Saving Spirituality

Lately I have been reading Robin Meyer's "Saving Jesus from the Church" a controversial, but terrific book that echoes my own conscience. Along with Marcus Borg's the "Heart of Christianity" it should be required reading for all who call themselves "Christian".

Meyers argues that the church,  through hierarchal structures, has "stolen" the message of Jesus from us and turned the Christian religion into something it was never meant to be. I concur.

We have a sacred story that HAS BEEN STOLEN FROM US! We need to go back to the fork in the road and restore Jesus understanding of spirituality. Dwelling in the "Kingdom of God" as he put it.

We need to understand; that there is no conflict between science and religion. That science is part of the Natural Law that God created and that He cannot be in conflict with that which He creates;

                that  Sexual Orientation is an identity, not a curse, and that women are equal to men and worthy of everything men enjoy; that to keep them from the pulpit and pay them less is unacceptable to the Good News of Christianity and should be unacceptable to us.;

                that the earth, the creation of God, is an organism, not an object;

                that the Sermon on the Mount could save us but cannot be heard among the din of dueling doctrines and the curse of the "American Dream", modern "Rome's" euphemism for a bigger house, a bigger car, a litany of "things" and the trap of individualism and Meism.

                that Christianity as a belief system requires only acquiescence, but that Christianity as a way of life requires Love and Compassion, action toward others;

                that Christianity as a way of life requires rebirth and the conquest of ego, new eyes to see the world,  new ways to reject the kingdom of Rome and embrace "The Way" of Christ, the Kingdom of God, unlimited compassion.

                that Christianity as a belief system requires only intellectual assent  and acquiescence, but as a way of life, it requires action, compassion and love.

                that Christianity has declared war on individual morality but is remarkably silent about the evils of the system, especially corporate greed and malfeasance. 

We are embraced by a blithering array of assaults on our understanding of Jesus Gospel in modern America.  We have the prosperity gospel which tells us God wants us to be rich. We have the fundamentalist gospel that tells us only Christians can be saved, that spirituality is the sole purview of those who follow the human made structure of the Christian religion. We even have an interpretation of the gospel that claims God wants us to own a gun, presumably to put our first amendment rights ahead of scripture or somehow, within it.

These are patent nonsense, twisting the message of God through Christ in order to fulfill an agenda of our own design. It is reminiscent those structures iterated above, the paradigms of Rome.

Spirituality is not about your belief system.  It is about your relationship with God and each other.

Spirituality is not defined by a religion, by the "Law", but by what is in the heart of each of us.

Relationship with God comes from deep spiritual understanding, not adherence to a belief structure. The question the fundamentalist needs to ask is not "have you accepted Jesus as your personal savior"? but rather "now that you have accepted Jesus, how is your love and universal compassion reflected in your deeds"?

Christianity is a faith that was born at the margins of society.

Early Christians used their faith as a means of social transformation in the face of injustice. But the church has often recently become narrow, ugly and retributive. Jesus was never those things. Christianity has bought into the paradigms of Rome unequivocally.

We are all in competition in the "pursuit of happiness" It is a shame it wasn't called the "pursuit of contentment and peace and justice".  In everything we do today there is a frantic quality, even in how we worship. Get there, get er' done and get home in time for football.

We have substituted a "contractual agreement" with God for a "relationship". "I don't sin so I've fulfilled my part of the contract". It is so reminiscent of the Pharisees who were unable to accept Jesus fulfillment of their Law with Love. The goal of all major religions is unlimited compassion...except these days,  for Christianity. It's goal appear to be righteousness of the individual.  I submit that is a terrible corruption of the Gospels.

Discipleship is not about observance but obedience to God's will, following Jesus dictates about the Kingdom of God. It can only be expressed one way Love/Compassion.

The Six Line Invasive Narrative depicted below is what salvation and spirituality mean to the church today.  It is mired in a tale so far from Christ's Good News and so far from Loving each other because it is all about me and my personal transformation. There is nothing about you or the world in this narrative.

The narrative is where we are today as Christians. It is about my personal salvation through acceptance of a belief structure, and little about my transformation as  a human or humanist or Christian.

But where we should be is in tune with personal and social transformation. A gospel which changes the world through our love. Where we, through our local actions, effect change in our community which then effects change throughout the world.

As Brian McLaren states; "Our contemporary gospel in many churches is primarily

 INFORMATION ON HOW TO GO TO HEAVEN AFTER YOU DIE:

with a large footnote about increasing your personal happiness and success through God.

with a small footnote about character development

with a smaller footnote about spiritual experience

with an even smaller footnote about social/global transformation.

We are lost as a spiritual people until we start to REPLACE

The Law of Progress through rapid growth

with the Law of Good Deeds for the Common Good;

until we replace,

The Law of Serenity through Possession and Consumption

with the Law of Satisfaction through Gratitude and Sharing;

 until we replace,

The Law of Salvation through Competition alone

with the Law of Salvation through seeking Justice.

True spirituality is not about the ME.

Years ago, Elie Wiesel the holocaust survivor and Nobel laureate spoke at a ministers conference in Detroit about the book of Job. According to Robin Meyer, he said, "I am not going to try to convert anyone here to Judaism, and I would appreciate it if you did not try to convert me to Christianity. What I am trying to do is be the best Jew I can be so that you can be the best Christian you can be. Let us study together."

May we all study together in the spirit of God, and in the spirit of Love. That is what spirituality is all about.

John P. Middleton

October 2010

Atonement

Atonement

By Prof. John P. Middleton

We may have misjudged, mismanaged and misconstrued Christ’s role with regard to atonement.

First, let me offer the definition of atonement from the Catholic Encyclopedia.

The word atonement, which is almost the only theological term of English origin, has a curious history. The verb "atone", from the adverbial phrase "at one" (M.E. at oon), at first meant to reconcile, or make "at one"; from this it came to denote the action by which such reconciliation was effected, e.g. satisfaction for all offense or an injury. Hence, in Catholic theology, the Atonement is the Satisfaction of Christ, whereby God and the world are reconciled or made to be at one. "For God indeed was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself" (2 Corinthians 5:19). The Catholic doctrine on this subject is set forth in the sixth Session of the Council of Trent, chapter ii. Having shown the insufficiency of Nature, and of Mosaic Law the Council continues:

Whence it came to pass, that the Heavenly Father, the Father of mercies and the God of all comfort (2 Corinthians 1, 3), when that blessed fullness of the time was come (Galatians 4:4) sent unto men Jesus Christ, His own Son who had been, both before the Law and during the time of the Law, to many of the holy fathers announced and promised, that He might both redeem the Jews, who were under the Law and that the Gentiles who followed not after justice might attain to justice and that all men might receive the adoption of sons. Him God had proposed as a propitiator, through faith in His blood (Romans 3:25), for our sins, and not for our sins only, but also for those of the whole world (I John ii, 2).

More than twelve centuries before this, the same dogma was proclaimed in the words of the Nicene Creed, "who for us men and for our salvation, came down, took flesh, was made man; and suffered. "And all that is thus taught in the decrees of the councils may be read in the pages of the New Testament. For instance, in the words of Our Lord, "even as the Son of man is not come to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give His life a redemption for many" (Matthew 20:28); or of St. Paul, "Because in him, it hath well pleased the Father that all fulness should dwell; and through him to reconcile all things unto himself, making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to the things that are on earth, and the things that are in heaven." (Colossians 1:19-20).

The great doctrine thus laid down in the beginning was further unfolded and brought out into clearer light by the work of the Fathers and theologians. And it may be noted that in this instance the development is chiefly due to Catholic speculation on the mystery, and not, as in the case of other doctrines, to controversy with heretics. At first we have the central fact made known in the Apostolic preaching, that mankind was fallen and was raised up and redeemed from sin by the blood of Christ. But it remained for the pious speculation of Fathers and theologians to enter into the meaning of this great truth, to inquire into the state of fallen man, and to ask how Christ accomplished His work of Redemption. By whatever names or figures it may be described, that work is the reversal of the Fall, the blotting out of sin, the deliverance from bondage, the reconciliation of mankind with God. And it is brought to pass by the Incarnation, by the life, the sufferings, and the death of the Divine Redeemer. All this may be summed up in the word Atonement. This, is so to say, the starting point.

In order to deal with the doctrine of atonement, substitutionary or not, we have to acknowledge, as the Catholic Encyclopedia suggests, that “that work is the reversal of the Fall, the blotting out of sin, the deliverance from bondage, the reconciliation of mankind with God. And it is brought to pass by the Incarnation, by the life, the sufferings, and the death of the Divine Redeemer.”

Several allegations need to be excised.

1.      It is the work of reconciliation, a reversal of the Fall of Adam and Eve or “original sin”.

2.      The work is a deliverance from the “bondage”, we assume, only of “sin”, but could we also include “absence from God”?

3.       It represents the reconciliation of Man and God.

4.      It is brought to pass by the Incarnation, the life, the sufferings, the death of the Divine Redeemer, Jesus the Christ.

The question then arises as to what we have to believe as Christians in order to embrace this doctrine.

Regarding the first observation, it appears we should accept “Original Sin” not as metaphor, but as the exact fate of humankind resulting from the “Fall” as literally described in Genesis. Should we then accept the Genesis story of the Fall and disregard other “creation” stories in Genesis? Must we accept “the doctrine of “Original Sin” without question in order to call ourselves “Christian”? Can we consider the story of Eden in a metaphorical sense to describe human/God alienation? What happens to the role of Christ if we refuse to accept “Original Sin” as dogma?

Regarding the second observation, Christ clearly seems to provide a bridge between God and Man by his own sayings, his life, his ministry, his presence or incarnation. That he “delivers” us from alienation into relationship, would be difficult to refute.  Every word he utters and the Gospels as a group reaffirm that deliverance, that bridge, that relationship.

Regarding the third observation, “reconciliation” implies restoration of something that was lost. Without Original Sin what was lost? When and how was it lost? Without a literal Genesis/Eden, what were things like before it was lost?

Once again we are sent to the literal meaning, the fundamental story of Genesis as the ONLY or at least MAJOR explanation for atonement.

For many practicing Christians, that is not sufficient.  Nor should it be.

If I were to avow that we have hitched Jesus star to an ancient, perhaps confused oral story, without much merit or proof; that we have limited his role to one of atonement instead of a more proper focus on “wisdom pathway or Jubilee” or “Good News”; that we have created a Calvary story that satisfies the indentured ignorance of the ancient blood sacrifice of the animals to appease an angry God; that by so doing we are perpetuating a focus that does little to help our theology and nothing at all to help us understand Christ’s real work, would you have issues? Yes, you probably would.

You might first say “Jesus knew he would die and asked God to take the cup from him and then became reconciled to his fate”.

I would answer “yea, verily”. But how does the fact that he knew he would die exonerate atonement?

“What would his death then be for?” you ask.

“Ah”, I say.  Exactly.

We are so focused on the death for atonement, we see nothing else.  How about some other possibilities?

a.       To indicate we die as all animals die, but it is not the end.

b.      To indicate God’s intentional plan for us that transcends all worlds and earthly domains.

c.       To reassure us that despite suffering we will end in glorification.

d.      To exemplify man’s perfidy and cruelty.

e.      To show the path of Rome/the world is flawed.

f.         To show we must die to “this world” to transcend.  

 

“But the blood and suffering….Mel Gibsons vision……!

What about it.  The Romans were cruel, death had been decreed, what else do we suppose might have happened? Is the torture of Christ necessary for relationship with God. Is pain a requirement for heaven/transcendence or is it a symbol of Man’s finite cruelty opposed to God’s eternal love? Did God decree the cruelty or did mankind? Must we humble ourselves before God in pain before we can have a relationship with Him?

“But substitutionary atonement….”, you say.

If you mean Christ’s finite suffering for a few hours/days before his death was somehow a sop to pay God for all mankind’s transgressions until then, I might ask what sort of motive God has to require that sort of cruelty? An object lesson?  A Blood sacrifice required in some pagan ritual as previously noted? Many prisoners of war have endured far more specific and heinous torture for far longer periods of time.  Is it really such a momentous physical sacrifice?

No!  While the death of Christ may have supernal meaning, the torture, blood and suffering have no meaning beyond human cruelty demonstrated.

Earlier, we noted that the Catholic Encyclopedia speculated atonement “-is brought to pass by the Incarnation, the life, the sufferings, the death of the Divine Redeemer, Jesus the Christ.

If we can use the word “suffering” in the same way the Buddha did, that all life is suffering because of our misplaced egoistic desires, we might have little argument with the above citation. But to offer Passion Week suffering as expiation for our sins is terribly limiting and not very much in keeping with our God of “Love”.

How do we define “sin”; as the agent for loss of the kingdom?  Christ does not seem to have described it that way.  He seems to indicate it is more “alienation” from God. We typically have seen Jesus death as “eliminating” Original Sin, but certainly not present sin. His role in expiating present sin is not one of expiation, but one of offering an alternative, the bridge to God.

Our focus is simply too limiting.  We need to see Jesus suffering as an example of how this life offers little deliverance and cloaks us in suffering until we enter the kingdom of God, not through death, but through our choices in this life. This revised view is much closer to the Wisdom tradition and tracks with much of the Old Testament.

As Harvey Cox says in “The Future of Faith”, “Creeds are products of their times. They are road markers of key points in Christian history. They provide invaluable indices of how some Christians thought, not all, responding to largely internal disputes in the past. But to make “believing” them a permanent feature of Christianity today misunderstands the valuable functions they can serve. The numerous creeds theologians have devised over the centuries enables us to glimpse the historical challenges they faced.  But their circumstances and ours are not the same. Only be seeing them for what they are, landmarks along the long path Christianity has trod and not walled barriers, can they help us face current difficulties and opportunities.”

I would want to add that this is not a call to abandon ideology or creeds, but rather A CALL FOR PERSPECTIVE AND FOCUS. Our faith needs to focus on, in and of the Christus, the word of God incarnate, the LOGOS of God, the pathway and the key and not on those creeds, ideologies and barriers that may help us define Godness or provide a lens with which to see God more clearly.  We ought to quit worshipping the lens.

The incarnation, Life and Death of Christ offer us more than great insights into God, great deliverance from evil and the bondage of this life. He offers us the MEANS of salvation, the LOGOS of God, the WORD incarnate, the PATH of righteousness through Grace and the KEYS to the Kingdom he spoke most often about.

Jesus Christ is not about atonement for Adam and Eve, he is about atonement for US, we here today, we here who are still lost, still searching, still confused. He says to us, “It is OK. God knew you then and He knows you now. His is waiting for you to accept Him with faith. Your ultimate death is a transition to a kingdom you can embrace today, now, in this life, with a change of heart; with my baptism of faith. It is a kingdom where suffering is endured, where cancer is not an end, where love abounds and where I always stand to greet you at the door.”

Prof. John P. Middleton

2010

An Open Letter to Christians Everywhere

An open letter to Christians everywhere.

In recent months we have seen a number of events that test our mettle as Christians. Floods, famines,  immigration, Haiti, there seems to be no end to the carnage. Then comes the circuit court's review of prop 108 and the gay marriage issue, and then the possibility of a Mosque within three blocks of the World Trade Center disaster, both of which provoked a response so divided and so deep that no amount of rhetoric can be salving.

As I have said in many previous essays the problem is that we are really not Christians in this country, we are Paulinists, separating  justice and mercy; worshipping Jesus but not following His teaching; creating doctrines rather than witnessing for love. For Paul, a big issue is who is worthy and who is not and what are we to do about it. "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness." (Rom 1:18)  Paul goes on to say all sorts of things about salvation through "Faith".  Those in the modern church seem to have taken him to heart in that they seem to believe "if I have faith in Jesus, I don't have to go out of my way to love anybody."

When people ask "have you accepted Jesus as your personal savior?", our skin begins to itch because of the implications in the question. The questioner is really asking whether or not we have accepted a set of doctrines and creeds, a belief structure, rather than questioning whether we love our neighbor and what we are doing about his misery.

What is called "Christianity" has become just that..... a belief structure.  Being a Christian means accepting certain tenets and constructs.  There are no options for acceptance of virgin births, sun "standing still" in the sky, biblical literalness and inerrancy, judgment of the "wicked", the eschatology of Revelations or the Blood Atonement for the sins of the world. Adam and Eve are real people and the devil is incarnate. And the whole shlamoozal is 15 thousand years old.  If you don't believe it you cannot call yourself a Christian.

Contrast that concept with the earliest followers of Jesus who were known as practitioners of "The Way". "The Way being a euphemism for the unbelievable love they showed one another; so profound that the Romans were amazed.  "Who are these people, they really LOVE one another", they exclaimed.

Their faith was simply to follow Jesus teaching as there was not yet a set of Biblical or church concepts other than the old testament to hang one's hat upon. Jesus teaching, his greatest commandments, had to do with Love of God and one another and dwelling in the "Kingdom of God".  This latter was identified in parables and can only be defined as reiterating the greatest commandments through action. So, these early Christians tried to Love "Everybody" including Samaritans (read Muslims) and Gentiles, Jews and pagans, Romans and everyone else to the point of distraction. They shared their food, their possessions, their money, their time and their love.

As I have often said, "scripture is the lens through which we see God and we ought not worship the lens."  But to even vaguely suggest that the Bible is not an object of worship in this modern Christian Church is to beg for something akin to vegetable pelting at the least. We will not abandon our cherished icons and idols but we have no problem judging and vilifying others. No regard is given for inconsistency in scripture, or simple scientific truth.

You will hear believers say, If God wanted the sun to stand still in the sky, he simply willed it and it occurred. We must suspend all belief in Natural Law. We must first avow it is the Sun moving in orbit and not the earth.  We must then believe God suspended the effects of gravity or lack thereof to achieve this desired result. In short we must believe God interferes in Natural Law when it suits Him.  No question is asked of why he interferes to help the woman lift the Buick with the child trapped underneath, but does not help the millions of starving African children? Is one child more privileged than another?  Was Calvin right and some of us are elect and others not? How can we seriously believe God interferes in Natural Law but still permits suffering. Is he evil? When we conclude God cannot interfere in Natural Law without violating his own creation, where does our belief structure then go?

If we continue to insist on a dichotomy between God and Science we are lost.  There can be no conflict or God's creation is at fault. How can God make a world where science is wrong? If He created Natural Law how can it be wrong? If science is wrong Natural Law is wrong.  Science IS the study of Natural Laws. If we need to claim all scientists are in error because the Bible says so, we are idiots who need to re-read some passages.

This is not some Liberal v. Conservative or Republican v. Democrat issue. This is an issue of a faith gone awry, wherein Christians do not act toward others with love, but hate. The use scripture to defend a set of un-Jesus beliefs that fit an agenda.

Gays and Lesbians are not welcome in this church because.......No Mosque may be built near Ground Zero ....but a Cathedral would be OK............We worship Christ and go to church every Sunday but won't lift a finger to help Haiti or our neighbor in New Orleans......

We have become a sad group of quasi-Paulinists.  To call ourselves Christians is disgusting. It perverts the teaching of Jesus in both Spirit and Law. In order to believe this modern dogma one needs to first believe in hell. But not just any old hell.  No, the hell of eternal burning punishment for misbehavior and unacceptance of dogma entitled "Belief".  Will a good Jew or Muslim go to heaven?  Hell no, he doesn't accept the same principles I do, so God will punish him. God's principle is Love and brotherhood for all. But our Christian principle sure as hell isn't.  Ours is all about retribution, punishment, sin payment and finite evil in an infinite universe. Our version of Christianity has God's wrath more powerful than his love, God's divine and infinite vengeance against little old finite man with his finite sin. His love doesn't overcome.  His wrath overcomes.

Even the cross has become a place for vampire Christians who want Jesus only for his blood. Without the blood sacrifice Jesus becomes nothing. Just human.  We see Jesus as suffering and dying for us but never see Him as living for us. The exuberance of his love is lost in the misery of his death.  It is a backward set of worship standards. All his teachings, all his words, all his love disappear in the passion play.  All that is left is the misery and suffering and none of the joy. 

We ignore his admonishment to the good thief even as he hangs there.  There is no room for love, only for judgment. His blood sacrifice is what we remember, not his words of love.

Even as Jesus says, He that believeth in me...becomes corrupted to " He that worships me but loves no one but himself and those who think like him."  

For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day." John 6:39 NIV.  What does belief in Jesus mean? Is it intellectual assent to his deity? Or is it emulation of his actions and his words? The two are sometimes not harmonious. Even if we acknowledge his deity, are we done? Are we great Christians who say "Here is what I believe" but I will do nothing to help our neighbor because he is .........................(fill in the blanks...Muslim...illegal alien....black...gay...lesbian...indigent...Hindu...Jew...creepy...smells bad  or looks and acts differently)?

We cannot have a Mosque near ground zero because we hate Muslims, pure and simple. It has nothing to do with what a few radical Muslims did to us or what they may still be trying to do with us, or else  all of Jesus teachings about "who is my brother"  and turning cheeks goes directly in the shitter. You cannot claim to be Christian while you hate.

This last few decades have perverted Christianity to the point that we must suffer the Abundant Life nonsense that Jesus wants you to be wealthy.  I have even heard a pastor extol why Jesus wants you to have a gun!  Pure and simple garbage!

To support this kind of belief structure one needs only a few well chosen scripture verses, and boy! They are sure in there. Leviticus teaches us God not only hates homosexuals, but it is ok to own slaves from a neighboring country. 

Lev 25:44-46 44 "'Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. NIV

But these are God's words inerrant and complete aren't they?  Canada here we come in the name of God!

We must stop this!

We must Stop! In the name of God! We must Stop!

There is no hope for the future if we hate. No hope for ourselves. Every time we say "I got mine now you get yours."; every moment we waste in failing to help those in need; every day we sit at home and ponder our devotion to God, how holy we are.......is wasted. It is wasted in pride and hate and sloth and envy and all of the things Jesus warned us of.

We as a Christian nation have embraced the pagan truths totally and utterly.  We are lost if we go on this way.

Prof. John P. Middleton

SUMMER 2010