spirit's presence and work is not confined to Israel or to the church or Christian people. The Holy Spirit, after all, is the Spirit of God, the Spirit of the Creator, who loves the whole kosmos. God's providential reign in the whole of creation means that the Spirit is never absent, and is always and everywhere at work. Israel knew well that Yahweh was not confined to Jerusalem or to the temple. The Psalmist in Psalm 139 praised God's omnipresence with the words, "Whither shall I go from your Spirit? Or whither shall I flee from your presence?... If I take the wings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there your hand shall lead me, and your right hand shall hold me." (vs. 7, 9). The Psalmist of Psalm 33 extols the Ruah of God as Creator: "By the Word of the Lord the heavens were made and all their host by the breath of his mouth" (v. 6) Yet this is not merely a single, completed act of creation: According to Psalm 104 (vs.30) "When you send forth your Spirit they are created, and you renew the face of the ground". The Spirit of God, then, is the source of the ongoing creativity and fecundity of the created order. In a more ancient text, the Spirit is credited with God's provision of intelligence and skill to Bezalel: "I have filled him with the Spirit of God, with ability and intelligence, with knowledge and all craftsmanship...." (Exodus 31:2) This means that the Spirit is present and at work enabling what we regard as the natural processes of life. The ongoing universal activity of God as Spirit to the natural world, as well as to all humanity, is attested in various parts of the Hebrew Scriptures: According to Isaiah, the Spirit makes of the wilderness "a fruitful field" and also brings about "justice, righteousness and peace". (32:15-17) The second prophet Isaiah sees the Spirit as the sustaining, life-giving source of all earthly blessing. (44:3-4) We may say that the Spirit of God, whom Christians identify also as the Spirit of Jesus Christ, is the ongoing, ever present source, power and life of all creation. The Spirit is to be found everywhere and among all people, giving and sustaining life. The Spirit's work among the nations is not for nothing; it is always salvific, creating wholeness and blessing. Indeed, the Ruah of God was there from the beginning of creation, "brooding over the face of the waters," according to Genesis 1:2. And according to the Yahwist, when God shaped humanity from the dust of the earth, God breathed life into his nostrils (Gen 2:7). The gift of humanness is the work of the Creator Spirit. Humanity's very humanness is this in-breathed life of God, which is given to all of humanity by the Spirit. This omnipresent work of the Spirit is attested by Calvin, in Institutes I, 13 -14. Calvin writes, (referring to Gen 1:2): "the Spirit of God was expanded over the abyss or shapeless matter; for it shows not only that the beauty which the world displays is maintained by the invigorating power of the Spirit, but that even before this beauty existed the Spirit was at work cherishing the confused mass.... [The Holy Spirit, is] ...diffused over all space, sustaining, invigorating, and quickening all things, both in heaven and on the earth. The mere fact of his not being circumscribed by any limits raises him above the rank of creatures, while his transfusing vigour into all things, breathing into them being, life, and motion, is plainly divine."5It is appropriate then, returning to our theme of experience, to speak of experiencing the Spirit in the stuff of everyday, natural life and in the beauty and order of the world. The presence and work of the Spirit, the Spirit of
the Creator, who is the Spirit of Christ, is also at work in all of human
history striving for wholeness, liberation and justice. Not only
the history of Israel, of Christ, and of the church, are the realm
Are not you Israelites like Cushites to me? says the Lord. Did I not bring Israel up from Egypt, and the Philistines from Caphtor, and the Aramaens from Kir? The text suggests that wherever we find works and events of justice and liberty, there we find the activity of God. Israel's experience of the redeeming God whose Spirit led them from Egypt to the promised land, who spoke through their prophets and accompanied them in exile, who brought them home through the hand of Cyrus, inspired in them an awareness that their God of compassion was indeed the life-giving Creator of all. The American Lutheran theologian Robert Jenson speaks well of this. If the Holy Spirit is God, he argues, "this Spirit's wind must blow on and through all things". We must look far and wide, then, to see the Spirit's work of blessing, wholeness and justice in the entirety of the world and among all people. But Jenson warns us, "the enterprise is also perilous, for it must be the particular Spirit of Jesus... to whom we attribute cosmic efficacy...."6 This realization that God's Spirit is not tied down to us, that God loves the whole world, and makes this love effective, saves us from arrogance and superiority toward others, including members of other religions. We must be open to their wisdom, even while sharing the gospel with them, for God has not been absent from them through all the millennia of human history. This should be grounds not for jealousy, but for humility, and for praise and thanksgiving. Conclusion In conclusion: I have suggested that both the Scriptures and our own particular Protestant traditions, encourage us to be open to a great variety of experiences of the Spirit. We should expect that the work of the Holy Spirit should be evident among us in various ways, whether strange and spectacular, or very quiet, even ordinary ways. On the other hand, we ought not to demand experiences, - either to demand them from God, as proofs of the divine reality and presence, or to demand them of others, as proofs of the authenticity of their faith. Faith is the one thing needful, as Calvin insisted, since no one can say "Jesus is Lord" without the Holy Spirit. I've also distinguished between the universal working of the Spirit in the whole world and among all people, and the particular working of the Spirit which marks the history of Israel, the Christ event, and the life and mission of Christians. The particular working of the Spirit which brings people to Christian faith may be referred to as baptism in the Holy Spirit, or receiving the Spirit, or being born anew of the Spirit. This particular gift of the Spirit implies justification, sanctification, glorification, and, above all, faithful participation in the continuing mission of the risen Christ. Harold Wells is Professor of Systematic Theology, Emmanuel College, Toronto School of Theology. ENDNOTES 1 See a thorough treatment of these themes in Theodore W. Jennings, Jr., Good News to the Poor: John Wesley's Evangelical Economics (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1992). 2 John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, III, I, 4. (London: James Clarke & Co., 1962, Vol. I, p. 465). 3 Ibid. 4 Note that Wesley rejected the notion that 'baptism in the Holy Spirit' was an event subsequent to conversion. See a thorough discussion of this by Randy Maddox, Responsible Grace: John Wesley's Practical Theology (Nashville: Kingswood Books, 1994) pp. 134-136. The argument is made meticulously by James D. G. Dunn, in his book Baptism in the Holy Spirit: A Re-examination of the New Testament Teaching on the Gift of the Spirit in Relation to Pentecotalism Today (London: SCM Press, 1970). 5 Institutes 1-1.13-14. 6 Robert W. Jenson,
Christian Dogmatics, (Vol. II) ed. C. E. Braaten, R. W. Jenson (Philadelphia:
Fortress Press, 1984) p. 165.
THE CHRISTIAN CHARTER
Thomas F. Torrance According to its Christian Charter, The Scottish
Order of Christian Unity is open to all Christians who believe in Jesus
Christ as God and Saviour, and uphold his commandments particularly in
relation to family life, education, and medical ethics. In the particular
aims of the Order as expressed in its "Christian Charter" we are not concerned
with theological discussions between Churches, but together with other
Churches to uphold the teaching of Jesus Christ as it bears upon all inter-personal
relations between men and women and children, particularly upon marriage
as a life-long partnership between one man and one woman, the training
of children in the home and in the school, the healing and preserving of
human life, and concern for righteousness in the framework of community
existence and activity. My particular concern today is with the bearing
of Christ's teaching upon the conception and pre-natal life of the child.
But first let me emphasize the fact that it is explicitly with the teaching
of Christ as God and Saviour to which we are committed, that is,
of Christ as "true God of true God", as we confess in the Nicene
Creed. If we detach Christian ethics from their source and norm in Jesus
Christ as God himself become man, everything goes wrong.
"The culturalistic fallacy" - Filmer Northrop This fallacy pin-pointed by Professor Northrop, the
great mathematician and philosopher of Science at Yale, has to do with
the twisting of scientific truth to suit some prevailing cultural trend,
but actually it has long been rampant in theology and ethics. Here is an
example from Scottish Church history. In 1642 the Earl of Lothian presented
Robert Leighton to the Parish of Newbattle, where he served for ten years,
but where he was constantly rebuked by the Presbytery for not "preaching
up to the times" and advocating the Covenants, that is, for not advocating
the political theology of the day. Leighton replied, "If all of you preach
up the times, you may surely allow one poor brother to preach up Christ
to eternity".
"Moral inversion" - Michael Polanyi Today we also suffer from another fallacy which Michael
Polanyi, one of the greatest scientific minds of our age, has called "moral
inversion", the twisting of moral truth to serve social and political ends.
He pointed to the way in which a particular ethical idea could be detached
from its real moral ground, exalted into a supreme place over all ethical
truth, and then used to attack and demolish the moral foundation of human
life. In the first instance Polanyi had Marxist, communist and fascist
regimes in mind, but moral inversion applies no less to what is now frequently
being done to Christian ethics, even to the teaching of Jesus Christ. His
teaching, as set forth by St. John, for example, about loving relations,
is detached from God's commandments, and then used to undermine the teaching
of Christ about marriage as a divine institution between one man and woman,
and so to condone sexual relations outside marriage and even to accept
same-sex relations. Thus anything goes so long as it involves some kind
of "loving relation", even though it contradicts the Ten Commandments and
the explicit Words of Christ. That is a very damaging form of moral inversion,
which is often decked out with a parade of compassion and accusations of
judgmentalism. It is particularly reprehensible when it is advocated by
Christian teachers and churchmen, as it is today, for example, by Richard
Holloway.
"The naturalistic fallacy" This fallacy was first exposed by David Hume in Edinburgh
and then formulated by G.E. Moore in Cambridge. It
is basically similar to the culturalistic fallacy and to moral inversion,
but when it raised its head in natural science it was exposed and refuted
by Michael Polanyi and Karl Popper both of whom showed that when in rigorous
science we are forced by reality to adopt one way of thinking and formulating
a truth, we set aside at the same time alternative ways of thinking and
formulating it as misconceived or heretical. By its very nature
truth excludes untruth. Scientific truth and rejection of heresy belong
together. Thus in formulating a natural law science is committed to a way
of thinking that excludes other ways of thinking. That was, for example,
the principle imposed on science in the discovery that light takes the
shortest path or quickest route between two points, which excludes any
other possibility--thus the theory of relativity formulated by Einstein
by its essential truth excludes relativism. Any idea at variance with that
would be heretical for rigorous science, self-willed deviation from the
truth, when people hold that some course of events they have come across
in their observations is how they had to take place. Thus in discounting
any other or deeper explanation they claim that the factual state of affairs
they have found is what ought to have happened, and is the truth.
Earlier this year I lectured in several Universities in the USA about "Einstein and God", and showed that for Einstein "God" was not just a metaphor but a "transcendent" and "spiritual" reality which he confessed he had to take into account in the foundations of scientific discovery. I discussed his recovery of biblical, Jewish-Christian, way of thinking of man as body of his soul and soul of his body. It was that unitary, non dualist, way of thinking (for example of the particle and the field, of space and time) that governed his science, and determined for him the fundamental interrelation between relativity and quantum theory. I believe it is that non-dualist unitary way of thinking that we need to recover in our understanding of the conception and life of the unborn child. Jews and Christians believe that God created the universe, matter and mind alike, out of nothing--that is the all-important notion of contingent rational order upon which all our modern empirical and theoretical science rests. My concern here is with the fact that this applies to human being. In creating human being, body and soul, our of nothing God did not give being and life to the body by itself, or to the soul by itself, but to man/woman in whom body and soul form a living unity. The human being is an embodied soul and a besouled body, as Karl Barth once expressed it. This truth has two far-reaching implications, which are very relevant for us today. (1) The inseparability of soul and body applies to the human embryo from the moment of conception. Although distinctive features of human being may not yet be discernible in any differentiated form, the essential nature of the unborn child is nevertheless a living human being, not just a natural or biological organism, which is the object of God's concern whether as a child or as an adult. For Christians this truth was considerably reinforced by the fact that the human life of Jesus the incarnate Son of God commenced from the moment of his conception in the womb of the Virgin Mary. It was thus that the Early Church was led to reject abortion and feticide as well as infanticide. Thus in its teaching of the ten commandments it added two others: "Thou shalt not procure abortion", and "Thou shalt not commit infanticide". The fullest consideration of this was given by St. Gregory of Nyssa, who held that since man's being is one, consisting of soul and body, soul and body come into being at the same moment in the womb. And with other Greek theologians he held that each soul is created by God along with the body and grows together with the body from the moment of conception. The human being is already potentially complete as "the human germ", as Gregory expressed it, which is startlingly similar to modern scientific finding that the human being is genetically complete in the embryo from the moment of conception, which makes abortion and feticide as morally and utterly abhorrent as infanticide. Let it be granted, however, that difficult circumstances arise in which exception is called for in the prohibition of abortion. Unfortunately, however, especially in a society rife with moral relativism, the exception tends to be turned into a rule, which would then be another and serious form of moral inversion, one which, alas, is now fearfully widespread. I believe firmly that what we need to take into account today, along with our scientific understanding of the pre-natal period of a baby, is that the human fetus is a soul as well as a body, as soul of his/her body and body of his/her soul. The human embryo is already a being with a multi-levelled structure which is properly to be understood in the coordination of the body and the soul, that is of the lower level with the higher level of its existence. Thus what is learned of the embryo as a physical or biological organism, for example in respect of its conscious sensations, may be deepened and furthered in respect of its feeling, hearing, recognition and learning. Thus I believe that the human fetus, incomplete in itself merely as a biological organism, is open to deeper and more complete understanding as a embryonic human being, when we take into account that it is an embodied soul and a besouled body. This will surely help our neurological and medical science to think more fully of the unborn-child in its open structure to what is beyond mere empirical observation (in line with what we do elsewhere, for example, in mathematics and physics) -- and also help them to avoid what Polanyi called the rationalistic and deterministic fallacy. My intention is not to be critical of them but to further the remarkable scientific account given of the pre-natal life of the child by the Symposium of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, to which I have referred. (2) That the human being is soul of his/her body and body of his/her soul applies to the distinction between male and female. It means that the difference in sex is not simply a feature of the body, merely accidental to the soul, but is intrinsic to the human soul which far from being neutral is either male or female. Sexuality determines the innermost being of people, making them either male or female in themselves. However, in that the basic form of humanity, the essential human nucleus is neither man by himself nor woman by herself, but only man and woman: man is man only in relation to woman, and woman is woman only in relation to man. That is of course in accord with the teaching of Christ about marriage, that in God's creation man and woman are not finally two but one. Hence this difference in gender within the oneness and fullness of human being, far from being an external convention, goes back to the union between man and woman in God's original creation which must not be put asunder. This has important implications for our concern in the Scottish Order of Christian Unity for Christian education in sex which is very much needed today. Unfortunately much that passes for education about sex seems to be concerned mainly with its physical and biological aspects, so that sex education in schools tends to concentrate on the physical side of sex and thus on the mechanics of sexual relations. Without proper attention given to the soul and the spiritual nature of male and female relations, this may even foster the animalisation of sex which gives rise to the unhappiness and disaster so very evident today in teenage pregnancies. This is an area to which we in the Scottish Order of Christian Unity must give much more attention, especially in regard to the all-important personal relations involved. The embryonic child as an embodied soul and a besouled body is already a person. The Personal Being of the Fetus
A Response to "Mending the World"David L. Fisher Prelude
The core of the paper which follows was written prior to the 36th General Council and focuses mainly on the "Theological Foundations" section of the document. Introduction See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and on the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ. For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority. CColossians 2:8,9. (NIV) The Mending the World document appears to reflect post-modern values and a panentheistic orientation. This makes it ideally suited as a point of departure in dialoguing with other religions since it makes no truth claims which could be viewed as being absolute or contradictory to other world-views. On issues of faith it presents several alternative "traditions" which some Christians subscribe to. At the same it advocates the use of a " common cause" to bring about stronger relations with people of other religious traditions. While this approach is helpful insofar as it promotes tolerance, unfortunately it appears to undermine traditional Christian claims to absolute truth. Moreover Mending the World, in its quest for an environmentally friendly theology, seems to advocate panentheism which is foreign to the Christian faith. This has major implications for how the United Church understands God, and as a result would dramatically change the nature of how we do mission. This paper will attempt to show how the Mending the World report is influenced by a postmodernistic outlook, how panentheism is espoused and, paying close attention to what it means for God to be reconciling the world, how our mission as a Church is re-prioritized. A Postmodern View Postmodernism is a contemporary way of viewing the world. It is a reaction to modernism, which held that reality could be discovered through our senses and by applying the scientific method. Modernists believe that human bias could be eliminated through the rigorous application of observation and analysis. Whereas modernists believe that an objective view of reality could be realised, postmodernism emphasizes that not only our interpretations, but also the process of selecting and analysing what we observe, is unavoidably laden with bias.1 Alister McGrath writes: There has been a general collapse of confidence in the Enlightenment trust in the power of reason to provide the foundations for a universally valid knowledge of the world, including God. Reason fails to deliver a morality suited to the real world in which we live. And with this collapse of confidence in a universal and necessary criterion of truth, relativism and pluralism have flourished.2Before beginning my studies in University, I recall spending some time looking at the venues of each of the subjects sponsored by the General Arts department. A kindly philosophy professor stood behind a table and presented me with a challenge: "define reality in 25 words or less." After a moment's hesitation I shot back: "reality is whatever I perceive it to be." I was unaware that my answer typified post modern thinking. According to postmodernism, there is no objective reality which can be discovered, rather only a reality which we each construct based upon our own experience. A common consensus on truth may develop as we write our collective story, or what postmodernists call a "meta-narrative."3 Yet this "truth" is not true because it corresponds to some objective reality of which it speaks, rather it is true only because we believe it to be so. Hence there can be contradictory "truths" espoused by various people and groups. To take a pertinent example, Christians may regard Jesus as the Messiah and for them this is quite true, while at the same time Jews may deny that Jesus was the Messiah and for them this is no less true. In postmodernism, all belief systems may be regarded as equally plausible. The inherent advantage of this way of thinking is that it promotes tolerance and pluralism. Yet it does so by denying the possibility of arriving at any knowledge of objective truth. Postmodernism views truth as what we make it, as opposed to Biblical Christianity which holds that certain absolute truths can be revealed to us by the inspiration of God. With respect to its theological foundations, Mending the World reflects a postmodernist spirit. It states that "from the Church's beginnings, a common, pithy, and universally acceptable understanding of Jesus' life and significance have not existed."4 It presents Jesus as a "prophet of the end time", as "teacher of law", as "emissary of wisdom" , as "revolutionary for social change" and as "revealer of the gift of grace" adding that each of these is a "construction". It goes on to say that, "the constructions are always stories of faith, not history. Even the biographical bits are recorded by post-Easter people, and are included not to provide some presumed "neutral" history of Jesus, but in order that, as John's gospel states, 'you may believe.'"5 This begs the question as to the extent to which the Bible can be relied upon to be the revelation of any objective truth. If there is no objective reality to which it points, then one could question whether it should be considered as anything more than a mere fanciful, albeit meaningful fiction. If this were in fact the case, then I would suggest that the promises "of God" as contained within the pages of scripture are nothing more than wishful thinking, self-fulfilling at best, or hollow myths making believers most pitiful fools at worst (1 Cor. 15:15-19). This type of reading is at odds with the United Church's founding belief in, "the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, given by the inspiration of God, as containing the only infallible rule of faith and life, a faithful record of God's gracious revelations, and as the sure witness of Christ."6 In this same spirit, Mending the World presents four "traditions" or theories "of atonement". It then goes on to present three contrasting perspectives on how God's initiative to "reconcile and redeem" can be understood. Not surprisingly it refuses to "adjudicate" between them. Instead it acknowledges that "this multiplicity of views [is] a significant issue for Christians in the new ecumenical setting."7 Proposing to leave these critical issues unresolved while on the threshold of unprecedented inter-faith cooperation at great expense to the Church is hardly satisfying. How we view the world has dire consequences for what we believe and how we act. At issue are two things. First, the determination as to whether the truth claims of Christianity are unique and necessitate a specific form of response, and second, an assessment as to whether these claims, while confessional in nature, are reflective of objective truths which can be evaluated over and against competing ways of viewing reality. To view them as such is not to deny the role of bias in relation to the way that reality is perceived. Rather, it is to affirm that reality exists apart from our perceptions or "constructions" of it, and that in spite of bias the relative merit of competing "truths" can be assessed. If the unique claims that Christianity makes about the spiritual condition of human beings and the necessity of salvation are true in an objective sense, then it is a matter of love and compassion that they be shared with sensitivity. That is the Good News. To present them as options like dishes in a cafeteria, sorely lacks appeal. The key question is this: given the competing truth claims of various religions, which way of looking at the world and at God most closely corresponds to reality? Undoubtably the answer will be a matter faith, but it is a faith that holds that an objective reality exists. I would not expect people of other religions to compromise their beliefs by relativizing their truth claims, even if their world view may be in complete contradiction to my own. Real dialogue does not gloss over our differences but respects others while holding to them. Panentheism Espoused Perhaps most disturbing is the fact that this report advocates panentheism. Pantheism holds that God is all and all is God. It makes no distinction between what we know as creation, and God whom we call the Creator. Panentheism on the other hand, is a term that was devised by Karl C. F. Krause (1781-1832) to describe his thought.8 It is best known for its use by Charles Hartshorne and recently by Matthew Fox. Fox's book The Coming of the Cosmic Christ is quoted several times in the Mending the World document. Allan Anderson quoting from, New Thought: A Practical American Spirituality writes: Panentheism says that all is in God, somewhat as if God were the ocean and we were fish. If one considers what is in God's body to be part of God, then we can say that God is all there is and then some. The universe is God's body, but God's awareness or personality is greater than the sum of all the parts of the universe. All the parts have some degree of freedom in co-creating with God. At the start of its momentary career as a subject, an experience is God--as the divine initial aim. As the experience carries on its choosing process, it is a freely aiming reality that is not strictly God, since it departs from God's purpose to some degree. Yet everything is within God9.The Mending the World document portrays Jesus as "representative of humanity", "representative of God" and "representative of the whole of creation." (Italics mine). It states that "the Church speaks, then, both of the humanity and divinity of Christ. It affirms that this Christ is present to, and in every form of life in the universe. 'All things were created in Christ' says the author of Colossians, 'and in Christ all things hold together.' (Col. 1:17)".10Mending the World goes on to say that "lifting up the image of Christ as present in and to all of life may help us re-image and transform our relationship to nature."11 Quoting from Matthew Fox, Mecthild of Magdeburg is recorded as saying, "The day of my spiritual awakening was the day I saw, and knew I saw, all things in God and God in all things."12 [Italics mine]. A close look at what is being proposed reveals a significant and alarming logical error. Namely, to say that all things are in Christ is very different than saying Christ is in all things. It suggests that if A is in B, then B is in A. It would be no more true than if I were to say that because I am in Canada as I write this, that therefore Canada is in me. This is patently false. There are two passages of scripture within the New Testament which speak about all things being in "God" or "Christ". The first is cited above, and suggests that nothing in all creation exists apart from Christ. To say everything is in Christ, is to say that, in the words of one Bible translation, "he holds all things in unity." (JB) This does not imply that Christ is in all things in the sense that we could say that carbon is a part of every living creature. Rather it means that all things are sustained by him. Hence Hebrews 1:3 speaks of Christ as "upholding all things by the word of His power." Christ is not a part of creation, but has taken part in creating and as creator is separate and distinct from creation. The second reference can be found in a famous speech Paul made to the Athenians. Using first an expression suggested by the Greek poet Epimenides of Cnossas, and then quoting from the Phainomena of Aratus he states: "In him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, 'For we are his offspring.'" In the sense that the whole human race has been created by God, in that sense all human beings are said to be the children of God. Thus Adam himself is known as "God's Son." (Luke 3:38). Paul is not saying, contrary to what some panentheists may claim, that this shows that God is in all things. Rather it tells us that the origin of all life comes from God. In context this passage shows that God is not in idols made by human hands, for God does not make His home in "shrines made by human hands." Clearly God is not in all things, otherwise in some way God would be dependent on what "human hands" could do for him. (Acts 17:25). In the few instances where God or Christ are portrayed as being "all in all", it is the idea of God's absolute preeminence over all of creation (1 Cor.15:28), or the fact that Christ breaks down all barriers of race, class and culture which stand between human beings, which is being conveyed. No where is there any indication that Christ's individual personality literally indwells all things. In contrast to the mistaken belief that the Bible teaches that God is literally in all things, the scriptures clearly do teach that God is in some things. Namely, God is said to indwell the bodies of believers. Paul writes for instance, that believers are "God's temple" having been redeemed by God and filled with the Holy Spirit [1 Corinthians 6:19] and that Christ in believers is the "hope of glory" [Colossians 1:27]. The United Church's Articles on Doctrine in the Basis of Union unambiguously state that Jesus abides in the hearts of believers as the indwelling Christ (Article 7] and that the Holy Spirit "abides with the Church, dwelling in every believer as the spirit of truth, of power, of holiness, of comfort, and of love" (Article 8).13 In addition, speaking specifically about the body of believers, the letter of Ephesians states that God who is Father of all, is also over all, through all, and in all [Ephesians 4:6]. Unfortunately, the unique relationship of "indwelling" between God and the Church is distorted by Mending the World insofar as it claims that "God calls the Church ... to discern and celebrate God's Spirit in people of other religions and ideologies."14 While the uniqueness of this relationship between God and the Christian Church does not impose limits on God's presence or God's working among and through people outside the Christian Church, it does suggest that God's redemptive work in Christ has brought an intimacy, direction and vocation which is unparalleled within other religions and ideologies. By postulating that "God calls the Church ... to discern and celebrate God's Spirit in people of other religions and ideologies," the groundwork has been laid to accept a later proposal set forth by Mending the World as one option among three, namely that "all authentic religions can mediate salvation ... (and that) just as a parent's love is not exhausted on a first child, but can extend equally but differently to all the children that follow, so too God is able to have a specific covenant with Jews, another with Christians, another with Hindus, and so on."15 Clearly this contradicts the Biblical witness which states in the words of Jesus: "if you love me, you will obey what I command. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counsellor to be with you forever - the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you." (John 14:15-17) Is it possible that the United Church could adopt panentheism over and against the Biblical witness? I believe the answer is an unqualified yes! Feminist theologian Sallie McFague, in her highly acclaimed book Models of God, proposes that the scriptural language that has been used to speak about God should be discarded in favour of employing an alternate "metaphor" for God, namely God as a mother. Stephen Smith summarises McFague's proposal against Biblical language as follows: She sees most biblical language for God as "patriarchal
as well as imperialistic, triumphalistic metaphors," that are "not only
idolatrous and irrelevant" but "opposed to life." The monarchical language
of God as King, Ruler, Lord, and Father is the main
The principle insight of liberation theologies - that redemption is not the rescue of certain individuals for eternal life in another world but the fulfilment of all humanity in the political and social realities of this world- must be privatized to include the well-being of all life. This is the case not only because unless we adopt an ecological perspective recognising human dependence on its environment, we may well not survive, but also, of equal theological if not pragmatic importance, because such a perspective is the dominant paradigm of our time and theology that is not done in conversation with this paradigm is not theology for our time.17In the spirit of postmodernism, McFague contends that we "need metaphors because all renderings of reality are metaphorical (that is, none is literal), but in our novel constructions we offer new possibilities in place of others. In this sense we create the reality in which we live."18 In order to meet this crisis, McFague proposes several new "metaphors" for God, namely God as a mother, as a lover and as a friend. While acknowledging some of the limitations of these metaphors, McFague is unequivocal in her belief that they represent better alternatives than the traditional language employed to speak of God. Of the three images she suggests the dominant seems to be that of God as mother. She writes: But what if we were to understand the resurrection and ascension not as the bodily translation of some individuals to another world - a mythology that is no longer credible to us - but as the promise of God to be permanently present, "bodily" present to us, in all places and times in our world? In what ways would we think of the relationship between God and the world were we to experiment with the metaphor of the universe as God's "body," God's palpable presence in all space and time? If what is needed in our ecological, nuclear age is an imaginative vision of the relationship between God and the world that underscores their interdependence and mutuality, empowering a sensibility of care and responsibility toward all life, how would it help to see the world as the body of God?19I doubt that Sallie McFague's book Models of God is a blueprint for Mending the World . Nevertheless the affinities between McFague's proposal and the Mending the World are inescapable. Mending the World names "the search for justice for God's creatures and healing for God's creation as the church's first priority ... ."20In the spirit of McFague's book, traditional Trinitarian language is not to be found in Mending the World. The transcendent element of God's character is almost totally absent within the United Church's report. Both documents propose panentheism as a means to inspire this "earth healing." Indeed, the primary mission of the Church has been redefined from "making disciples" (Matt. 28:19), to "earth healing." Problems With Panentheism I would contend that to accept panentheism is to reject theism. Matthew Fox in his description of panentheism quotes Meister Eckhart who states that "'ignorant people falsely imagine that God created all things', in such a way as to say that they are outside divinity. For 'God is in all things. The more divinity is in things the more divinity is outside things.'"21 By accepting panentheism the traditional theistic distinction between the Divine and the created order is dissolved. Thus a few of the many risks of adopting a panentheistic position would include: the conceptualisation of Christ as an impersonal force (for how is the personality of Jesus Christ contained in all aspects of creation?), the elimination of any conceptualisation of the resurrection of the dead which includes judgment or hell, (for if Christ is in all how can Christ be the judge of himself or continually be present in hell?), the repudiation of the belief that Christ died to save sinners (cf. Rom. 5:8,9 - for if Christ is in all how did Christ's life end on the cross?), as well as trying to hold contradictory claims that God is good when evil is acknowledged to be present within creation and Christ is said to be in all things. With respect to this latter point, Craig S.Hawkins points out that in a panentheistic universe, ontologically evil emanates or flows naturally and necessarily from the very nature of the ultimate Life Force.22 If Christ is "in all" then does not evil flow from Christ? And what assurance do we have that God would desire to defeat evil at all within the world if Christ and the world are one? If we were to accept panentheism how could we as a Church affirm that nothing in "all creation will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord (Rom. 8:39b), if Christ is a part of that very evil which opposes us? Perhaps these problems were unforeseen by the Inter Church - Inter Faith committee. For the Mending the World document, rather than addressing them, takes a different approach. Namely it speaks of "wholeness that has been lost" and of "mending the world." Thus evil is seen more as a shortcoming to be made up than as a force to be fought against. Mending the World mentions evil in this latter sense only once. "The 'Christus victor' tradition" it states, "sees Jesus' suffering as a necessary prelude to triumph over evil." It goes on to say that, "In his victory is the promise and guarantee of our own. Our suffering is to be considered temporary."23 Yet this interpretation of the Christus Victor tradition fails to capture the understanding which was elucidated by Gustav Aulen in his book Christus Victor. Aulen summarises this position succinctly: "its central theme is the idea of the Atonement as a Divine Conflict and victory; Christ-Christus Victor - fights against and triumphs over the evil powers of the world, the 'tyrants' under which mankind is in bondage and suffering, and in Him God reconciles the world to Himself."24 That unbelievers are in bondage and in need of deliverance as brought about by the atoning work of Jesus Christ, that "evil powers" exist in opposition to God, that there is a "sin nature", as distinct from acts of sin, are all themes which are ignored by Mending the World. Their absence is consistent with the report's broad panentheistic approach. The Impact on Mission Panentheism also has a predictable impact on our understanding of Christian mission. Mending the World calls on the United Church to set as its first priority "the search for justice for God's creatures and healing for God's creation."25 Logically if its starting point had been the premise that human beings are in bondage to evil, and that all of creation was impacted by the sin of human beings, it would have followed that the Church's first priority should have been to point to the One who is able to transform not only creation, but also the human heart in a redemptive way. This shift is reflected in the report's interpretation of God's reconciling work in relation to the world. The document tells us that "Jesus is the one affirmed as God's child, the one through whom the world has been reconciled to God (2 Cor. 5:19)", and that "the Church is united in its affirmation that God has reconciled the world."26 Yet even these statements are in themselves incomplete and as a result mislead the reader. 2 Corinthians 5:18-19 reads as follows: Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ, and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation. [Italics mine].It is most important to note that, contrary to what the Mending the World Document suggests by it use of the past tense "has been reconciled" and "has reconciled" this work of reconciliation is ongoing in the sense that it must be accepted in order to be efficacious. In its entry under reconciliation the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Kittel and Friedrich states that: God is not reconciled, nor does he reconcile himself, but he himself reconciles us or the world to himself (2 Cor. 5:18-19), while we are reconciled to God (Rom. 5:10) or reconcile ourselves to him (2 Cor. 5:20). katallassein denotes a transformation of the state between God and us and therewith of our own state, for by it we become new creatures (2 Cor. 5:18), no longer ungodly or sinners, but justified, with God's love shed abroad in our hearts (Rom. 5:6ff.). God has not changed; the change is in our relation to him and consequently in our whole lives.27It must be said that the world, in the sense of unredeemed humanity, has not been reconciled to God and that one of the primary and unique roles the Church has been given by God is to be "ambassadors for Christ" (2 Cor. 5:20) of this "word of reconciliation" (2 Cor. 5:19). By suggesting that Christ's work of reconciliation is already an accomplished fact, a half truth since it is true that the work accomplished by Christ is sufficient for reconciliation, Mending the World undermines the second half of the truth by not stating it: the world must accept Christ's work of reconciliation in order for that reconciliation to occur. At this point, the report comes perilously close to Universalism which holds that all are saved irrespective of faith. This is in direct contrast to the Biblical witness which states that faith is necessary in order to please God (Hebrews 11:6). True reconciliation to God, as well as the transformational character of the Gospel, is predicated upon the acceptance of the Gospel. This is why Paul states: "be reconciled to God" (2 Cor. 5:20). Mending the World not only misses the mark with respect to the saving nature of Christ's reconciling work, it also uses a broad, albeit selective definition of "reconciliation", which encompasses the idea of being reconciled to God's will. Thus it appears that God reconciles the world as my wife reconciles our cheque book with our bank statements at the end of the month. Namely by balancing the figures of what is (our cheque book) with what should be (our bank statements). The report affirms that God was incarnate in Jesus Christ "overcoming alienation" (what is) "and bring(s) about the reconciliation of the world to the divine love and purpose" (what should be). Taking it a step further the document states that "out of this reconciliation comes the world's hope for redemption, and its restoration to the order and beauty intended by God."28 This shift has significant implications. While not arguing against the belief that we should be "reconciled to God's will" it must be made clear that God's will is first and foremost that we should be reconciled to His person, and not that creation should be reconciled to what we might consider the ideal for creation. Jesus Christ stands at the centre of Christian missionary endeavours, not the quest for the healing of the earth. The enormity of this shift is underscored by the Very Rev. Robert Smith who is Chairperson of the Inter-church- Interfaith committee which was responsible for the production of Mending the World.In an article in the March 1997 issue of "The Observer" in a paragraph devoted to how the report has an impact on our understanding of mission we read, "Our mission is working with God to heal the world, but the church may not be the one that does it. Certainly not by itself."29 Smith indicated that, "if the General Council accepts this document - we will have a 'much lower doctrine of church.' This particular branch of Christendom will abandon the contention that God works primarily through God's church."30 The impetus of Mending the World is to shift the United Church's approach to ecumenism from being "church centred" to "world centred". Yet so doing, the effect is to undermine the Church's witness to the redemptive work of Christ who reconciles humanity to God. The unique commission given by God to the Christian Church is to share the Good News of the reconciling work of Christ whose death and resurrection bring the hope of eternal life to believers. The claim that God does not work primarily through the Christian Church is valid only if we abandon this task and reorder the Church's priorities. This is precisely what Mending the World proposes we do. In conclusion, the Mending the World document is flawed. It is flawed not because Christians should not work with people of other religions or those with no faith at all in order to address the very real and pressing ecological crises and the grave human injustices of our time. We should and we must. Rather the report is flawed because its approach undermines the absolute nature of Christianity's truth claims, and compromises the Church's witness of Christ to the world by accepting panentheism as a point of departure. Therefore this report should be rejected. So what did the 36th General Council do with Mending the World? As was the case with most of the other business, a great portion of the sessional committee's recommendations had to be referred to the Executive of General Council because of time constraints. Nevertheless the General Council was able to debate, and eventually support the following: Therefore be it resolved that the 36th General Council: 1. Express its deep gratitude to the Inter-Church and Inter-Faith Committee (ICIF) for its persistent commitment over 10 years to help the Church discern within its life and witness a new understanding of ecumenism. 2. Affirm the Mending the World report: a) as the fruit of faithfully pursuing the ICIF mandate to "challenge the Church to a vision of ecumenism which includes the whole inhabited world." (Record of Proceedings, 1988 GC, p.315); and b) for clearly linking the UCC's historic and ongoing commitment to be both a united and uniting church with "God's work of healing, sharing the good news of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and making common cause with all people of good will, whether they be of faith or not, for the creation of a world that is just, participatory and sustainable."; and c) as a lens through which the work of the Church can be reviewed and assessed in terms of the whole world understanding of ecumenism. It is important to note what the General Council did not do. It did not endorse all of the theology contained within the report. Neither, it must be added, did it repudiate it. Rather, the 36th General Council and the further recommendations of the sessional committee which will be going to the General Council Executive, speak of using the report as a "lens" through which the mission of the Church may be viewed and prioritised. Thus, the impact of this report upon the life of the United Church will, to a great extent, depend on the degree to which it is embraced as such. Undoubtably Mending the World will have a major impact on the agenda of the United Church with respect to ecumenism. However, the extent to which the report's theology is promoted in and reflected by the United Church remains to be seen. Given the report's theological underpinnings, particularly with respect to its Christology as it pertains to panentheism, there is good reason for concern. Panentheism is often monistic by nature. Namely, it holds that there is essentially one reality, and that all other beings are but attributes or modes of that reality. Given this pairing, further clarification would be helpful as to what the authors of Mending the World intend when they state that "... everything that exists here has evolved in a closed environment, and has, consequently, been built with the same basic building blocks of life (and) ... in addition to the linkages we expect to find developing and existing in a closed system, we also affirm a connection within the creation that has its origin in God."31 [Italics mine]. From a theistic position one would expect that the origin of creation came not in God but from God. If the report intends to propose monism along with panentheism, then this would suggest that Christ at very least, and possibly even the first and third persons of the Trinity, are dependent on and perhaps even captive to matter. As such, from this panentheistic frame of reference, one could ask if there is any sense in which the United Church holds that God is transcendent over creation. Did God create ex nihilo or has God always been a part and had a part in an eternally evolving creation? Several other important questions emerge. For instance, if we abandon any claim to absolute truth for the sake of dialogue, is there really anything unique or substantive we have to offer with respect to Jesus Christ's commission to evangelism? Are we "ambassadors" for Christ, or merely talkers about human traditions and beliefs? Can we faithfully speak about the justice and healing work of God without any reference to (or in some circles belief in) life beyond the grave? Further, given the impact of postmodernism, will we be able as a Church to distinguish between what we accept as revelation from God, and what is simply a projection of our own imaginations upon God? Given the prominence of the concepts of the New Age movement, (many of which are espoused by Matthew Fox), will we as a denomination be able to clearly distinguish between the Creator and Creation thereby rejecting the "divinization" of the world? Could our relationships with other religions lead us unwittingly to worship and serve that which has been created instead of the Creator? This a critical juncture for the United Church of Canada. The main thrust of Mending the World was not to redefine our Christology, but our ecumenism. Yet, in so doing, it has moved us to consider a shift from Biblical theism to panentheism. The main thrust of the United Church's "Reconciling and Making New: Who is Jesus for the world today?" a document which is currently being studied in the United Church, is our Christology. While panentheism does not dominate it, it contains nevertheless panentheistic elements. Before adopting a panentheistic approach, it behoves the Church to explicitly name, and closely scrutinise, the implications of moving from Biblical theism to panentheism. I would contend that these two theological systems are incompatible, and to try to hold both simultaneously or shift from Biblical theism to panentheism will introduce confusion and exacerbate the fragmentation of belief within our Church. In turn, this would make it even more difficult to effectively share the "Good News of the Gospel". We would do well to heed the apostle Paul's admonition to the church of Galatia not to embrace another gospel (Galatians 1:6-9), lest we find ourselves spiritually bankrupt and condemned. 1 Jim Fidelibus and Dennis McCallum, "Confronting the postmodern Beast" Good News, Jan/Feb. 1997, 17. 2 Alister E. McGrath, Intellectuals Don't Need God & Other Modern Myths (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993), 175. 3 Fidelibus and McCallum, 17. 4 Mending the World: An Ecumenical Vision For Healing and Reconciliation, by Robert F. Smith, chairperson of the Interchurch-Interfaith committee. 1997, 9. 5 Mending the World, 11. 6 ___________,"Basis of Union" in The Manual: The United Church of Canada 1995. 30th ed., (The United Church Publishing House), 14. 7 Mending the world, 16. 8 Van A. Harvey, A Handbook of Theological Terms. (New York: Collier Book Macmillan Publishing Company, 1964). 172. 9 Allan C. Anderson and Deborah G. Whitehouse, New Thought: A Practical Spirituality (New York, New York: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1995), 89f. 10 Mending the World, 17. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid., 18. 13 ____________ "Basis of Union," 1995, 14-15. 14 Mending the World, 4. 15 Ibid., 15. 16 Stephen Smith. "God's Body or God's Creation?" Mission and Ministry: Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry Quarterly, 8 (Fall 1990): 13. 17 Sallie McFague, Models of God (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987), 7. 18 Stephen Smith, 1990, 13. 19 Sallie McFague, 1987, 60. 20 Mending the World, 1. 21 Matthew Fox, The Coming of the Cosmic Christ (Harper Collins Publishers: New York, N.Y., 1988), 57. 22 Craig S. Hawkins, "The Modern World of Witchcraft: Part Two" in The Christian Research Journal, Summer 1990, 23 Mending the World, 14. 24 Gustav Aulen, Christus Victor, 4. 25 Mending the World, 1. 26 Mending the World, 14. 27 Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 41. 28 Mending the World, 14. 29 Donna Sinclair. "One world, once people, one cause," The United Church Observer, March 1997, 16-17. 30 Sinclair, 17. 31 Mending the World, 16.
United or Untied?Philip A. Cline During the 50th Anniversary of Church
Union celebrations in 1975, Don Harron's alter-ego Charlie Farquharson
made humorous references to the United Church of Canada as "yer Untied
Church of Canada." It was funny, at the time, and we all laughed. We haven't
laughed much in the last ten years as Old Charlie's designation of "untied"
has been too close for comfort and too accurate to find amusing.
THE TWENTY ARTICLES OF FAITH: A PRESENT GUIDE OR A PAST STORY?R. George Morrison Do you remember that simple game many of us played
as children? The one where a dozen people sat on chairs in a straight line,
while a message was given to the person on one end of the line with the
instruction that this message was to be passed along the row by whispering,
each in turn, to his/her neighbour. The fun, of course was to discover
the kind of garbled and frequently hilarious misrepresentation of the original
message that was finally reported by the player on the other end of the
line. Such was one of our earliest lessons in the perils of communication!
THE LOWVILLE PRAYER CENTRERev. Dr. Paul Miller The past twenty years have laid bare some deep theological
and institutional rifts within the United Church of Canada. The year 1988
was the culmination of those cleavages. Ten years after, the wounds remain
open and still painful. Since that fateful year, numbers of clergy and
laypeople have left the church for other denominations or dropped out altogether,
decimating a once-vibrant evangelical community within the United Church.
Superficially, at least, the polarization that once was evident in virtually
every church court and meeting has been mitigated by their departure. Things
often appear to go "more smoothly." But we would have to say that much
of the energy has also gone out of the Church. Presbytery and Conference
meetings are tired affairs. Congregations have retreated into a survival
mode. And, recent comments by the Moderator have once again highlighted
the fragmented state of our beloved United Church.
STATEMENT OF THE REV. DR. GRAHAM SCOTT, PRESIDENT, CHURCH ALIVE on published remarks by Moderator Bill Phipps in October 1997The 1925 Doctrine of the Basis of Union remains the official and constitutive teaching of the United Church of Canada, specifically that the Bible is given by inspiration of God, a faithful record of God's gracious revelations, and the sure witness of Christ (II); that Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of God and the only Mediator between God and humankind (VII); and that Jesus rose from the dead (VII) and so will we (XIX).The 1940 Statement of Faith affirms this teaching. The 1944 Catechism affirms this teaching. The New Curriculum affirms this teaching, as, for example, in former Moderator A.B.B. Moore's book, Jesus Christ and the Christian Life, published in 1965. I quote the following paragraphs, which relate to the reality of resurrection, the historicity of the Bible, and the divinity of Jesus Christ. The records of the first Christian century are clear. They leave no doubt about the witness of these communities. They affirmed that Jesus of Nazareth had been raised from the dead on the third day, and that he had been seen by many of the brethren. This astonishing claim was the very heart not only of their public proclamation but of their personal experience. (P. 169)The twentieth century mind may find it difficult to incorporate this event into its faith but neither the church nor its documents will allow us to cut it out of the record simply because it is difficult or inconvenient to accept. We must deal fairly with the evidence that is in our hands. The church and its ancient documents are there and cannot be wished out of existence. Their testimonyis plain that the resurrection appearances occurred in times and places and to persons that are known, and those occurrences have found a continuation in the living experience of the church through all the ages. (P. 174)No matter what kind of fantastic world may be emerging from the adventures of man's mind, the needs of the human spirit will be with us still. The Christ whose redeeming influence answered those needs in the apostolic age continues to answer them in the nuclear age. He is the same yesterday and today and forever. And man's only fitting response to him is the confession of faith: "My Lord and my God!" (P. 246)There is good news in the affirmations above. I am prepared to die for this resurrection faith in Jesus our Lord and Saviour and god. I am called away from the culture of death by this life-affirming Word and by the life-giving Spirit, who bears witness to Jesus (John 15:26). Moderator Phipps's denials, unbelief and agnosticism are not good news. They seem to me to be an invitation to suicide. They do not even inspire me to care for the poor. But Jesus Christ, who, though he was rich yet for our sake became poor, does inspire me to care for the poor, for all human beings and for the world that God loves so much (John 3:16. 2 Corinthians 8:9). ON TEMPLES AND WILDERNESS TENTSKenneth S. Barker Some time ago I read an article by a Canadian theologian
who suggested that large, cathedral-like churches were theologically inappropriate.
The values they proclaimed to the world: namely, power, wealth and respectability
were precisely the values that Jesus rejected. There was even the mean-spirited
suggestion that clergy who favoured large buildings did so because they
enjoyed ego trips.
ReviewAspects of the Canadian Evangelical experience: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1997.Reviewed by Kenneth S. Barker. When George Rawlyk of Queen's University died unexpectedly
on November 23, 1995 he had recently conducted a significant conference
on Canadian Church history. With funding from the Pew Charitable Trusts
a number of scholars from both mainline and newer denominations had been
gathered at Queen's to present papers on "Aspects of the Canadian Evangelical
Experience".
ReviewJesus Christ and Creation in the Theology of John Calvin by Peter Wyatt. Alison Park, Pennsylvania: Pickwick Publications, 1996. 172 pp.By Paul Miller Jesus Christ and Creation in the Theology of John
Calvin by Peter Wyatt is one a number of recent studies aimed at rehabilitating
the image of the great sixteenth century Genevan Reformer. The book is
a revision of Wyatt's Th.D. thesis.
A Review of:Embracing Transformation: Congregational Mission In a Changing Canada:The Division of Mission, The United Church of Canada (Video and Work book)The Purpose Driven Church, Rick Warren, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1995Growing Spiritual Redwoods, William M. Easum and Thomas G. Bandy, Abingdon Press, Nashville, 1997 John James Transformed. This world is a different place than it was a few years ago. Our communities are different. A transformation has happened. One example. Today I had the Sunday off. No preaching or worship responsibilities. Where would I go to church? Because I live in Niagara Falls I decided to try a neighbouring city, St. Catharines. The service time was 11:00 am. At 10:36 I passed "The Beer Store". Cars were in the parking lot. A red neon sign said "Open". At 10:40 I passed an adult video store. Cars were in the parking lot. A red neon sign said "Open". At 10:45 I pulled into the church driveway. Cars were in the parking lot. I knew it was open even without the red neon sign. We can't turn the clock back to an earlier era. In 1998, on a Sunday morning, as some people are going into church, others are picking up a case of beer or an adult video. Welcome to the 21st century. But how does the church deal with a changing culture? The Division of Mission in the United Church has produced a resource Embracing Transformation: Congregational Mission in a Changing Canada. The resource contains a 45 minute video showing "six very different congregations that are seeking to follow God in mission in the changing circumstances of their communities." With the video comes a workbook with six theme chapters followed by an 11-part small group process for discussing the material. Here's my bias in writing this review: Part of my personal professional growth has been to study transforming congregations - usually in the United States. So a decade ago I went to hear Terry Fullam at St. Paul's Episcopal in Darien, Connecticut. More recently I've heard Bill Hybels at Willow Creek, Robert Schuller at the Crystal Cathedral, Rick Warren at Saddleback Valley and others. My immediate response on seeing the cover was "What does the United Church's Division of Mission know? Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" The answer is yes. Yes! This is a very good resource as a starting point for a congregation wanting to talk about the process of transformation. The opening video segment is captivating. Riveting.
Foothills United Church in Calgary is "a rural church overtaken by change."
The video clip shows the congregation at worship, fellowship and play.
Brief comments are given by a variety of members. (Names of participants
at the bottom of the screen would have been helpful but that's a small
point.) A man who works as a gas station attendant is interviewed. In part,
this is his testimony:
That's a powerful testimony to Jesus presence. At Foothills if someone missed two or three Sundays, they receive a phone call asking "How are you?" That's effective pastoral care. Two women who had been in the church for some years chat about the 1988 sexuality debate. They talk of the need to learn to get along in a family. Of some people leaving. Some coming back. It's a poignant moment. I found myself thinking that if I was in Calgary looking for a church I would give Foothills United a try. The next three segments feature churches in unique situations. Marion Harper Memorial Circle in Winnipeg is a new Native congregation. It's a congregation that blends aboriginal symbols (traditional medicines) with Christian symbols (the Bible and the Cross). Communaute Chretienne de Bethel in Montreal is a congregation of new immigrants, primarily black, who joined the United Church in 1994. The video showed a clip of their dynamic, exuberant indigenous worship - clapping, waving hands and dancing. Westminster United is possibly the most ethnically diverse congregation in the United Church. No wonder, it is in the heart of Mississauga. A rainbow of people is shown. Forty seven different nationalities or ethnic groups comprise the congregation. This congregation endeavours to make its building available to the wider community. Interesting idea. They have a telephone connector who keeps in touch with all the congregation. Seeing these three different congregations in a consecutive sequence on the video reminds the viewer of the broad diversity of the United Church. One concern is that as an overall picture it is not a proportionate representation of united Church congregations. That too needs to be remembered. The fifth segment tells the story of Three Rivers Pastoral Charge in rural Nova Scotia. This is a congregation creatively reaching out to a community in decline due to the closing of a nearby military base. The congregation sponsored a community wide trade fair to help counter the problem of unemployment. The final segment is of Ryerson United in Vancouver, a city church that has experienced congregational renewal through the use of contemporary music and the development of spiritual cell groups. The accompanying workbook, Embracing Transformation,
is well laid out and should lead to some fascinating discussions by participants.
For example, here's one question for reflection in the small group process:
To this reviewer, that is a question worth asking most congregations. The work book includes a section on "Resources for Transformation" which is generally quite good. However, they neglected the two most influential books of the 90's on church transformation. Rick Warren's The Purpose Driven Church and Lee Strobel's Inside The Mind of Unchurched Harry and Mary have by far out-sold every item on the resource list. Unfortunately they are not included. But they are worth reading. On the plus side, permission is given to photocopy whatever is needed from the workbook. That is helpful. Thank you. Almost all United Church congregations could only benefit from using the video and work book Embracing Transformation. While Embracing Transformation is a starting point, it's not the final word. Readers of Theological Digest need to grapple with the principles and theology behind congregational transformation. To further one's thinking two key books should supplement Embracing Transformation. Neither are listed in the resources. One through neglect, as mentioned above, the other had not yet been published. The books are Rick Warren's The Purpose Driven Church, and Bill Easum and Tom Bandy's Growing Spiritual Redwoods. In 1995, Lyle Schaller said "The Purpose Driven Church is the best book I've ever read on how to do church in today's world." In 1997, Lyle Schaller said of Easum and Bandy, "This may be the most significant study book for congregational leaders published in this century." If that is Lyle Schaller's assessment, I for one am listening. Starting in 1980 and continuing till today a remarkable work of God has been happening at a new church started in Southern California. Saddleback Valley Community Church is a Southern Baptist congregation that now has over 12,000 attending its weekend worship. That's nearly as many people as all the United Churches in Toronto combined! Part of the reason is that Rick Warren thinks differently than many other church leaders. For example Warren says that "many churches begin with the wrong question. They ask, "What will make our church grow?" The question we need to ask instead is, "What is keeping our church from growing? What obstacles and hindrances are preventing growth from happening? All living things grow - you don't have to make them grow." (p. 15) The Purpose Driven Church is about church health, not church growth. Warren acknowledges that no one could or should try to clone Saddleback. As he put it "Read this book like you'd eat fish. Pick out the meat and throw away the bones." (p. 71) Purpose-driven. The title tells the theme. Some churches are driven by tradition, "We've always done it this way." Some are driven by personality - the strong-willed leader. Or by finances, programs, buildings, events/activities. Warren reports that in a major survey on the question "Why does the church exist?" nearly 90% said "The church's purpose is to take care of my family's and my needs." Only about 10% said "The purpose of the church is to win the world for Jesus Christ." (p. 82) Healthy churches will have a clearly stated purpose in line with Biblical truth. Saddleback's purpose is based on two statements by Jesus, The Great Commandment (Matthew 22: 37-40) and The Great Commission (Matthew 25: 19 - 20) Two chapters then focus on "Organizing Around Your Purposes" and "Applying Your Purposes". Warren uses Saddleback as the basis for his descriptions. Particularly helpful is his description of the 5 circles of commitment. He draws a picture of five concentric circles people keep moving from the outside to the centre: using his penchant for alliteration. Warren describes his aim to move people from the community to the crowd to the congregation to the committed to the core. Warren then moves to discuss targeting certain people types because no single church can possibly reach everyone. We try too hard to be all things to all people. Read the Observer ads for ministers. Many churches want someone who is effective with youth, seniors, children, likes visiting, is a dynamic preacher and can repair the lawn mower when it is broken! In a chapter on "Knowing Whom You Can Best Reach" Warren claims "You will attract who you are, not who you want." (p. 177) We need to recognize spiritual receptivity, "Growing churches focus on reaching receptive people. Non-growing churches focus on re-enlisting inactive people." (p. 183) In the section on "Bringing in A Crowd" Warren shows his penchant for posing the right questions. Example: "Instead of asking "What shall I preach on this Sunday?" pastors should be asking "To whom will I be preaching?" (p. 227) If we took what Warren says seriously much of the time we would throw away the lectionary. Warren gives lots of attention to designing seeker-sensitive worship. Example: "At Saddleback we summarize the mood we want with the word celebrations. Each Sunday is Easter at Saddleback, so we are fanatical about creating a light, bright, cheerful environment." (p. 264) Musically, Warren recommends speeding up the tempo and updating the lyrics. In the final section Warren describes how to intentionally develop spiritually mature members and then turn those members into lay ministers. There are many great practical ideas in The Purpose Driven Church. Warren explains clearly the teaching program, Class 101, 201 and 301 to develop membership, maturity and ministry. The book is both simple and profound. Of course not everything is transferable to a Canadian context. Sometimes, one has to look past Rick's Southern Baptist bent. Still it ought to be on every seminary's reading list. I agree with Lyle Schaller. The Purpose Driven Church is the best book I've ever read on how to do church in today's world. At least, it was until I read Bill Easum and Tom Bandy's Developing Spiritual Redwoods. Those names should be familiar to most of us in the United Church. Tom is Program Officer of Congregational Mission and Evangelism. With Bill Easum he has criss-crossed the county holding workshops on building thriving, effective congregations. Easum's books continually make the best-seller list in the United Church Book Room. I came to the book with a bias thinking "This will be good." No surprise. It is. The opening page is worth the price of the book. Then it gets better. Easum and Bandy together have asked countless congregations a single question. "How would you describe your spiritual journey?" They then describe how members of declining churches respond and how participants in thriving churches respond. This is only a review. You'll have to buy the book to read the response. It's worth it. A few years ago Tom preached his message "Only The Gospel Matters" to the congregation I serve. Tom said that if it helped to advance the gospel he would throw a brick through our stained glass windows. Scared the heck out of some of our people. He is still beating on that drum. In the introductory chapter he claims, "The body of Christ will sacrifice anything and everything - property, offices, financial security, traditional music, familiar heritage - for the sake of Jesus and the Gospel." (p. 13) The metaphor of the redwood in the forest is used with some success in describing the differences between life in the twentieth century and the uncharted territory of the twenty-first century. The book is organized into 8 vistas (chapters). Vista three describes the growing cultural interest in Jesus and spirituality. "The key question for ministry in the twenty-first century: What is it about our experience with Jesus that this community cannot live without?.... Jesus, and our relationship with Jesus is the very root and foundation of the church which aspires to grow into a Spiritual Redwood." (p. 50) Vista Four, Spiritual Redwoods at worship is an important supplement to Embracing Transformation. Easum and Bandy understand that the worship in mainline churches is cerebral rather than celebrative but are not content to leave us there. There are nuggets of gold on each page. One example: "It is becoming increasingly clear that differentiating worship form and style by generation no longer fits our cultural experience. A new generation emerges every three years - not every thirty years. The eighteen year old who once could inform the Worship Committee about the preferences of a fourteen-year-old now shrugs his or her shoulders in dismay. How on earth should he or she know what a fourteen-year-old would like" (p. 70) Worship in the new century will be: "Visual! Printed material will be cut back or entirely eliminated. Words, songs, pictures, images and symbols will be projected in colour throughout the sermon. Surround sound! Sound systems will be state-of-the-art, amplified and surround worship participants. Music and sound will form a continuous background to worship. Technology supported! Computers, video cameras and monitors, sound mixers, electronic keyboards and synthesizers will be used by trained volunteer technical support teams." (p. 71) Three basic tracks of worship are described. Churches will need a traditional service, a praise service, then the newest track, the sensory worship service. "Worship must compete with MTV and Much Music for the souls of the modern public." (p. 96) How you respond to that statement will colour your response to this book. But Bandy and Easum chart a clear path through the forest for those who want to investigate new directions. Vista Five looks at church organization, the core vision, values, beliefs and mission that shape a congregation. This vista is a call to move from a committee structure to a church organized around people's spiritual gifts. Vista Six looks at the need to develop lay pastors, small groups, and team ministries. Vista Seven describes leadership. "People need to experience God, not be told about God. Spiritual Redwoods require leaders who are spiritual giants. These are not leaders in the traditional ways of Christendom. They do not control the work, manage the work, or even do the work of the church. They are visionaries, synthesizers, and motivators. Spirituality is more important then credentials. No one cares whether or not the clergy are entitled to use the word "Reverend", wear preaching stoles or place abbreviations for "Masters" or "Doctoral" degrees after their names. What matters is that leaders truly live their faith and can readily and joyfully speak out of their own life struggles and spiritual victories." (p. 179) In their blunt, pithy way Easum and Bandy shock us with statements like, "Leaders who work harder, longer and smarter in the same old way kill the church even faster." (p. 181) The metaphor Easum and Bandy use for the leaders of the twenty-first century is that of midwives. "Spiritual midwives will have a Bible in one hand and a pom-pom in the other." (p. 192) This book is challenging but not intimidating. Easum and Bandy have written a pivotal book for those
of us in mainline churches who want our congregations to be vital and strong.
Lyle Schaller is right, "This may be the most significant study book for
congregational leaders published in this century."
EDITORIALTHE PHIPPS' PHENOMENONModerator Bill Phipps has lived up to his promise to put the United Church in the news. Many are questioning if he has lived up to his ordination vows.After all, the newspaper headline quotation, "I don't believe Jesus was God", attributed accurately to Phipps, is obviously in conflict with the United Church's Basis of Union Doctrine. No less contrary to the Basis of Union is Phipps' denial of Jesus' objective resurrection. Granted that Phipps acknowledges that after his burial Jesus began to live in the minds of his disciples and friends, this is obviously a subjective event and equally obviously at variance with St Paul's insistence that the resurrection is a real event. Phipps seems to have focussed on only one word of 1 Corinthians 15--the word "spiritual" in the phrase "spiritual body" (verse 44). We simply note that Paul also uses the word "body" and that the context of 1 Corinthians 15 makes it crystal clear that he insists that Jesus rose from the dead in a real way. The Gospels preserve the mystery of the event by their references to the empty tomb. But they also provide witness to Jesus' objective appearances, just as Paul did. And both Luke and John underline the church's conviction that Jesus is not merely a spirit (Luke 24:39. John 20:20,27). Now Mr Phipps admits that he is no theologian. Why then would he deny Jesus Christ's divinity and physical resurrection? There is a difference between remaining silent before a mystery which one does not understand and denying faith statements that have been affirmed by virtually all Christians of all times in all places. It is one thing for him to attempt to articulate his faith in Jesus and quite another for him to deny historic and universal faith statements. We are compelled to deny his denials. Moreover we are reminded of Emmanuel Principal Earl Lautenschlager's insistence years ago that ministers should preach what they believe, not what they don't or cannot yet believe. What we may not believe will not likely help spread the Gospel. But what we do manage to believe can be used by God to build up the faith in our congregations and in seekers. DOUBT
POSSIBILITY OF DIALOGUE
DIVERSITY OF GIFTS
THE WIDER CHURCH
LETTERS TO THE EDITORBouquetsDear Editor, Keep up the good work. I have been a member of the United Church since 1925 and an ordained minister of the United Church for 55 years but cannot stomach the politics of Marian Best and Bill Phipps. Sidney R. Vincent
Dear Editor, More power to you, friend, in your vital, courageous thrust in the Church's life. I can't say that I see a bright light ahead as I preach around the province. Bill Phipps gives no hope for us in terms of the next 3 years. He is on record as saying that "Jesus is a window into God--one of the best." How enchanted must be the King of Kings and Lord of Lords to have that endorsement! Heaven's best,
Apology demanded Dear Editor, I thank you for your complimentary issue of Theological
Digest and Outlook. I appreciate the articles appearing in this issue.
Fred G. Holberton, D.D.
Editor's Note: If the Coronation Presbytery officers do know the Manual,
then in our opinion they stand convicted of disregarding it.
Bearing Faithful Witness Dear Editor, I have been wanting to know what position conservative
United Church people might take vis-a-vis the paper, Bearing
Faithful Witness: United Church - Jewish Relations Today. I am sorry
to see it listed in Theological Digest & Outlook (Sept. 1997)
amongst the causes for tears emerging from General Council.
(Rev.) Clint Mooney
Editor's Note: We will review Bearing Faithful Witness in the
September 1998 issue.
Palms & Scorpions Dear Editor, I want, especially, to thank you for the excellence
of Volume Twelve, Number Two. They are always good, but this one seemed
to me to be especially so. As usual, I read it from beginning to end at
almost one sitting. I guess the Neuhaus article caught my attention most
of all--likely because of my own experiences.
Fr. Daniel Matheson
Thanks, but no thanks Dear Editor, Enclosed please find the complimentary copy of Theological
Digest & Outlook that you recently sent to me. As I glanced through
it, I found that so much of what your contributing writers had to say was
so exclusive and arrogantly self-righteous that I was left feeling sad
and depressed. I'm afraid I didn't find much at all that reflected "Christian
maturity", only a pressing need to be "right" and share your version
of the truth. I wonder what Jesus thinks about your version of the truth?
Moderator Dear Editor, The moderator has done it again so it is a good thing there is positive print available for the people. Blessing,
The Great Tradition Dear Editor, Thanks for your review of "Reclaiming the Great Tradition"
- it saved a book-greedy Christian reader the cost of adding another book
to her library containing many more books than she can read. Reading intensively,
rather than extensively, this leads her to writing, working out her growing
understanding of Scripture and the Christian life.
Margaret Ryckman
Prayer the key Dear Editor, Your theological digest is the best reading of its
type that I have seen. Keep up the good work. When I think of the state
of the 'church' today, it occurs to me that possibly my fundamentalist
father was right in his view of what he referred to as "the world". We
have imagined that we lived in a Christian land for the past hundred years
or so, but possibly we were mistaken.
An editorial feature:PALMS & SCORPIONSCHEERS & TEARSNotice:Fallible and sinful as we are, we continue to award token of praise or of disapproval to those who, in our opinion, have said or done things of which Scripture and/or Tradition would approve or disapprove. Palms celebrate primarily faithful acts. Scorpions call for repentance. Tears indicate our dismay and our hope for repentance. Cheers usually indicate approval for primarily decent or courageous acts, although occasionally irony may be discernible. We expect to make mistakes in the course of this editorial feature. We will publish letters demonstrating a mistake and/or unjustifiable cries of outrage. To date we have not been made aware of any serious mistakes. We expect to miss many worthies and we know we have; their reward is in heaven or hell, as the case may be. It is because we believe that there is a hell--Jesus is said to have preached more about hell than any other biblical figure--that we call those apparently heading there to repentance and to reconciliation with the God who does not want anyone to perish. We try to check our sources to ensure accuracy. We invite readers to submit nominations with stories and sources. Please write us. See page 2 column 1 for the current editorial address. [PALM] Those who drafted and who signed the Christmas 1997 Confession
of Faith in response to the current debate in the United Church and society
at large regarding the divinity of Jesus Christ and the historical nature
of his resurrection from the dead. This Confession is printed elsewhere
in this issue. The concluding confession of faith is that "We 'accept our
Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour' and take our stand on this truth."
This formula that Jesus is God and Saviour comes from the basis of the
World Council of Churches (1938).
[CHEERS] Those who drafted the official statement by the Executive of
General Council issued on or after November 24, 1997 in response to issues
raised by the interview of the Moderator, the Right Rev. Bill Phipps, with
the "Ottawa Citizen." The Executive acknowledged "that there is pain in
the body of Christ." The Executive held up three words to help clarify
doctrinal standards in the United Church, namely, continuity, context and
diversity.
[TEARS] That the Executive did not address the Moderator's denials. It is one thing for him to express his personal beliefs; it is quite another thing to deny beliefs that are written into the Basis of Union doctrine, such as the divinity of Jesus Christ, his resurrection involving an empty tomb, and the trustworthiness of Scripture. [CHEERS] Doug Koop, editor of Christian Week, for courage in
saying some things that needed to be said about the Phipps' affair, particularly
that the Executive of General Council actually blew their big chance to
dispel some of the stereotypes about the United Church. Koop perceives
three major stereotypes: that the United Church is actually untied rather
than united; that it is the NDP at prayer; and that it is really the Agnostic
Church of Canada.
[SCORPION] W. Peter Scott and Celia Orth, Executive Secretary
and President of London Conference respectively, for writing an open letter
accusing of heresy anyone who said that Jesus was God. In effect Peter
Scott and Celia Orth have labelled as heretics all members of the World
Council of Churches and of the Roman Catholic Church, all of whom say that
Jesus is God. Included in this number of heretics would be the Executive
of General Council, for they affirmed the WCC basis that Jesus Christ is
God and Saviour. Evidently everyone is wrong except Peter Scott and Celia
Orth.
[CHEERS] Rev. Dr. Don Faris, of North Lonsdale United Church,
North Vancouver, for preaching on the topic, "Is Jesus God?" In his hard-hitting
sermon Faris took the Moderator to task for saying that we should look
to modern scholarship such as that of the Jesus Seminar. This is what Faris
said:
[TEARS] That a Professor of Church and Society could compare Moderator
Bill Phipps to Salem Bland of Queen's, to Bishop (later Archbishop) William
Temple and to the Confessing Church's Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Yet Christopher
Lind of St Andrew's College, Saskatoon, did so in a letter to the Globe
and Mail, published December 8, 1997. Apart from compromising Bill Phipps'
modesty, such a comparison raises serious questions.
[CHEERS] David Harris, for acute editorializing in the December
issue of the Anglican Journal. Noting that Bishop Michael Ingham of Vancouver
had his controversial ideas about other ways to salvation overshadowed
by the Moderator's "frank admission that he doesn't believe Jesus was divine
or that his body rose from the dead", Harris went on to make these comments:
[CHEERS] Margaret Wente, writing in the Globe and Mail, exposed
the pseudosociological insight, "Marriage makes men happier, but not women"
for the half-truth that it is. She writes, "In fact, the most credible
studies of family life have one consistent finding: Marriage benefits both
men and women, in about equal measure, for pretty much the same reasons."
So where did the myth of the miserable wife come from? From a book written
aout 25 years ago, The Future of Marriage by sociologist Jessie
Bernard, who found from surveys that married men were much happier than
single men and who concluded that marriage benefits men. But Wente noted
that the surveys showed almost identical findings for women. Bernard, however,
explained that married women only say they are happy because society expects
them to say so.
[CHEERS] Mayor Dianne Haskett of London, Ontario, for refusing
to proclaim a Gay Pride weekend on the basis of her Christian convictions.
The Ontario Human Rights Commission fined her $5,000 for taking her stand.
When the penalty was announced, Haskett was campaigning for re-election
as mayor. Her opponent, the deputy mayor, campaigned on his support for
a Gay Pride weekend. The media called Haskett intolerant, bigoted and a
disgrace to the city. Haskett was so dumbfounded by the Commission's decision
that she quit campaigning. She made no public appearances in the last three
weeks of the election race. But when the citizens of London went to the
polls they re-elected Haskett by a two-to-one majority.
[SCORPION] Prime Minister Jean Chretien & the RCMP for suspending civil liberties at the University of British Columbia campus in November 1997 during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) conference. Craig Jones was arrested for holding a sign that said "Free Speech" well back from the three-metre fence separating him from the APEC leaders' motocade. Students were pepper-sprayed by the RCMP. The Prime Minister joked about it. [SCORPION] The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) for blasphemy and expressing hatred of Christianity. On November 23, 1997, CBC Radio Two's "Brave New Waves" program broadcast the words "Christianity is stupid" repeated many times, as well as phrases such as "Christianity is triggering the murders." (Christian Week, Jan. 6, 1998). On December 15 CBC Television broadcast "Mike MacDonald's Politically Correct Canadian Christmas," including the scene of an actor, dressed like the suffering Christ on the cross, wearing a crown of thorns, and talking about his leather fetish, "I'm into leather, man." (Western Report, Jan. 12, 1998). Apparently Michael Enright has many fellow-travellers in the CBC. Apparently the CRTC rules against hate don't apply to Christianity. And apparently the TV sponsors Shopper's Drug Mart, Russell Stover Chocolates, Business Depot and others don't care about showing contempt for Christ. [SCORPION] Colombia, a country terrorized by drug-related crime
and a guerrilla movement that just might overthrow the government, a country
that has the highest murder rates in the world, now has legalized euthanasia,
thanks to a 6-3 decision of the Constitutional Court of Colombia. The court
ruled that "no person can be held criminally responsible for taking the
life of a terminally ill patient who has given clear authorization to do
so." (First Things, January 1998) We expect that the carefully limited
terms will soon be the key that unlocks the door to wide-open euthanasia
without the patient's consent, as in the Netherlands.
[CHEERS] Last spring, a Toronto teacher asked her grade-school students
how many of them were "pro-choice". All the hands shot up, except for one
little girl's. "Why are you not pro-choice?" the obviously unbiased teacher
asked the seven-year-old, who replied, "Because I'm pro-life." The teacher
continued her interrogation, "And why are you pro-life?" The girl answered,
"Because Mommy and Daddy are pro-life."
A Confession of Faith(produced by United Church of Canada members, independent of anyexisting organization inside or outside the United Church of Canada.)Christmas Eve, 1997In response to the current debate in the United Church of Canada and society at large regarding the divinity of Jesus Christ and the historical nature of His resurrection from the dead, we recognize, That:
We "accept our Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour"(15) and take our stand on this truth. Therefore, we invite all persons within the United Church of Canada to join in this confession. I, (print name) __________________________________________, share in this confession. Signature: ____________________________________ Date: ________________________________________ Address: _____________________________________ Phone: _______________________________________ Check One: __ Member of U.C.Can. __ Adherent of U.C.Can. __ Ministry Personnel in U.C.Can __ Friend of U.C.Can. This Document is available from HTTP://WWW3.SYMPATICO.CA/CONFESSION/
ENDNOTES: (1)Mark 9:29 (2)I Corinthians 12:3 (3)Hebrews 2:14,18
(4)Matthew 16:16, Basis of Union Articles I&II (5)John 1:1-4,14 (6)We
refer here to the empty tomb and Jesus' insistence that he was not a spirit
Luke 24:37-39, John 20:24-27 (7)I Corinthians 3:11 (8)Mark 2:5,10 (9)Acts
4:12, Basis of Union Article IX (10)John 1:1-12 (11)Revelation 21:1, Romans
8:21, Basis of Union Article XX (12)I Corinthians 12:2 (13)John 16:13,
Basis of Union Article VIII (14)John 20:28 (15)World Council of Churches
May 1938..
BUILD UP EACH OTHERGREATNESS IN MINISTRYRev. Leslie McSpadden TEXT: Jesus said: "Among you, whoever wants to be
great must be your servant, and whoever
I was ordained in 1964 and I plan to retire in June,
2000. I have spent a lot of time considering how I want to spend these
last three years because I want them to be creative and productive. I have
seen too many clergy spend the last 3 or 5 or 10 years coasting into retirement.
I don't want to waste what could yet be my best years in ordained ministry.
AN OPEN LETTER TOThe Rt. Rev. William Phipps1250 Bloor St. W. Etobicoke, ON M8X 2Y4 Moderator, I was present yesterday at the open forum in Metropolitan
Church when you were given the opportunity to speak and to respond to questions
and comments from the 600 people gathered.
A Child AsksCAN JESUS TELL ME WHAT TO DO?Mary Fraser Dear Rev.Phipps,
Jennifer is a fictitious little girl. Recently,
however, in conversation with a small granddaughter who is fortunate enough
to be attending a Catholic school where some religion is being taught,
the subject of bullies and forgiveness did come up, and with it, the whole
question of the authority of Jesus.
NEWSWORLD ALLIANCE OF REFORMED CHURCHESUnder the theme "Breaking the Chains of Injustice" (Isaiah 58:6), the 23rd General council of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches (WARC) took place August 8-20, in Debrecan, Hungary.Among the major actions taken by the council was the decision to readmit the Dutch Reformed Church (NRC) as a member. WARC had suspended the south African denomination in 1982 because of its support of apartheid. To qualify for readmission, the NRC needed to meet three conditions: open its doors to more non-whites, give aid to victims of apartheid, and pass "unequivocal" resolutions assuring WARC that it rejects apartheid. The NRC has met the first two conditions and is expected to pass the anti-apartheid resolutions during its October 1998 general synod. Taiwanese ecumenist Choan Seng (C.S.) Song was unanimously elected president of the WARC. Song, the only candidate for the post, is a member of the Presbyterian Church in Taiwan and a minister in the Reformed Church in America. The delegates signed a Declaration of Debrecen as a commitment to work in their specific fields to realize the goals of the General Council. The Declaration of Debrecen WE BELONG--BODY AND SOUL, IN LIFE AND IN DEATH--NOT TO OURSELVES BUT TO OUR FAITHFUL SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST. We confess our theological and moral failures, our complicity in adding to the world's burdens, our inadequate witness to God's purposes. We ask forgiveness from God and from each other for these transgressions, and also for the injuries we have done to one another. Claiming the new life which forgiveness makes possible, and relying on God's promises that the chains of injustice can be broken, we declare: WE ARE NOT OUR OWN. We belong to the living god who made all things and declared them to be very good. We will not exploit and destroy that creation. We will be stewards of creation for God. WE ARE NOT OUR OWN. We believe in Jesus Christ, who died for us and was raised for our salvation. We confess that no human ideology or agenda holds the secret to the ultimate direction of history. We are in all things dependent on our Redeemer. WE ARE NOT OUR OWN. We know that in Jesus Christ we were bought with a price. We will not patronize, exclude, or ignore the gifts of any person, male or female, young or old. We declare our solidarity with the poor, and with all who are suffering, oppressed, or excluded. WE ARE NOT OUR OWN. We believe in the Holy Spirit who will guide us into all truth. We refuse the false assumption that everything, including human beings and their labour, is a commodity and has a price. WE ARE NOT OUR OWN. We are called to be build into a new community in the Spirit of God. We pledge ourselves to a simple life-style which bears witness to God's ordering of the household life. WE ARE NOT OUR OWN. We do not despair, for God reigns. We will continue to struggle against injustice in this world. We look forward to the Holy City in which God will dwell with human beings and be their God. WE ARE NOT OUR OWN. With Christians of the Reformed faith through the centuries, and with the whole people of God, we join our voices to proclaim, SOLI DEO GLORIA! (Source: December 1997 Presbyterian Record)
|
|||||
|
