Simon Rich, “Center of the Universe”
But if God rested on the sixth day, how did we get here?
Simon Rich, “Center of the Universe”
But if God rested on the sixth day, how did we get here?
… and Jim Naughton’s commentary.
The tenth most popular story on The Lead was a brief item I popped up late one Monday evening a couple of months ago, noting that there aren’t nearly as many Episcopalians as there used to be and wondering if we ought to try to do something about that. It was also among the items that drew that most comment.
Naughton gets the significance of that development right, and points out that the Cafe, and probably most other Episcopal blogs, are focused internally, on issues of interest primarily to insiders (“Episco-geeks” maybe?). But the important stories, the developments that will have a long-lasting impact on local congregations, on the health and vitality of the Episcopal Church, and Christianity as a whole, are taking place outside the doors of our churches.
At the end of his piece, Naughton says:
The greatest danger facing our church has less to do with its stand on LGBT issues than with its quickly diminishing capacity to witness effectively on behalf of the Gospel.
I am hoping we can pay some attention to the simple issue of survival in the year ahead.
Unfortunately, he ended on a negative note. To put the issue in front of us in terms of “survival” is to see the problem in terms of the institution, and not the gospel. I don’t think the problem is that we “have a diminishing capacity to witness effectively on behalf of the gospel.” The problem is, we are too focused on institutional questions, on structural questions. We spend too much of our time and energy debating the Anglican Covenant, and have nothing left over for witness.
It’s not a problem of our “capacity.” After all, the gospel was spread by a small, ragtag group of disciples who were uneducated and ill-equipped for the commission they were given. That didn’t matter. They were on fire for the gospel. We need to be as well, or we might as well close up shop now and not waste further effort.
New Year’s Day is a curious thing in the liturgical calendar. We don’t really celebrate it most years; it’s only when it falls on a Sunday that most Christian churches worship on that day. At the same time, however, January 1, because it is the eighth day after Christmas, is commemorated in another way. Traditionally called the Feast of the Circumcision, in more recent times, it has come to be known as the Holy Name, because according to Luke, it was on that day that Mary gave Jesus his name.
We are still in the liturgical season of Christmas, we will be until January 6—the Feast of the Epiphany—but already our culture has gone beyond Christmas to think about other things: New Year’s Day, the Rose Bowl, and the NFL playoffs, to name only three of the biggest. Still, it’s rather odd that we don’t make much religious observance of New Year’s Day—Christianity may be one of the only religions of the world not to make a fuss of it. In most, New Year’s Day is quite a celebration, with everything from religiously sanctioned parties to reenactments of the story of creation. For us, we leave it to the secular world to observe. Our New Year’s Day, the First Sunday of Advent, is focused not on the changing year but on what is to come: the birth of Jesus Christ.
We pause today, continuing to ponder, with Mary the significance of Jesus’ birth as we remember his circumcision and naming. Only Luke records Jesus’ circumcision. For him, it is part of his overall concern to depict Jesus as fulfillment of prophecy and in continuity with Jewish tradition. We see his parents keeping Jewish commandments concerning birth. Every good Jew had his sons circumcised, and every good Jewish mother presented herself at the designated time for purification in the temple. Luke records each of these events carefully, drawing our attention to the continuity with the past even as he makes the case that with Jesus Christ, something quite new, a new age, has begun in the world.
The Christian tradition has a conflicted attitude toward time and the passing of the years. It used to be quite common for theologians and Christian thinkers to make a sharp contrast between how time was conceived and understood in the wider ancient context, and indeed in the world’s religions, and the Christian perspective. One way of making that distinction was to contrast two different terms used for time in Greek—chronos, from which we get such words as chronology. One can think of chronos as sequential time—the passing of the days and years. By contrast, kairos is the irruption of something new and different into that sequence, an opportune moment. In Mark 1:15, the gospel writer uses kairos when he records Jesus preaching: “The time is fulfilled, the kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news.”
There is some truth in this distinction between kairos and chronos, and our liturgical calendar, which begins with Advent and culminates in Easter preserves something of that sense. On the other hand, each year we repeat that same sequence and our celebration of the new breaking in on the old, Jesus Christ coming into the world to make all things new, seems to fall back into a repetitive sameness.
We want all things to be made new, but we experience time and our lives, especially as we grow older, as a constant circling of the years. We want all things to be new, we want to change, and that’s why we make new year’s resolutions: we promise to lose weight, get more exercise, to eliminate bad habits, or to learn new things, but as we all know, those resolutions too often end up broken within a few weeks or months. And it’s not just us. It’s our whole society. One need only to visit a gym or fitness center in the first few days or weeks of the new year to see evidence of those resolutions. A return visit a month or two later will show how few of those resolutions were kept.
It’s a frustrating thing, but quite human to want to change but to find the strength to change difficult or impossible. And so it goes. Time passes; the years circle around, we make resolutions and break them, and we seem stuck in the same old, same old.
In this recurrent cycle, we believe Christ does enter to make all things new. It is that we celebrate in this season of Christmas, when God takes on our flesh, comes into our midst, and gives us new perspective, new faith. But even at those times when such newness seems quite far away, our faith proclaims that God is among us, that God is the ruler of history.
We see evidence of that faith in our reading from the Hebrew Bible today. It is the familiar, magnificent Aaronic blessing:
The Lord bless you and keep you.
The Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you
The Lord lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace.
It appears at a crucial moment in the history of the Hebrew people. Following their escape from the Egyptians and the crossing of the Red Sea, the Hebrews make their way to Sinai where they receive the Law, the Torah, and spend almost a year. Finally, as they break camp, Yahweh instructs Moses to bless the people. In other words, this blessing, or benediction, is both an ending and a beginning. It completes the time at Sinai, and is meant to accompany the Israelites as they make their way through the wilderness. Yahweh instructs Moses to tell Aaron and his sons to begin each day with this blessing. The final word of the instruction explains what is meant by the blessing—with the words of the blessing the name of Yahweh is put on the Israelites, and through those words, Yahweh blesses the people.
We don’t often think about what it means to “bless” or to “be blessed.” In the biblical tradition, blessing refers to or bears witness to, the work of God. It refers to gift we have from God that benefits individuals or communities, whether that gift be physical, material, or spiritual. It encompasses all of God’s activity, from creation to redemption.
To bless in that way is to see ourselves and our lives in God’s hands to recognize that God rules all, time, history, the changing years, and ourselves.
To bless in that way is to put our lives and our life’s changes, in God’s hands, to release ourselves from the burden of wanting to change and not being able to, to put ourselves in God’s hands. To bless in that way also means, and this may be more difficult to understand and accept, that God is working God’s purpose out, in the chances and changes of our lives, and in the chances and the changes of the world.
But perhaps Isaac Watts put it best, in his hymn “O God our help in ages past:
Time like an ever-rolling stream,
bears all our years away;
they fly, forgotten, as a dream
dies at the opening day.
It’s customary for people to look back and assess the past year; hence the top ten lists like those I linked to in an earlier post. Episcopalian bloggers have done something similar with lists of the ten most important stories.
Here’s Elizabeth Kaeton’s take. Here’s another try, from Susan B. Snook.
I’m not going to comment on either one. Around here, of course, the big story was the protests. It was a year of protests, beginning in February and continuing through the summer with Walkerville. This blog saw a huge increase in visitors during the protests and in fact the number of visits has continued to stay at a much higher level than before. More than 21,000 unique visits in 2011. The busiest day was February 22, the day of the interfaith clergy press conference.
I’ve not gone back to reread what I wrote during the height of the protests. One of the reasons I like to blog is that it is a contemporary equivalent of a day book or diary in which I take note of what’s going on in mind and in the world around me at particular moments. I think it will provide a very useful resource in future years as I reflect on my ministry. But it’s also quite raw, caught up in the moment, and therefore probably lacking in perspective.
If there are images that dominate 2011 as I reflect on the past year, in addition to the protests, I would cite the interfaith 9-11 service that we held at Grace, and then Christmas Eve, with two glorious services and an encounter with a very ill homeless man on the sidewalk after the 4:00 service. That encounter became the heart of my sermon at the 10:00 service.
That Christmas Eve experience of worship in the context of the daily ministry in an urban church is the most challenging and rewarding part of Grace’s mission. To worship surrounded by marathoners, or protestors, means that our worship can never be only about ourselves and God, it is also about those around us. Sometimes it’s hard to see the connection and sometimes, as on Ash Wednesday, the connection is clear only to us inside the church.
The experience of 2011 as we became more clear on what Grace’s role in the community should be, has provided a solid foundation for more visible outreach in the community, being a witness to the Good News of Jesus Christ amidst the crowds and noise on Capitol Square.
The LA Times provides a chart: http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/12/la-times-chart-proves-movies-are-getting-worse-and-worse
I haven’t been paying close attention, which may reflect how busy my life is in other ways; but it also probably is due to the lack of interesting movies and the outrageous prices charged for them. I tried to count the number of movies I actually saw in 2011 and am guessing the total is less than 10.
Roger Ebert offers his perspective on why movie revenues were flat in 2011. By and large, I think he’s right. I saw my first 3D movie this month, Scorsese’s Hugo, and I don’t think it was worth the extra money.
But film retains its power to transform us, and to transport us to a different world and to challenge us to think about life in new ways. I saw Descendants this week and was deeply moved. Perhaps I’ll blog about it in the next day or two.
I didn’t get around to thinking about Eric Weiner’s op-ed in the New York Times several weeks ago. In it, he discusses the increased numbers of Americans who identify themselves as “non-religious.” Weiner sees the problem as a result of organized religion. God is not fun, he says and goes on to observe that increased polarization in religion as in politics, leaves growing numbers of people marginalized. He cites his own experience:
In my secular, urban and urbane world, God is rarely spoken of, except in mocking, derisive tones. It is acceptable to cite the latest academic study on, say, happiness or, even better, whip out a brain scan, but God? He is for suckers, and Republicans.
I used to be that way, too, until a health scare and the onset of middle age created a crisis of faith, and I ventured to the other side. I quickly discovered that I didn’t fit there, either. I am not a True Believer. I am a rationalist. I believe the Enlightenment was a very good thing, and don’t wish to return to an age of raw superstition.
We Nones may not believe in God, but we hope to one day. We have a dog in this hunt.
I have no doubt that his experience is shared by many. His proposed solution, though, seems misguided, at best:
We need a Steve Jobs of religion. Someone (or ones) who can invent not a new religion but, rather, a new way of being religious. Like Mr. Jobs’s creations, this new way would be straightforward and unencumbered and absolutely intuitive. Most important, it would be highly interactive. I imagine a religious space that celebrates doubt, encourages experimentation and allows one to utter the word God without embarrassment. A religious operating system for the Nones among us. And for all of us.
It’s particularly ironic, given the response to Jobs’ death. It would seem he is already perceived as a spiritual guru, or even a saint.
I wonder whether Weiner actually experienced religious communities that do not deal with “raw superstition.”
Here’s another take on the same question, from an unlikely source, The Mennonite Weekly Review (hat/tip to Brian McLaren).
Lauren Sessions Stepp writes about the growing trend of young adult evangelicals leaving church which she attributes to this:
I’m not surprised. These young dropouts value the sense of community their churches provide but are tired of being told how they should live their lives. They don’t appreciate being condemned for living with a partner, straight or gay, outside of marriage or opting for abortion to terminate an unplanned pregnancy.
Cathy Grossman at USA Today, covers the story as well, profiling the apathetic or “so whats?” as she calls them. She quotes several conservative religious leaders who see the rise in religious apathy as a disaster for Christians. And other scholars see the rise in non-identification as a significant trend.
But I wonder if that’s the case. Certainly there has been a collapse in institutional religion in the last decade, but does the decline in membership actually reflect a decline in religious interest or affiliation. I wonder how many of those regular churchgoers of a previous generation had rich spiritual lives. How many of them went because of custom, or duty, or civic obligation? The difference may be attributable in part that there are no social consequences for non-attendance at religious services as there might have been fifty years ago.
Top ten religion stories lists:
Religion Newswriters Association:
1. The death of Osama bin Laden spurs discussions among people of faith on issues of forgiveness, peace, justice and retribution.
2. Lively congressional hearings are held on the civil rights of American Muslims. In the House hearings focus on alleged radicalism and in the Senate on crimes reported against Muslims.
3. Catholic Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City. Mo. is charged with failure to report the suspected abuse of a child, becoming the first active bishop in the country to face criminal prosecution in such a case.
4. The Catholic Church introduces a new translation of the Roman Missal throughout the English–speaking world, making the first significant change to a liturgy since 1973.
5. Presbyterian Church (USA) allows local option on ordination of partnered gay people. Church defections over the issue continue among mainline Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Episcopalians.
6. Pope John Paul II is beatified—the last step before sainthood—in a May ceremony attended by more than million people in Rome.
7. California evangelist Harold Camping attracts attention with his predictions that the world would end in May and again in October.
8. A book by Michigan megachurch pastor Rob Bell, “Love Wins,” presenting a much less harsh picture of hell than is traditional, stirs discussion in evangelical circles. Messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention rebut it.
9. The Personhood Initiative, designed to outlaw abortion by declaring a fetus a person, fails on Election Day in Mississippi, but advocates plan to try in other states. Meanwhile, reports show the number of restrictions adopted throughout the country against abortion during the year are far more than in any previous year.
10. Bible translations make news, with celebrations of the 400th anniversary of the King James Version; criticism, notably by Southern Baptists, about gender usage in the newest New International Version; and completion of the Common English Bible.
Peter Lahrmann’s (Religion Dispatches) alternative list
But I wonder if the most important religion story of the year isn’t the rise of the nonreligious?
Giles Fraser, late of St. Paul’s Cathedral, had a radio program on the BBC on Christmas Day in which he argued that:
Following his battlefield conversion, Constantine established Christianity as the official religion of Rome, and he decided that Christ’s birth should become a major focus of the Christian year.
The broadcast is available here. But for a better historical perspective, try Andrew McGowan’s piece in Biblical Archaeology Review. It’s much better history, and much better nuanced, making clear that it wasn’t until the mid-4th century that December 25 became the accepted date for Christmas, and pointing out that there was considerable speculation about Jesus’ birth as early as the gospels, and increasing in the second century. He even goes a long way toward debunking the myth that December 25 was deliberately chosen to counteract pagan rites.
I’ve been thinking about John 1 and the image of the tent or tabernacle. The Greek verb that is translated as “dwelt” in “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” derives from the word for tent. In the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint, the same word is used for tabernacle, the place in which God was present during the Hebrews’ sojourn in the wilderness.
It’s a rich image, evocative of the temporary nature of the flesh in which the Incarnate Word resided and also because of the resonance with the Hebrew Bible, the author of John’s gospel was making a revolutionary statement about God’s presence in the world.
I thought about the image of “tent” earlier last week as I reflected on Paul’s words in II Corinthians while preparing a funeral homily. Paul uses “tent” to refer the flesh:
For we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. 2For in this tent we groan, longing to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling—
We tend not to think of flesh or body in these terms, perhaps because “tent” no longer has a ubiquitous presence in our culture. Tents are for camping, not for living, or dwelling.
Still, there is one way in which that image might take on new power in the contemporary context. One alternative translation is: “And he set up his tent in our midst.” Jim Keane, SJ, sees in this idea a parallel with the Occupy movements.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being.”
What do we celebrate at Christmas? Of course, the answer is obvious, even trite—the birth of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the World. But what do we celebrate at Christmas, what does the birth of Christ mean? Last night we heard the familiar story from Luke’s gospel. We know it well. The images are fixed in our memories, down to the marrow of our bones, the crude stable, the angels, the shepherds. Indeed, so familiar to us is the story that sometimes it becomes difficult to hear it afresh. Luke’s nativity story is as comfortable to us as our favorite pajamas or sweater, as familiar to us as the back of our hand.
Today we heard another gospel, a different gospel, but it too is familiar to us. Its words and images flow over us, surround us. Their beauty and brilliance have been dimmed as well by our repeated hearing of them. What new thing can we say about Christmas? What new or renewed faith, what transformation can come about in the midst of such old familiar stories and words?
In fact, that’s one of the problems with rituals. Human beings are by nature, ritualistic. Ritual takes us out of ourselves and out of our daily lives. Ritual draws us in, brings us into the presence of eternity. We like things to stay the same. We are comfortable with routine. We think things have always worked this way, that, for example, Christmas has always been celebrated in the way we do it today. Of course, that’s not true. We know approximately when Christians began celebrating the incarnation of Christ—it was probably in the fourth century. We know by whom and when the first crèche—the first nativity scene—was erected: by St. Francis of Assisi in the thirteenth century. We know that Christmas was not celebrated in colonial New England, that Santa Claus came on the scene in the mid-19th century, that “White Christmas” and “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” date from the 1940s. We know all this, but when somebody messes with it, we get mad. All of that accumulated tradition combines to make Christmas an evocative and powerful event.
Yet all that familiarity, all the ritual does something else, too. It prevents us from encountering the gospel anew, it keeps us from hearing the words of Luke or of John with open hearts and minds, open to the possibility that Christmas, besides being the “most wonderful time of the year,” that Christmas might transform us, and transform the world.
“In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being.” The profound and mysterious hymn with which the Gospel of John begins makes some extravagant claims about Christ. What is proclaimed in these words is that Christ, the Word, has been present in the world since creation, indeed that the Word was itself the creative process through which the world, and we, were created.
There’s something of an irony here. At Christmas we celebrate the birth of Christ, the coming of Christ into the world, but John begins by asserting that Christ has been present in the world from the very beginning of creation. The problem, of course, is that we don’t get it. We don’t recognize Christ’s presence among us, in us.
In the beginning was the Word… There are few texts of scripture on which Christians have thought and reflected than the opening verses of John’s gospel. The English translation captures only a small portion of all that lies in the Greek word logos that connotes as well, reason, natural law, the order of the universe. And behind the Greek lies the Hebrew concept of wisdom—the idea expressed in the Old Testament that it was through wisdom that God created the universe.
These rich words convey to us something of the faith of the early Christians who confessed them and sang them in worship, but the profundity of what they confessed elude our grasp. What might it mean for our faith not just to confess, but to believe that in creation in this world around us, we see the presence of God, we detect Christ?
We live in a world that loves to compartmentalize and to criticize. We tie things up into neat packages—this is science, that is religion. This is my faith, there is the rest of my life. This is Christmas, that, well, that is the rest of the year. We tie things up in neat packages, even though life resists such neat categorization. We want things neat and tidy, but life is messy. On Christmas, we want to hear the old familiar story, to sing the carols, to go home and have a nice Christmas dinner, exchange presents, and tomorrow wake up, and get back to business as usual.
What we don’t want, not really, is to encounter Christ. Oh yes, we love the baby in the manger, we love the story of Mary and Joseph, of shepherds and angels, we love the warm fuzzy feelings that Christmas is so good at providing. We want Christ on our terms, not on God’s terms.
John’s gospel reminds us that Christmas is not just about all of that. John proclaims to us loudly and powerfully that the Christ who was born in Bethlehem is the Incarnate Word, present in all the universe, present in all our words, present in us.
Christ comes to us, of course, as the little baby in a manger in Bethlehem. But our faith also proclaims that Christ is present all around us, even when we fail to recognize Him. Christ is here, in this place as we worship. We encounter Christ as we gather around the altar and share in the Eucharist. Christ is present, too, in the poor, the homeless, the destitute. May the spirit of Christmas infect us and transform us, that we see Christ in all that we do, in everyone we meet, in our neighbor, and yes, in our enemy, too. Amen.