John 14.1-14
Glad to see you here, today. We should take roll to account
for those select few who might have been taken in last night’s rapture. I’m
assuming their absence is for other reasons, but I wouldn’t want to assume. If
the chosen among us have been teleported to the heavenly banquet, I guess we
are here to witness the decline of this plane of existence. Now being an
optimist, that decline will, no doubt, be interesting. I can’t claim to have
studied the Biblical foundation and logic for the rapture claim. Contrary
opinions were found in most editorial pages including the Washington Post. Without studying the theories I am unsure if the
6pm prediction meant that the rapture would happen in hourly waves as the earth
made its 24-hour rotation? Or if it would be correlated with Greenwich Mean
Time?
I must say that attention paid to these predictions discourages me on the state of religious belief. For one, I worry for those who spent years and risked their and their families well being in the fear of things unknown. I am also discouraged because the believers who receive the most attention are those who seem, to me, to be the most distracted from God’s mission. (Jesus told us that the hour is unknown, so just be ready (Matthew 24.44). That means to me that we should make it a habit to love our neighbor, practice radical hospitality, and serve God in the world. For me, it does not mean to fear for our own future salvation.)
I must say that attention paid to these predictions discourages me on the state of religious belief. For one, I worry for those who spent years and risked their and their families well being in the fear of things unknown. I am also discouraged because the believers who receive the most attention are those who seem, to me, to be the most distracted from God’s mission. (Jesus told us that the hour is unknown, so just be ready (Matthew 24.44). That means to me that we should make it a habit to love our neighbor, practice radical hospitality, and serve God in the world. For me, it does not mean to fear for our own future salvation.)
Recently, Rob Bell, an evangelical preacher in Michigan,
wrote a book questioning the existence of hell. (Love Wins: A Book About
Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived) This was shocking to his more religiously
conservative colleagues because it debunked the core of the individual faith
doctrine. (see Time
article) Their fear was that if there was no threat of hell, then why would
people invest valuable time in religious adherence. If anyone and everyone, no
matter their creed, were welcomed into God’s club, then why would someone
commit him or herself to Christianity?
If Rob Bell were an Episcopalian, his thesis would have been
unnoticed and those who did read it, from an evangelical perspective, would
have shrugged it off as “unorthodox” and “without Biblical foundation.” Why is
that? Why is it that when someone challenges a religious belief, that it is
labeled as radical, or controversial, or unorthodox in an attempt to discredit
it? This is true for challenges to non-religious ideas, as well.
A few months ago when I was flying to Washington after
attending a family funeral, the man seated next to me on the airplane pulled
out and began to read a weathered Bible. For most of the trip, I was able to
read quietly next to him. But as we began our descent into Washington, he made
a comment about his faith and I, without thinking, admitted that I was a person
of faith, too. He, then, asked me what I thought of the ‘lost,’ those who had
not made a commitment to Jesus. I, again, naively spoke of my friends in these
other traditions and what they had taught me about God and how my understanding
of Jesus’ teachings opened doors of inclusion.
I do believe that God is greater than our human
understanding. I didn’t just make this up because it makes things easy; it
actually makes it much more challenging. Our liturgical tradition and the
holistic nature of the Biblical message continues to lead me along that path.
If Jesus wanted us to proof test our faith, he certainly wouldn’t have taught
in parables. He wouldn’t have asked so many questions. He wouldn’t have taught
us to pray. All of these actions require us to use reason in understanding
God’s role in our life. They require us to be open to revelation that exists
within the Biblical truth, but needs to be re-imagined in contemporary
times.
I regretted opening up to my neighbor on the plane because I
knew that one can cherry pick the Bible to support an exclusionary and
self-focused belief, a belief that is all about achieving some reward, rather
than about visioning God’s love extending to all of God’s creation. Verses in
today’s Gospel lesson are ones that are often quoted when pointing to
Christianity’s corner on God. They were the first ones quoted by the man
sitting next to me on the plane. They are the beginning lines of Jesus’
farewell discourse in the 14th chapter of the Gospel of John. Jesus
said, “No one comes to the Father except through me. “ (John 14.6)
As soon as he used that quote, I knew that the debate was
lost. I could only hope for a quick landing and an escape from the awkward
moment. For one, I cannot quote scripture like someone who has been taught to
proof test. Second, just as I disengaged from the conversation because I judged
him as irrational and unsophisticated, he turned me off because he felt that I
had overlooked the core truths of the Bible. There in lies the issue; we each
were so convinced of our beliefs that there was no opportunity for mutual
understanding. Neither of us yelled or screamed, but each of us felt disrespected
by the other.
I could have contended that John’s audience was a small,
marginalized group of believers and that the theology of the Gospel of John
points to the relationship with God the Father available through the
incarnation of Jesus. That verse of scripture that some contemporary Christians
use to exclude other major religious traditions is a call to the early
believers that for them, Jesus is an opening to God the Father. If we were to
state the meaning of the passage to John’s audience it might read, “none of you
can come to relationship, as Christians, except through Jesus who is God’s
Son.“ This is a consistent reading of John who writes of this incarnation in
the 1st chapter of the Gospel by saying that “It is God the only
Son, who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known.” (John 1.18)
But to understand God as only the Father, is to diminish God’s greatness. For
Christians, knowing God the Father is only a part of the Trinity. For those who
believe God can only be known in this way, are reducing God to human
understanding. For Christians, understanding the love of God is found in God’s
Son. Remember another of John’s famous verses, “For God so loved the world that
he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but
may have eternal life.” (John 3.16) Those who believe in Christ can understand
God’s love through the great gift of incarnation, but that does not mean that
we can’t see God active in people of other faiths and in their religious
practices. And there are so many more examples of a theology of inclusion in
the Biblical tradition that requires the interpreter to take a step back from
the oft-quoted verses to see the interplay of the whole.
But a conversation that asks us to reflect that deeply about
scripture’s interconnected nature turns most people off. Culturally, we are
much more comfortable with a quick sound bite, and a belief that is cut and
dry, black and white. We like that because it is easy to pass forward, it
requires little or no risk, and it guarantees us a trophy in the end. This kind
of blanket understanding of faith allows us to join the winning team. It
infests our prayer with hope for preferential treatment over others in God’s
creation instead of realizing that we are a human race called by God to seek
peace, love, charity and equality for all of God’s creation.
Today, we celebrate the ministry of the Rev. Dr. Marjorie
Ann Gerbracht-Stagnaro. For over thirteen years, Marjorie’s love for the
diversity of God’s creation has informed her service to St. Patrick’s. She has
been involved in shaping the young minds served by our Day School ministry with
a moral of open discernment and compassion. She provides all of us an example
of what it means to come to God through Jesus while opening up non-judgmental
relationships of mutual understanding with others who encounter God
differently. She embodies the tension at the heart of the Christian faith for
Episcopalians.
So why is it that the focus on Christianity in the media and
in popular culture is focused on those branches who claim to know,
definitively, God’s truth and God’s plan? I’m sure it is because it is easier
to come to grips with a God who provides all the answers to all the questions.
Why is it acceptable to categorize those who challenge that
belief as radical and unorthodox? I’m sure that is because it is easier to be
settled in one’s faith when those who challenge it are less credible and
outside the mainstream.
Why does God’s mission of love take a back seat to judging
the moral beliefs of others?
I do believe it is that way because it risks our feelings of
superiority and chosen-ness. We like to believe that everything that we
consider important is universally held in the same regard. Historically, the
Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion has lived comfortably in the
tension of doubt and difference. It was, for generations, the binding principle
of a church focused on service, mission, and intellectual understanding and
respect. More recently, Anglicans have been tempted by the desire to set
standards of practice and belief. This desire to find consensus around issues
of deep division distracts the Church from God’s mission to the world. It also
leads to faithful and well-meaning people labeling those who disagree with them
as sinners who have lost their way. I am thankful that the leaders of the
Episcopal Church have attempted to stay above the worldwide fray and have
maintained the counter-cultural tension that naturally exists in God’s
creation. It would be pretty boring if everyone thought exactly the same.
Faith is much more complex than just a means to reach heaven
or to avoid hell. Faith is a response to the blessings of God. I’m not talking
about the blessing of being born in a particular country or with certain means,
it is a blessing that God gifted to all people: free will and the ability to
discern and question and to be curious.
Our response, in faith, is to work to fulfill God’s mission in the
world: to share love with all, to seek justice, and to open our doors to all
people. Fulfilling this task is not done alone. Jesus taught us to gather
around the Eucharistic table, to explore God’s Word in community and then to
return to the world focused on service. St. Patrick’s is such a faithful
community. As we gather to worship in God’s name, to partake in the Holy meal,
and to discern our call to serve, we help each other stay focused on the goal:
that is to be loving and faithful servants of God.
Don’t let the moment pass you by. Join with others in this
community as we reach out to the world through Samaritan Ministry, St.
Phillip’s Food Bank, SOME breakfasts, Horizons Greater Washington, community
building with Native Americans and in our support of our partner church and
school in Haiti. These are just a few of the many ways that we can work
together in fulfilling God’s mission in this world. Stay focused and be ready.
Easter 5A
May 22, 2011
"But to understand God as only the Father, is to diminish God’s greatness."
ReplyDeleteWhat a great and thought-provoking way to expand God's presence in us. Thank you, Kurt.