« November 2006 | Main | January 2007 »

Five golden rings? No, but reflections on the Incarnation that arise out of the experiences of my life.

I finally turned in all final grades (except for one upon which I'm still waiting to receive the work!) yesterday. I'm humbled and thankful for my students. I probably need to be "meaner" to make sure that students get their work done and submitted on time. Too many other pressures jump in and distract from the primary end of university student life these days. Still the depth of reflection, the connections made, the seriousness with which many take my work with them -- it is very humbling.

It was made more humbling yesterday. We received a call from Nancy Zumwalt in the morning; I was able to call her back in the late afternoon. Nancy and Bill have stood by Nancy's mother, Peorl, for the past five years as her physical body dwindled and her mental capacities left her. Even as Peorl left them, they stayed with and by her in the nursing facility. Nancy called to tell us that the hospice personnel told them that Peorl had most likely entered her final days.

Nancy called last night at 11:15ish to tell me that Peorl had passed from this life to life eternal. I had the profound honor of meeting Bill and Nancy and Peorl in the room where she had died within 45 minutes of her death. We gathered, I read from John 12 and committed Peorl and her body to God through Christ in whom Peorl had lived in faith. We slipped off to a small chapel and we shared and I listened to stories about Nancy's parents and life as we waited for the body to be taken to be prepared for internment. From dust we come; to dust we shall return.

Today I will travel to Vista for a rehearsal for tomorrow's wedding of Liz Brostrom and Chris Schoenthal. It is interesting to move from the experience of last night to the planning for today. From God we come; to God we shall return. The gift of the Zumwalt's and the life of Peorl help to understand what is really the significance of the next couple of days for Chris and Liz.

Yet this also takes place during the Christmas season -- and we understand amidst the flow of life, that it maintains its significance, its meaning, because "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory." As a theologian I also have begun reading a new book by Rudi te Velde, Aquinas on God: The 'Divine Science' of the Summa Theologiae. So far it is a brilliant analysis. At first sight, such an esoteric, technical reading of the overall structure of the Summa seems far from the teaching and pastoral experiences of my past twenty-four and anticipated future twenty-four hours. But I've been struck by the descriptive profundity and truthfulness of te Velde's analysis of Thomas' program in the Summa. According to te Velde:

"Thomas begins by stating that man is directed to God as to an end that surpasses the grasp of reason. . . . Thomas adds a sharp sense of the mystery of God, who is inaccessible to the natural faculties of man. God exceeds the graps of human reason. But human beings cannot live their lives in ignorance of the ultimate end of lie in order to direct their intentions and actions towards it. 'It was therefore necessary for the salvation (ad salutem) of man that certain knowledge about God, which exceeds human reason, should be made known to him by divine revelation.' Thus considering the necessity for men of having some foreknowledge of the end of tehir life in order to live and act in correspondence with that end, and considering the transcendence of God, the idea of a revealtion, of God who reveals himself to men as their beatifying end, makes sense. This reasoning does not prove the truth of the Christian claim to have nkowledge of God received from God himself, but it does point out it intelligibility. Without some sort of instruction on how to orient one's life towards God, as the ultimate truth of the universe, there is danger of getting lost, as a result of which a human life is wasted" (p. 20).

Neither a fideism nor a reason closed to faith can account for these life/pastoral experiences that the past hours have brought and the future hours will bring. The academic, theological, and pastoral life merge together as Thomas so profoundly recognized.

Thus, te Velde speaks about the overall programme of the Summa. It is worthwhile to share an extended quote:

"sacred doctrine teaches the knowledge of God revealed by God for the sake of man's salvation; this knowledge is received by man in faith, through which he has a certain anticipatory foreknowledge of the final and perfect knowledge of God, in which eternal happiness consists. Knowledge of sacred doctrine does not concern only the moral practice of human life on its way towards God as the end; it is also, and primarily, speculative knowledge of God himself, as God himself is present in his revelation as the source and object of man's beatitude. . .. it is also knowledge by which man is led effectively through the work of Christ (and the beneficial gifts of his sacraments) to an eternal life of beatitude in univety with God. . . . sacra doctrina is, in fact, the doctrine of Christ, and that in Christ the fullness of God's grace and truth has become manifest. For Thomas, Christ is the full and final revelation of God whose saving grace is effectively present in Christ and in his sacraments" (pp. 21-22).

To share with others in life and death and life eternal requires a knowledge of our true end in God through Christ. Christmas, death into life everlasting, marriage in Christ, are all intensely theological experiences in which we experience the fullness of their turhfulness through the mystery of God in Christ experience through the church and its sacraments.

Last night when I came back into the house around 2ish, Tony, my sixteen year old, was "bedding down" on the couch in the living room as has been his habit during break. He reached out his hand over the couch to hold mine for a few seconds to ask how things had gone. I had chatted with Johnny, oldest son, on the way home, who was working the 11:00 pm - 3:00 am shift in the "Wecome Center" at PLNU, about working together next week on the quickly approaching interviews with Professors Lindbeck, Burrell, and Hauerwas -- in which I intend to emphasize the medieval, Thomistic background of their work that ties them together in a Thomistic notion of friendship. I crawled into bed, where Kathy was deep asleep and read more on Thomas to get sleepy after the early morning adventures. Each one of these simple gifts of my life took on added signicance in light of the other gifts God has given me -- including Marcos Rodriguez's call this morning to encourage Kathy and I to take some time off together.

Sacra doctrina is not abstract intellectual gymnastics; it is the mystery that opens us to the depths of the truthfulness of our experience. It is the doctrine of Christ.

Merry fifth day of Christmas.

Posted by johnwright at 11:34 AM | Comments (10)

The Christmas season is a wonderful time to read the beginning of Barth's Church Dogmatics. If persons would take the beginning of the Church Dogmatics seriously, misrepresentations of Barth and his fundamental wisdom would become very apparent for us. For instance, he clearly writes that "it is indeed unfortunate that the question of the truth of talk about God should be handled as a question apart by a special faculty, and . . . we cannot find any final reasons to justify it" (p. 5). For Barth there is no final chasm between grace and nature. Indeed, "secular science generally do not have to be secular or pagan. There might be such a thing as philosophia christiana. . . o contest this principle is to combine despair of the world with over-valuation of the Christian world in a way which is incompatible either with Christian hope or Christian humility" (p. 5). Here Barth engages in subtle reference that was going on in Roman Catholic thought during this period, and ending up on the "Catholic side."

Barth reminds us that theology is about truth. There is no fideism here, no emotivism. The church's witness through its confession that we call theology goes to the very depths and nature of reality. "The question of truth, with which theology is concerned throughout, is the question as to the agreement of the Church's distinctive talk about God with the being of the Church. The criterion of past, future and therefore present Christian utterance is thus the being of the Church, namely Jesus Christ, God in His gracious revealing and reconciling address to man. Does Christian utterance derive from Him? Does it lead to Him? Is it conformable to Him? None of these questions can be put apart, but each is to be put independently and will all possible force" (p. 4).

Barth's concern is not the what the "secular sciences" or "philosophy" might say. His concern is to not to subordinate God in Christ to what is already "given" -- to subordinate the gift to the given, for there is no given, only gift, seen in and through the true and perfect Gift, Jesus Christ. Barth recognizes then, like today, "attempts have always been made on all sides to criticise and correct the Church's talk about God. But what is required is its criticism and correction in the light of the being of the Church, of Jesus Christ as its basis, goal, and content" (p. 6). There is no criterion, whether it be justice, liberation, socialism, community, liberty, equality, capitalism, democracy, to which the church's task is held accountable by God rather than the being of the Church, Jesus Christ, the Alpha and Omega. This is the problem with both so-called progressive and conservative embodiments of the church's and individual Christian's witness today. Many "kindly take this aspect into account always miss the real problem by setting it within the sphere of their own sciences, judging the utterance of the Church about God in accordance with alien principles rather than its own principle, and thus increasing rather than decreasing the mischeif which makes cricital science necessary for the Church. The result is even worse when this is done in the name of 'theology' (p. 6).

Barth here criticizes all forms of "mediating theology" or "correlational theology" that finds its way into the church life and witness, ways of trying to make the church's witness relevant by bringing it into line with appropriate activities or causes of the day. To criticize mediating theology is not to criticize the finding of the sciences, or their importance for us. But it is to never subordinate the Gift that is the Being of the Church, Jesus Christ, to another criterion. And here, it seems to me, that Barth is spot on.

Posted by johnwright at 4:34 PM | Comments (6)

My good friend, Rev. Dr. Bob Smith read me a quote from Bonhoeffer this week, embedded in a book on Bonhoeffer that he was reading. I've saved it for today to share with you as Bob shared it with me. Bonhoeffer's elegance is matched only by his truthfulness. Merry Christmas!

"Without the holy night there is no theology. 'God revealed in the flesh,' the God-man Jesus Christ, is the holy mystery which theology is appointed to guard. What a mistake to think that it is the task of theology to unravel God's mystery, to bring it down to the flat ordinary human wisdom of experience and reason! It is the task of theology solely to preserve God's wonder as wonder; to understand, to defend, to glory God's mystery as mystery. This and nothing else was the intention of the ancient church when it fought with unflagging zeal over the mystery of the persons of the Trinity and the natures of Jesus Christ." (from A Testament to Freedom: The Essential Writings of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, ed. Geffrey B. Kelly and F. Burton Nelson (San Francisco: Harper, 1990), p. 472.

Posted by johnwright at 6:55 PM | Comments (20)

The fall semester is over (although I admittedly still have one class yet to grade). Unfortunately blogging has taken a hit amidst the trials, work, strains, and joys of this past fall. I have not had opportunity to respond to comments even as I would like. As we come to the end of the Advent season and soon begin Christmas, I hope to blog consistency over the next several weeks.

Last night I turned to reading Church Dogmaticsby Karl Barth, Vol. 1.1. Barth's text helps me; I find myself in it. Reading Barth is a form of prayer and contemplation for me. I hear Barth's text as if it was written today; yet this volume was written in 1932. One finds in it warnings about what is to come in Germany and Europe, warnings about the church's complicity, the underlying intellectual commitments that made such complicity possible -- not only in Nazi Germany, but also in the atrocities of the Soviet bloc and those of the liberal regimes of those "victorious" in WWII.

The Preface is a short piece, but packed. Barth had to explain why he had given up his earlier theological agenda, a Christian Dogmatics in Outline, to begin how his Church Dogmatics. Barth was concerned that readers could receive his earlier work "to find for theology a foundation, support, or justification in philosophical existentialism" (p. xiii). As Barth rightfully emphasizes, there is no support or justification outside of God's own revelation in Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh, for the task of the church. God is not justified by human works; humans may only be justified by God as a gift, the gift that is God's own Self in Jesus Christ.

Barth seeks to keep Jesus Christ, the Word of God, central already in this preface. In so doing, Barth found himself rightfully pushed towards towards the life of the church, the church catholic. In the preface Barth discovers that faith in Jesus Christ thought rigorously must be evangelical, catholic, and orthodox.

The Preface contains the well-known statement of Barth against the "analogy of being" "as the invention of Antichrist and I believe that because of it, it is impossible ever to become a Roman Catholic" (p. xiii). Emphasis on this, however, misses a deeper theme that runs throughout the Preface -- Barth's commitment to the catholicity of the faith. He argues that "from the very outset dogmatics is not a free science. It is bound to the sphere of the Church, where alone it is possible and meaningful" (p. xiii). He speaks of discovering that "Church history no longer begins for me in 1517. I can quote Anselm and Thomas with no sign of horror. I obviously regard the doctrine of the early Church as in some sense normative" (p. xiii). Even as the Ressourcement thought of the Nouvelle Theologie was building in Roman Catholic circles, Barth himself identifies himself with these same currents. He recognizes that as a result persons will accuse him as engaging in a "crypto-Catholicism" (p. xiii). Indeed, it is only his concerns (a misunderstood concern?) about the analogy of being that prevents him from becoming Roman Catholic, "all other reasons for not doing so being to my mind short-sighted and trivial" (p. xiii).

The significance of this evangelical, catholic, and orthodox commitment comes in chilling words in Barth's sharp, biting polemic against those who would dismiss him as a "crypto-Catholic":

"Shall I rather bemoan the constantly increasing confusion, tedium and irrelevance of modern Protestantism, which, probably along with the Trinity and the Virgin Birth, has lost an entire third dimension -- the dimension of what for once . . . we may describe as mystery--with the result that it has been punished with all kinds of worthless substitutes, that it has fallen the more readily victim to such uneasy cliques and sects as High Church, German Church, Christian Community and religious Socialism, and that many of its preachers and adherents have finally learned to discover deep religious significance in the intoxication of Nordic blood and their political Fuehrer? . . . I can only ignore the objection and rumour that I am catholicising, and in face of the enemy repeat the more emphatically and expressly whatever has been deplored in my book in this respect. It is precisely to this disputed aspect that I am of particularly good courage and sure of my cause" (emphasis mine, p. xiv).

It is thus Barth the catholic who seeks to write his dogmatics free of any moral or political ideology of the age that he might discover in order to make the gospel relevant. Barth had no need to write a "Barthian" theology at all: "The community in and for which I have written it is that of the Church and not a community of theological endeavour. Of course, there is within the Church an Evangelical theology which is to be affirmed and a heretical non-theology which is to be resolutely denied. But I rejoice in concreto I neither know nor have to know who stands where, so that I can serve a cause and not a party, and mark off myself from a cause and not a party, not working either for or against persons. Thus I can be free in relation to both ostensible and true neighbours, and responsible on earth only to the Church" (p.15).

Barth recognized the importance of his commitment to the evangelical, catholic, and orthodox church, even in the face of opposition from "the present-day authorities of the Church" (p. xv) amidst political and moral pressures building within the European culture. Barth's words again sound profoundly relevant for us today: "I am firmly convinced that, especially in the broad field of politics, we cannot reach the clarifications which are necessary to-day, and on which theology might have a word to say, as indeed it ought to have, without first reaching the comprehensive clarifications in and about theology which are our present concern. I believe that it is expected of the Church and its theology . . . that it should keep precisely to the rhythm of its own relevant concerns, and thus consider well what are the real needs of the day by which its own programme should be directed. I have found by experience that in the last resort the man in the street who is so highly respected by many eccleisastics and theologians will really take notice of us when we do not worry about what he expects of us but do what we are charged to do. I believe in fact that . . . a better Church dogmatics might well be finally a more significant and solid contribution than most of the well-meant stuff which even so many theologians think in dilettante fashion that they can and should supply in relation to these questions and tasks" (p. xvi).

Barth concludes with a personal world, seemingly trying to convince himself in face of secular, ecclesial, and personal antagonism to his task, that the endeavor on which he was embarking was worth the effort: "For these reasons I hold myself forbidden to be discouraged" (p. xvi).

"For these reasons I hold myself forbidden to be discouraged." I often say such words to myself. Barth's words in his Preface remind me of Gabriel's words to Mary in the Gospel of Luke: "The angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And now you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you will name him Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his ancestor David. He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end" (Luke 1:30-33). Mary's response is the response of the church, all the faithful when confronted with our true life's task whether it be in technically thinking the faith given to the saints in a Church Dogmatics, proclaiming the gospel to a congregation or an unbelieving world, or participating in the life of a congregation and/or parish in receiving the Word, participating in the Sacraments, and engaging in the Works of Mercy amidst the patterns of our daily life: "Mary said, "Here am I, the servant of the Lord; let it be with me according to your Word" (Luke 1:38).

Posted by johnwright at 9:03 AM | Comments (18)

Sunday is our multicongregational celebration of the Feast of the Nativity, the gathering of the nations in celebration of the gift of the Son of God. We'll dine together afterwards -- I think that the Spanish-language congregation is making some tamales!!! In our Bible Studies, however, we keep with the Advent passages -- passages of anticipation and hope and preparation for the coming of Jesus. I found this wonderful summary of the spiritual rythyms of Advent at http://insightscoop.typepad.com: "An advent, of course, is a coming; the word means "to come to." Advent anticipates the coming--or comings--of the Son of Man: in his Incarnation two thousand years ago, in his future return in glory, and in the mystery of the sacraments, especially the Holy Eucharist. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "When the Church celebrates the liturgy of Advent each year, she makes present this ancient expectancy of the Messiah, for by sharing in the long preparation for the Saviour's first coming, the faithful renew their ardent desire for his second coming" (CCC 524). Simply put, Advent is about being prepared to meet Christ--not on our terms, but on His terms. By preparing us to meet the tiny Incarnate Word of God lying in a manger, Advent also directs our hearts and minds toward the return of that child as glorious King and Lord of all." Hopefully our bible studies can be a time of such faith-full preparation of our affections for the coming of our Lord in light of his first coming.

I think it might be good to read the Gospel reading first and then hear the Epistle reading as a response to the Gospel. The gospel indicates what has happened; the epistle then records a call to our response. We will not look at the OT reading. It is from a deutero-canonical book, a book not accepted as Scripture by the whole church as it is not found in Hebrew, but only Greek.

Luke 3:1-6

We probably need to hear v.1, not through conteporary ears, but the ears of early Christians. Tiberius, Pilate, Herod, Philip, Annas and Caiaphas, etc. are not exactly a "hall of fame." They all were rather notorious to the majority of the Jews, many known tyrants or murderers. The time depicts a rather "down time" -- grim, difficult, violent. The passage marks the chronology in terms of the "significant" persons in the world, those who "make history" according to our view today. The "word of God" coming in such a time ties John to the prophets of the OT. His work contrasts to the work of those just listed. They "worked" by coercive violence to control large population groups.

What does John do? What is John's mission? What gives the warrant, the underlying reason, for his message of repentance, forgiveness, and call to "prepare the way of the Lord"?

Has what John announced happened yet or not? In what sense has it happened? In what sense has it not happened? Where does that leave us? What does John's message speak to us today? How do we go about "preparing the way"?

Philippians 1:1-11

In light of the gospel reading, let's highlight those sections that jump out, at least at me, from Philippians.

vv. 4-5 Notice Paul's talk of thankfulness is all based upon our "participation with me in the gospel." For Paul, the Gospel is the life, teachings, death, and resurrection of Jesus (see 1 Cor. 15). This "participation in Christ" language is very, very important, for it takes us "out of ourselves" where we find our selves and other believers in God in Christ by the Spirit through faith. If you notice, this participation is also the basis for Paul's optimism concerning the extent of the work of the Spirit in our lives.

We often speak of our "relationship Christ" rather than the more biblical "participation in Christ" that characterizes Paul here. Precisely, "relationship" language is never used in Scriptures. I've been reflecting and it is seeming to me, more and more, that this difference between participation and relationship is very different. In a relationship, we have two parties who exist in a 'one-to-one' interaction, with no common ground. "Relationships" are always, in some way, contested, negotiated, subject to power. "Participation" suggests a common good that exists outside of a relationship to order relationships to some good end. For instance, in a football game, teammates do not merely have a relationship -- there is something beyond them, the game, in which they participate that orders their relationship well for the good end of the game. In Christian marriage, the spouses are not merely "in relationship," they participate in a common marriage in God. A society that emphasizes "relationship" finds that the "give-n-take" outside a common good outside the relationship is hard to sustain. One easily gets pulled into deception, denial, and co-dependencies without a common life to order the individually perceived goods of a couple. Therefore, American marriage is "serially monogamous" -- Americans move from one relationship into another relationship that they hope can be more satisfying. For Paul the life of the congregation is drawn together through a common participation in the gospel, not through their own relationships. Reconciliation has happened in Christ; it is then lived out in common participation in the Gospel. Reconciliation is not negotiated through relationships between persons. The church as a community is not what humans accomplish through democratic negotiations, but a reality which believers participate through the gift of Christ that God has given.

Maybe it might be good to share experiences to see if this distinction between "relationship" and "participation" is useful.

If so, can you speak from your experience about this "participation in Christ" and this coming "completion" (or perfection, same word in Greek) of this work. Is there a basis for Paul's optimism that you have experienced upon reflection?

vv. 9-11: Here again is an advent prayer of Paul: What does Paul hope results from this common participation in the Gospel? How does this relate to Christ's future coming? How does overflowing love through common participation in Christ hepl one to determine what is best? Can you share instances from your life where this is so?

It might be fun to conclude to see how the Gospel and the Epistle readings correspond? What does advent, "this ancient expectancy of the Messiah . . . by sharing in the long preparation for the Saviour's first coming . . . renew [our] ardent desire for his second coming"? What does this do for the fundamental convictions, attitudes and practices in which we engage in life?

Have a wonderful time of sharing!

Posted by johnwright at 10:22 AM | Comments (0)