All posts tagged Christian community

Lesson 4: Three Christian Ways

by Pastor Fritz Foltz on November 23, 2011 in Practical Theology with No comments

A Positive Attitude Can Relieve SufferingI have been using 2000 year-old biblical language to lay our groundwork. Bob reminds us we often must translate this into contemporary concepts by noting that science teaches us natural diasters are not “evil.” Lupe suggests more helpful biblical language used by the Gospel of John to describe evil as darkness that is overcome by light. This presents evil as the absence of good. Her comment on Lesson 3 uses that language to cover the practical ways that Christianity offers for overcoming the suffering of this life.

First, there is attitude. Our faith certainly offers hope. If God is engaged in the overcoming of suffering and evil, then we can be confident that our efforts are not in vain. Lupe speaks of this as “awareness,’ recognizing the blessings and joys of life.

Modern Christians might not agree that God creates all or makes all good. They might not feel comfortable describing God using tribulations to cleanse, not punish, our sin and creation’s corruption. But they share God’s promise to be present among us now and to wipe away all tears in the future. If God is with us in all this, if his love is in and behind all reality; then we can be confident that our suffering can be overcome.

That has a very practical affect. To use medicine as an example, our attitude promotes healing. Those who work with the sick report a positive attitude contributes to healing.

Second, the way to overcome evil is to do good. Paul often defines Christian love as returning good for evil. Lupe says much the same when she characterizes good as positive and evil as negative. She writes that being passive is to change nothing. It is to accept the status quo that causes suffering for so many. To act negatively, believing we can only choose the lesser of two evils, is simply to perpetuate the evil, adding more hate, racism, greed, and violence. Martin Luther King put it this way: “Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars… The chain reaction of evil- hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars- must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation.”

Rather than being passive or taking negative actions that cause us to move backward, we are called to do more and more of those positive things that lead to a better world. Again to use medicine, healing is usually not promoted when we ignore a disease. Nor is disease ultimately overcome when we simply rely on medicines, with all sorts of side affects, to treat the immediate suffering of its symptoms. Real healing involves a response that changes our lifestyle and contributes to long term sustainable health.

Third, there is the support of the Christian community. Lupe implies this when she observes suffering can be made “less terrifying when families envelop each other in love.” This extends beyond the family to the entire Body of Christ. A loving, sharing community helps us overcome our individual suffering.

I plan to go on discussing these three responses in the next lessons. Let’s end this one with Lupe’s conclusion. “All this is to say that I believe God gave us humans the tools, the capacity for good and for happiness. When we do not use them, when we turn away from them, then we allow evil and suffering, like darkness and cold, to take over our lives.”

Lesson 42: How Do We Determine God’s Word – Community 4

by Scott Noon on October 29, 2011 in Doctrine with No comments

When I began my ministry in the early 1960s everyone was talking about Eugene Carson Blake’s proposal for uniting the Church. He urged mainline Protestants to unify before they began trying to reconcile their theological differences. His point was once we obeyed the New Testament call for one Body in Christ, we would become family and then with Jesus’ help we could begin creative conversations. His proposal did lead to the United Church of Christ, but his dream was never fully realized.

Other denominations agreed conversation was the key but reversed the order. For instance, the Roman Catholics and Lutherans entered theological discussion hoping it would eventually lead to institutional union. We discovered once we cleared up the language, we usually believed the same thing. However, again the dream was never realized.

I still think the conversation that takes place in community is a primary means for discerning God’s Word. Norma wonders how decent Christians can read the same biblical passage and get completely different understandings. Certainly one reason is in our present structure people are not reading together and sharing their different takes. We shall always have different perspectives, but we shall never come to a more common understanding until we begin to share these in creative conversation.

This break down in conversation is partially due to other developments that began in the 1960s. Churches began to divide rather than unite. Typical of what happened was the great increase of Baptist congregations in our small borough. When I observed his denomination seemed to be flourishing, a Baptist pastor responded I was missing what was really happening. There was no growth. Those new congregations were simply his members who got angry over minor conflicts and left to start their own churches.

All of this took place when the Holy Spirit was bringing about some of the fastest social changes in history. The society was debating the civil rights of African Americans, women, immigrants and homosexuals. Some churches have hardly moved since the 60s and others have radically changed. All claim “Gott mit uns”. This crisis has led to such conflict that people such as Anne Rice announce they are leaving, because they do not to be associated with the resultant mean-spirited hate mongering.

I find some hope in the current movement that seeks recognition of each other’s communion and ministry. It is not interested in institutional union but rather in gathering around Jesus’ table in the manner Juan described a couple lessons ago. When people share food, they also engage in conversation that shares their thoughts. They compare ideas about where Jesus’ Spirit might be leading his family. .

I saw what that could mean when Gustave Weigel, a prominent Roman theologian, and George Lindbeck, a Lutheran observer at Vatican II, discussed issues separating their communities back in the 60s. Realizing some were disappointed they had not reconciled all their differences in three days, the two went to great lengths to end their conversation with a public embrace, giving a sure sign there was hope in Christ to realize the dream.

I felt somewhat the same thing last year when I spend two weeks with a very, very conservative Roman Catholic layman. Even though it was obvious we were at the extreme opposite ends of almost everything we discussed, he departed asking me to do something nobody else had ever done. He bowed his head before me with the words “Bless me, Father”. That is what shall save the Church in the end, recognizing each of us has something to say to one another, especially when we speak in the name of Christ.

← Older Entries