« April 2006 | Main | June 2006 »

I'm trying to find the best time to blog the Bible Study. I probably will try to blog the Bible Study the first of the week before the Sunday's readings. Hopefully this will give time to prepare, but keep us together looking at the Scriptures for the upcoming Sunday. We'll continue to experiment.

This Sunday is Pentecost Sunday. The readings, of course, focus on the gift of the Holy Spirit. The church year provides the context for reading these texts in relationship to each other, to the gift given to us by God.

Isaiah 44:1-8 brings attention to the middle of the passage:

For I will pour water on the thirsty land,
and streams on the dry ground;
I will pour my spirit upon your descendants,
and my blessing on your offspring.
They shall spring up like a green tamarisk,
like willows by flowing streams.
This one will say, "I am the LORD's,"
another will be called by the name of Jacob,
yet another will write on the hand, "The LORD's,"
and adopt the name of Israel.

The prophet combines images of "pouring" and "renewal" and "adoption" with the coming gift of the Spirit. It seems, as well, to refer to the promise to Abram in Gen. 12:1-4. The Spirit seems to involve incorporation of individuals in Israel, God's elect.

One interesting little piece about the passage is the social background of the image. The imagery of one who writes "on the hand, 'The Lord's" alludes to the markings of a temple slave, one who was devoted to the care of a temple of a particular God. Thus, the Spirit binds one to God as God's very own possession, one who receives life from the very place of God's revelation on earth.

This then leads well to the 1 Corinthians passage (12:4-13). The focus on the Spirit is unity. The passage climaxes with imagery of water -- drinking. How does the Spirit relate then to the imagery of the body of Christ and the unity of the body? What is the relationship between the gift of the Spirit and the unity of the Body? What is the reason for the gift of the Spirit in the passage? What do you notice about the relationship between the individual's gift of the Spirit and the social reality of those gifts? Is individuality opposed to community, personal gifts from a social witness of a group? How have you experienced this? Can you name it in the life of our congregation?

This then leads to the Gospel reading: John 14:8-17. Follow the imagery of abiding in the passage. In the first part of the passage, who abides in whom? What is the purpose of this participation? What is the function, then, of the works made known by Jesus?

In the last paragraph of the passage, whom abides with whom? Given the imagery from above, what is the role of the Spirit? In the Gospel of John, who is truth? What does this suggest about the works of the believer?

How would the group summarize the gift of the Spirit from these passages? How does Easter lead to Pentecost? What is the relationship between the gift of the Spirit and the life of the congregation?

Have a wonderful week!

Posted by johnwright at 8:15 PM | Comments (3)

I have these profound mixed feelings about Memorial Day weekend. Of course, it is a parody of of the church's "All Saints Day"; any Christian must know that Christ died for them, a death participated in directly by the martyrs. There is no saving significance for the death of a solderier who has died in war. Yet there is merit in Christians pausing in mourning about the futility of war, and inability of war to bring peace. It is also important to remember the victims of war, including the soldiers and their families who bear in their bodies the wages of sin as a result of their engagement in battle.

The recent news of the atrocity of the US Marines execution of Iraqi civilians in Haditha makes this Memorial Day more mournful. From what little I've read, I can understand the cycle of violence that makes executioners out of normal human beings. My heart goes out to the soldiers and their families who have to bear the memories and consequences of their actions; of course, I pray for the victims as well. I have less sympathy for the officers who initially covered up the atrocity.

As I have spoken before, I regularly check the blog tcrnews2.com -- Traditional Catholic Reflections. It regularly helps me in keeping both the big picture in mind as a Christian, not defined by America, but by the Christian tradition. Yet it also keeps me recognizing that we are called to be in the world by helpful links to various current issues of the day. I encourage everyone to drop by the site daily.

What brings this to mind is a link to a Znet commentary that was posted there (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=67&ItemID=10325). As we remember, the US legitimated the attack on Iraq because of a change in US defense policy towards preemptive war. As Peter Dyer reminds us:

"One of the most pernicious consequences of the invasion of Iraq is that in the United States it is now apparently accepted virtually without challenge that aggressive war is a legitimate tool of American foreign policy.

I have seen nothing in the mainstream American media discussion of the pros and cons of a “preemptive” assault on Iran by the United States which deals with the possibility that this may be illegal or even morally wrong. So far this is simply not part of the debate."

What does this have to do with the atrocity in Haditha? The Marines actions there could be described not as retributive, but as "preemptive." By killing the civilians after the death of their leader, they were "taking out" the possiblity of future attack. Yet whereas we are shocked by the individual behavior of the Marines -- and rightly so -- we need to see that the whole Iraq invasion and occupation is based on the same reasoning -- the line between preventative/retributive war looks very shaky.

The whole Iraq war is a moral atrocity. No Christian can legitimate it on Just War terms without so radically revising it, that it renders reason unreasonable. The fact that the US has a policy that is directly contrary to a central Christian moral teaching makes it difficult, if not impossible, to have any allegiance to this overall polity. This is not just about the Bush regime; as Dyer reminds us, the United States population and all political groups have basically adopted this position.

How we respond to such a situation, we need the virtues of courage, prudence, faith, and hope. Yet it gives us more for reflection and prayer when the society around us observes "Memorial Day" to remind us again, that we don't belong here. As our reading said yesterday, we are not of the world, through we are sent into the world. May God grant us wisdom.

Posted by johnwright at 1:29 PM | Comments (15)

There are various ways to enter the readings this week. The Exodus passage is key to both. I want to give a little background on the high priests to make this evident. I hope that it stirs your imagination to allow the Spirit to form us in accordance with the Word of God. Enjoy your time together.

Exodus 28:1-4,9-10,29-30

The passage gives the description of the priestly vestments that the priests are to wear. Discuss how clothes set people apart, make them visible. Maybe get a volunteer from the group and do an analysis of their attire. Clothes mark people and offices.

If this is so, how to the clothes "consecrate" Aaron for the priesthood? You could, if you'd like, act this out and "manufacture" the priestly garb on the person and see how it transforms his or her appearance.

What would be the significance of the names of the sons of Israel on the onyx stones? Why would they engrave them on the breastpiece? What is meant by 'judgement' here?

To understand the role of the priest one has to understand the material reality of their role. The Israelite high priest officiated at sacrifices. Man sacrifices were a vegetarians nightmare; I call them "barbeques" as my Judaism professor taught me years ago. The high priest was the "master butcher and chef", the one who oversaw the transference of meat onto the grill (the altar) and then back to the people after it was cooked. The smoke would "rise" to God; some of the meat would be given back to the one who offered the sacrifice and then consumed with the family and friends in honor of God's provision. Of course, the priest would get a cut himself, but also was responsible for preserving some of the meat for the poor who might go hungry without such food.

Now, re-discuss why the special garb might be important to the priest and to the people and the significance of the names on the breast piece. How does the dress then relate to their "mission", their divinely appointed task? What would the intended result of the priestly garments have been?

In light of this, read 1 John 5:9-15. The passage emphasizes Jesus as God's 'testimony' to us. But notice the "boldness" theme at the end of the passage. How does this relate to the high priest's garments? Why should we be bold?

John 17:11b-19 continues what is usually called Jesus' high priestly prayer. How do his words relate to the image of the dress of the high priest? Notice the preservation from the world and the sending out to the world. How is that a priestly image? What is the importance of sanctification? Why would Jesus' disciples be hated? Why should they not be taken from the world? How are they sent into the world? What happened to Jesus when he was sent into the world?

Discuss this imagery about mission. What is our mission as individual believers and as a congregation? What is necessary for such a mission?

Posted by johnwright at 12:41 PM | Comments (14)

It's been a long time since I've posted a rant. So here goes. . .

I still have stacks of papers to grade, end of the year church material, as well as a million little and big projects to pursue. But I have been missing my blog, the strange and often invisible cyber-conversations that take place. As usual, I'm reading many different sorts of things, with my mind a swirl. As many, I find myself caught in this horrible United States culture that is itself caught between a secularism that excludes God from the world (possibly allowing God to take up residence within individual spirituality) in order to protect humans beings from exploitation and death and a type of Protestant cultural Christian religiosity that seeks to keep God in the world by making God the patron God of a certain nostalgic Protestant evangelical hegemonic culture.

I am convinced that these are merely mirror images of each other. Certain socio-economic and political forces legitimate themselves by making themselves "other than" the "other" side, thus perpetuating the atrocities through the dialectic that they set up that goes no where. It is this refusal of the "right" and "left", this refusal to take sides, to take both sides and the same time as as rejecting both sides, that I think that we have to be about. We cannot succumb to the temptation of a Jim Wallis, to baptize a United States left in response to the Southern Baptist baptizing of a United States right. We have to think, not as members of a temporary, failing polity of the United States or any other contemporary nation-state, but as a part of the great cloud of witnesses of the saints who gather around us as we travel onward today.

I've been reading Lorenzo Albacete's "God at the Ritz." It is a beautiful little book, poignant and truthful. Monsignor Albacete seeks an opening to the Transcendent, an opening that is denied or closed by both the secular left and the religious right. Father Albacete guides us past the subjectiving of "God" to a real examination of desire that lies at the base of human existence. By chasing what the secular has placed into the private to its ultimate extreme, he finds an opening back up to Mystery, to the Transcendant, an opening that refuses closure unless social, political and economic coercion forces it closed. As a remedy to the world's ills, ills that are deeply disturbing, ills within which we participate, I'd like to leave a quote from God at the Ritz:

Atheism likes to present itself as the 'open,' liberating way of life when compared with what it perceives as the limiting, self-denying religious way of life. And yet, in terms of the most fundamental desires of the heart, atheism seems to require that we suppress our most intense experiences, the experiences of needs that define us a concretely unique and unrepeatable persons. In short, atheism asks us to suppress the question 'Why?' Yet questions about the meaning and purpose of life -- the 'why?' of life -- will always be with us. They are blunt facts of human life, as outrageous as they may seem.

The desires of the heart -- especially the desire to know why -- should not embarass us. Religion is either the reasonable quest for the satisfaction of all the original desires of the heart, or it is dangerous, divisive, harmful waste of time. If that is the case, Nietzsche was absolutely right: we should be atheists not because it seems reasonable, but because we ourselves will to be so.

In order to be real, consistent atheists, our wills must be educated and trained. This will prevent the desires of the heart from escaping from our deepest regions and embarrassing us when we become senior citizens, falling back on our childhood way of seeing things. In order to achieve this, we need an educational system in which these desires are systematically reduced. We need an education where the possible link with infinity is not even mentioned, an education in which our only recognized link with the stars is that cosmology shows we are made of the same material stuff: all this is necessary to prevent these desires from bursting out of the hearts of our young people, leading them to question every compromise we have made and to demand what our current views of sexuality, our economic system, and our politics cannot provide. If they question the legitimacy of the ruling powers, then knows what might happen? Better to risk their despair than their revolution." (pp. 154-55)

Later Albacete reminds us that the premature closure of these questions:

"To believe we have found the answer to the meaning of life by our religious efforts this side of eternity could also be called idolatry. It happens when we identify an earthly reality as the Mystery, as God, as the source of meaning and purpose. When this reality is an idea or a philsoophical conviction, it is called an ideology. And we all know very well where that leads us.

It's funny -- religion is feared because it leads to divisions, persecutions, and wars. And yet, if religion is authentic, if it's really a reasonable quest for the Infinite and the Eternal, it will be the other way around. Religion will spare us from hostile divisions and ideological warfare and persecution by always pointing us beyond the temporal and definable. It will be a powerful defense against absolutist powers. It is no surprise that totalitarian governments try to domesticate or crush the religious quest.

Still, it is very, very difficult to continue the religious quest forever. Either we knowingly or unknowingly identify the Mystery with an earthly reality, or we begin to wonder whether it's really worth the effort, or we conclude that it's simply inhuman. But when it comes down to it, if you discover the meaning of life at 2:00 p.m. one afternoon, what are you going to do that night? Won't life become boring? More to the point, won't you become boring? Searching, seeking, and struggling at least make you open-minded and tolerant of those whose 'meaning of life' is not searched for where you search for yours!" (pp. 164-65).

Posted by johnwright at 8:56 AM | Comments (3)

This is the second installment of Bible studies from the Book of Common Prayer lectionary -- for a week and a half away (May 21). The Scripture readings are Isaiah 45:11-13, 18-19; 1 John 4:7-21; and Gospel of John 15:9-17.

Approaching the lectionary text one has to remember how the texts fit within the liturgical season (in this case, Easter) as well as they find their place within the drama of the Christian Scriptures. Historical context of the composition of these texts can help us understand them, but the theological context of the life of the church in this time between Christ's resurrection and return provides a more important context. Addressed to a specific historical situation, the lectionary reminds us that they are more fundamentally addressed to a particular people -- a congregation drawn together by the Spirit in worship as part of the church catholic.

The Isaiah text arises in the middle section of Isaiah, a section that speaks of "comfort" to Israel, the people of God, for their judgment is past. Isaiah 45 has a historical setting in the rise of the Iranian king Cyrus to conquer Babylon. The word goes forth that his Cyrus, a pagan prince, will help free the Judeans in exile and deliver them back to their land.

Vv. 11-13

What does the passage presuppose that the people of God in exile are doing? Why would they question God? What is the divine response? What is the significance of God as Creator?

Vv. 18-19 What is the relationship between God as the Creator and the One who will redeem through Cyrus? What is the significance of God speaking as "I am"? What is the function of Cyrus? How does Cyrus, called the Lord's Messiah, in a close by section of Isaiah, foreshadow Jesus Christ?

1 John 4:7-21

Overall this emphasis on God as Creator provides the background for 1 John 4:7-21. What does it mean that the Creator God IS Love? In reading this passage, how do we know what love is? Why is it that the one who loves knows God, then? Why is God's love in Christ (not merely in creation) prior to our love? Why is God's love perfected in our love of each other?

The passage speaks of perfection in love. What is the relationship between faith in Christ and loving each other? What is prior to our love for brothers and sisters within the church? What is all this in relationship to the Spirit? How do we participate in God through Christ by abiding by the Spirit?

Why is abiding in the Spirit abiding in Christ, also abiding in God? What is the importance of perfection in love? Why would perfect love cast out fear? Who is Perfect Love? Why can we then not participate in God and hate our brothers and sisters? What is the relationship between love of God and love of brothers and sisters? Why?

Now, read John 15:9-17 and then re-read 1 John 7-21. How do they mutually enlighten each other? Why would experiencing this be an experience of joy?

What is the relationship between human love and desire and God's love for us in Christ? What is it the divine Love in Christ offers human love? Can love be self-generating, as is often spoken about in certain circles today? Could human love dictate and predict the Love that we see in Jesus Christ?

What are our obstacles to loving in such a way today? Why instead do we fear? What are the sources of fear? Of love? What is the result of love?

Posted by johnwright at 2:52 PM | Comments (0)

I received a suggestion that we shift our bible study passages to the lectionary readings. Since we have a week 'lag time', I'm going to blog on the passages for May 15th. This isn't necessarily the abandonment of Acts; we will get some formal and/or informal assessment after about two or three weeks. So, give me feedback -- email me at jwright@ptloma.edu.

The 15th will be the fifth week of Easter. The readings from the lectionary of the Book of Common Prayer are: Deut. 4:32-40; 1 John 3:18-24; and Gospel of John 14:15-21. As you will see, reading from the lectionary itself demands reading, not merely by the letter, but to find the Spirit in the letter. It is a different process that opens up many different types of readings of the text as one listens for what the Spirit has to say to the church today. What I'd like to do is to take you through the process of listening that I try in preparation for sermons.

First, I read the all the passages, listening for verbal connections, thematic connections, or if one passage speaks louder than others and in a profound way that I and the congregation needs to hear. So start by reading these passages and looking for links, or possibly, one passage that can guide the way into the Word of God, Jesus Christ, by the Spirit's presence. Listen:

Deuteronomy 4:32-40
Ask now about former ages, long before your own, ever since the day that God created human beings on the earth; ask from one end of heaven to the other: has anything so great as this ever happened or has its like ever been heard of? Has any people ever heard the voice of a god speaking out of a fire, as you have heard, and lived? Or has any god ever attempted to go and take a nation for himself from the midst of another nation, by trials, by signs and wonders, by war, by a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, and by terrifying displays of power, as the LORD your God did for you in Egypt before your very eyes? To you it was shown so that you would acknowledge that the LORD is God; there is no other besides him. From heaven he made you hear his voice to discipline you. On earth he showed you his great fire, while you heard his words coming out of the fire. And because he loved your ancestors, he chose their descendants after them. He brought you out of Egypt with his own presence, by his great power, driving out before you nations greater and mightier than yourselves, to bring you in, giving you their land for a possession, as it is still today. So acknowledge today and take to heart that the LORD is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other. Keep his statutes and his commandments, which I am commanding you today for your own well-being and that of your descendants after you, so that you may long remain in the land that the LORD your God is giving you for all time.

1 John 3:(14-17)18-24
[We know that we have passed from death to life because we love one another. Whoever does not love abides in death. All who hate a brother or sister are murderers, and you know that murderers do not have eternal life abiding in them. We know love by this, that he laid down his life for us-- and we ought to lay down our lives for one another. How does God's love abide in anyone who has the world's goods and sees a brother or sister in need and yet refuses help?]

Little children, let us love, not in word or speech, but in truth and action. And by this we will know that we are from the truth and will reassure our hearts before him whenever our hearts condemn us; for God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything. Beloved, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have boldness before God; and we receive from him whatever we ask, because we obey his commandments and do what pleases him.

And this is his commandment, that we should believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he has commanded us. All who obey his commandments abide in him, and he abides in them. And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit that he has given us.

John 14:15-21
Jesus said to his disciples, "If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate, to be with you forever. This is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, because he abides with you, and he will be in you.

"I will not leave you orphaned; I am coming to you. In a little while the world will no longer see me, but you will see me; because I live, you also will live. On that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you. They who have my commandments and keep them are those who love me; and those who love me will be loved by my Father, and I will love them and reveal myself to them."

What do you hear? Any repeated phrases, words? Themes? Who would the group order the passages? What connections do you hear?

Let's come back to this at the end, now, after some connections to the three passages:

Deut. passage: This takes place in a speech of Moses at the edge of the land, before Israel is to go forth into the land (though Moses will be left behind). Can you find the references to earlier passages that the text refers? Why refer to these texts? What is the text trying to say to the people before they enter the land? What is the relationship between the God of Israel as the only God and God's commandment? What is the relationship between God's call at other times and God's future call? What is the relationship between the future and God's command?

1 John passage: What is the relationship between the command to believe in Jesus Christ, love of each other, and the sharing of goods with other believers? How is this related to the gift of the Spirit? What is this mutual indwelling of the Father, Christ, and the believer?

John: What is the relationship between loving and obeying Christ's commands? Can one command to love? If not, how then is this commanded? What is the relationship between the Spirit, again? How does this passage relate to the 1 John passage?

How do these passages describe a life for the believer amidst a congregation, a concrete people of God? What is most basic? What is more tangential, but related? What sort of life/congregation do the passages bring forth?

I hope this helps you discussion! Give me guidance.

Posted by johnwright at 4:09 PM | Comments (0)