Irish Bible Institute Lecturer Patrick Mitchell talked to author, theologian and Christian blogger Scot McKnight during his recent visit to Ireland. The interview is published in the latest edition of VOX magazine. Here we look at the second of Scot McKnight's more controversial discussions.
Q: In The Blue Parakeet you talk extensively about women in ministry. Why is this issue important to you?
I’ve had female students who were really fantastic thinkers, sharp communicators and godly Christians gifted by God to teach but could find no place to teach.
In the past I’ve had some colleagues that were really strong against women teachers and I respected them and I thought as a young professor ‘That’s not a battle I want to fight right now.’ I developed the idea that women don’t need men defending them, it’s patronising. So I stayed out of the conversation.
But over time I became convinced that women needed male voices speaking on their behalf. I’m convinced that the Bible has so much evidence of women in actual ministry that conflicts with the restriction of women in ministry in our churches.
I like to ask a very simple question: ‘Do you allow in your churches women to do what women did in the pages of the Bible?’ If you do, you’re being biblical and if you don’t you’re being unbiblical.
In the Bible women can teach (like Priscilla), they can be apostles (like Junia), they can prophesy, they can publicly pray – all these things occurred in the pages of the New Testament, not to mention prophets like Huldah, a prophet-singer like Miriam and a queen of the land like Deborah. In the pages of the Bible we have plenty of evidence of women in leadership.
Join the Conversation... Scot McKnight raises the controversial topic of women in ministry. Share your views below this post.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Conversation Starter part one
Irish Bible Institute Lecturer Patrick Mitchell talked to author, theologian and Christian blogger Scot McKnight during his recent visit to Ireland. The interview is published in the latest edition of VOX magazine. This first part of the interview explores the Gospel.
Q: Scot, you are here in Ireland talking about ‘The Earliest Christian Gospel’. Can you summarise your argument in a nutshell?
I think Tom Wright got this right; we equate the word ‘gospel’ with our understanding of the ‘plan of salvation’ which means ‘how I personally can respond to the offer of salvation in Christ’. I think most evangelicals think that is the gospel.
As a result of studying the New Testament, I became convinced that there are dimensions of what Paul thinks is the gospel and of what the early apostles in the book of Acts preach as the gospel that simply are not a part of how we preach the gospel.
For instance, they were very much focused on resurrection. They didn’t focus on us being sinners and our need to accept Jesus’ death. Instead they proclaimed that Israel’s story (the hope of the Bible story) is now fulfilled in Jesus as Messiah and Lord through his life, through his death, through his resurrection, through his exaltation, through the sending of the Spirit.
This is the good news that God has now wrapped up history. If we want to participate in this good news and get salvation we must repent and believe and be baptised. That was their understanding of the gospel.
I think our traditional evangelical gospel touches on some of those dimensions but there are many aspects that we have simply ignored in Western evangelicalism. In many ways I think we have thinned the gospel down to a superficial level and I want to create a conversation about what the apostles actually said the gospel was.
Join the Conversation... Post your comments below. Do you agree that we have 'thinned down' the gospel?
Q: Scot, you are here in Ireland talking about ‘The Earliest Christian Gospel’. Can you summarise your argument in a nutshell?
I think Tom Wright got this right; we equate the word ‘gospel’ with our understanding of the ‘plan of salvation’ which means ‘how I personally can respond to the offer of salvation in Christ’. I think most evangelicals think that is the gospel.
As a result of studying the New Testament, I became convinced that there are dimensions of what Paul thinks is the gospel and of what the early apostles in the book of Acts preach as the gospel that simply are not a part of how we preach the gospel.
For instance, they were very much focused on resurrection. They didn’t focus on us being sinners and our need to accept Jesus’ death. Instead they proclaimed that Israel’s story (the hope of the Bible story) is now fulfilled in Jesus as Messiah and Lord through his life, through his death, through his resurrection, through his exaltation, through the sending of the Spirit.
This is the good news that God has now wrapped up history. If we want to participate in this good news and get salvation we must repent and believe and be baptised. That was their understanding of the gospel.
I think our traditional evangelical gospel touches on some of those dimensions but there are many aspects that we have simply ignored in Western evangelicalism. In many ways I think we have thinned the gospel down to a superficial level and I want to create a conversation about what the apostles actually said the gospel was.
Join the Conversation... Post your comments below. Do you agree that we have 'thinned down' the gospel?
Monday, July 5, 2010
The Tangible Kingdom
... newest American fad or inspirational model?
Irish church leaders and mission workers from Greater Europe Mission came together in Dublin for a two-day seminar with American authors Hugh Halter and Matt Smay in April. Exploring principles from “The Tangible Kingdom” and their newest title “AND – the gathered and scattered church”, they challenged people to create incarnational communities.
Despite an unexpectedly extended visit to Ireland thanks to a certain Volcano in Iceland, Hugh and Matt appeared unfazed as they took time out to share their thoughts with VOX readers:
We are trying to express that the culture has changed so that the past focus of church does not fit the new context.
We are not saying let’s not do church. We believe that the church is still God’s primary means of reaching culture. Most existing churches want to be missional but they simply don’t know how. The church [as a whole] is not connecting with the culture and we are not representing Jesus well.
If people think the church is working, they do not want to look at new ways of doing it. We need honest critique of the church. The goal is not de-constructing church but re-constructing church. For us, that is loving the church.
Our story is how our church formed by not ‘doing’ traditional church. We lived as a missional community and people were coming to faith, so eventually we had to form a church.
We believe the Kingdom of God becomes tangible to those around us when we integrate three essentials:
• Inclusive community – living among and building deep and lasting relationships with those around us (whether or not they know God).
• Communion with God – helping people connect with God through worship, prayer and scripture.
• Mission – blessing our community, the maginalised and those in need.
Jesus could have become king and changed the whole Jewish nation but instead he chose 12 men and changed history.
Our intent isn’t to try and figure everything out for you, because we don’t have all the answers. We don’t care if your context is mega-church, house church or whatever-church. We don’t think it matters.
In the Irish context you might want to ask questions like:
• Why are we not good news?
• What would be good news to the Irish?
• How can we set Jesus apart from religion? How do you help people to make the kingdom tangible in a religious context?
The VOX verdict?
Hugh Halter and Matt Smay come across with refreshing humility despite their excitement and passion about the model they are ‘living out’ in Colorado. They are deeply rooted in American culture and some of what they say needs to be filtered through that reality; you may laugh at the idea that four years is considered ‘long term’ ministry.
However, there is still much of relevance, inspiration and challenge for us in Ireland. Check out “The Tangible Kingdom” and it’s sequel for yourself and let us know what you think!
To join The Conversation... add your comments and questions below.
Searching for a response by Ken Gibson
The script is already written. The day will come. The King will say to those on His left, 'Depart from me, for I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink” (Matthew 25). “I didn’t know” will not be an acceptable answer.
The nakedness, hunger, loneliness and imprisonment Jesus spoke of are representative of human suffering, but not an exhaustive list. Much of Jesus’ teachings revolve around liberty for the oppressed and justice for the weak. When Jesus launched His ministry, He explicitly demonstrated these concerns:
Justice and liberty seem like sore points with God. Over and over in the Old Testament we read about God’s demands to defend the weak and set captives free. In the New Testament, it was one of Jesus’ primary focuses. Why? Because all humankind is made in God’s image and wherever mankind suffers, Christ suffers.
As always, Christ chooses His words carefully. The King won’t say, “You knew I was hungry and gave me nothing.” No, it’s lack of action, not lack of knowledge that is condemned. On that day, Christ’s people, the Church, will not be able to claim ignorance.
Before we protest and scream, “That’s not fair, I wasn’t aware” we’ll find the warning was given centuries before Christ. God, speaking to His people through Isaiah the prophet commanded them to “learn to do right, seek justice, encourage the oppressed”(Isaiah 1:17).
In this command alone, never mind the full volume of scripture, we see that God places the onus on us to learn - to educate ourselves - in promoting justice. God is even more explicit through the prophet Hosea when He says, "My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge” (Hosea 4:6).
Our generation has access to a volume of information that is historically unparalleled. We’re never more than a click away from a vast world of statistics, figures and facts. There’s no excuse for not knowing anything! The real issue is our desire, or lack of desire, to know.
Experiment now. Open any search engine. Type in “Human Trafficking”. I’ve just done it. In 0.6 seconds it located 3.57 million entries. That’s certainly more than entry-level knowledge. Narrow it down by adding “Ireland” in your search bar. Still overwhelmed? Add “Christian response”. I hate to say it, but now there remains no excuse.
We’re not overtly bad people, we just turn a blind eye to human suffering, assuming someone else is taking care of the “problem.” It’s the government’s job anyway, right?
As Christians, we already have the template. While we were still slaves: slaves to sin, corruption, and our own carnal nature, Jesus heard our cry, giving Himself as a sacrifice to free us. He paid the ultimate price. He set the example.
We might say we didn’t learn, but we can’t say we didn’t know. We might say we were fascinated by the virtual world and the ease with which we kept abreast of our friends’ every fleeting moments and social contacts.
But it’s just as easy to invest that time learning to do right. We were created to love each other. If we just start somewhere, we can someday say, we learned about injustice and we learned to do right. Yes, that’s uncomfortable. We’ll have to gaze at human suffering but these are lives we can change. Jesus calls us out of our complacency. He demands that we serve.
Last month I encountered Anik from Africa. She had been a prostitute. Before you condemn her, consider this. Her passport had been taken and her children were being held captive. Every sexual encounter was an exercise in hope: a hope that her captors would release her children unharmed. They had no such notion. Freedom was denied her, until Christ’s people intervened.
Jesus launched His ministry quoting Isaiah the prophet. “…proclaim freedom for the captives.” In our modern day world, His servants, fighting for justice, made this a reality for Anik and her children. That’s what His people are supposed to do.
The script is already written. The actors are being chosen. Which part for you? Which part for me? Which part for the Church in Ireland? Ultimately, there are only two supporting characters: Those on the left who depart from the King for doing nothing and those on the right, who enter His courts for serving the oppressed.
Today you choose which character you will be.
Ken Gibson is CEO of The Leprosy Mission Ireland, serves on the boards of Christian organisations dedicated to fighting injustice and acts as development consultant to organisations across Europe. Watch out for his book on Overseas Aid being published this autumn!
Join The Conversation: Would you prefer to be ignorant of what is going on in the world? What can you do to avoid the apathy trap? Is cutting down on things like social networking the answer? How should we invest in doing right? Post your comments and questions below.
The nakedness, hunger, loneliness and imprisonment Jesus spoke of are representative of human suffering, but not an exhaustive list. Much of Jesus’ teachings revolve around liberty for the oppressed and justice for the weak. When Jesus launched His ministry, He explicitly demonstrated these concerns:
“The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners” (Luke 4: 18-19)
Justice and liberty seem like sore points with God. Over and over in the Old Testament we read about God’s demands to defend the weak and set captives free. In the New Testament, it was one of Jesus’ primary focuses. Why? Because all humankind is made in God’s image and wherever mankind suffers, Christ suffers.
As always, Christ chooses His words carefully. The King won’t say, “You knew I was hungry and gave me nothing.” No, it’s lack of action, not lack of knowledge that is condemned. On that day, Christ’s people, the Church, will not be able to claim ignorance.
Before we protest and scream, “That’s not fair, I wasn’t aware” we’ll find the warning was given centuries before Christ. God, speaking to His people through Isaiah the prophet commanded them to “learn to do right, seek justice, encourage the oppressed”(Isaiah 1:17).
In this command alone, never mind the full volume of scripture, we see that God places the onus on us to learn - to educate ourselves - in promoting justice. God is even more explicit through the prophet Hosea when He says, "My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge” (Hosea 4:6).
Our generation has access to a volume of information that is historically unparalleled. We’re never more than a click away from a vast world of statistics, figures and facts. There’s no excuse for not knowing anything! The real issue is our desire, or lack of desire, to know.
Experiment now. Open any search engine. Type in “Human Trafficking”. I’ve just done it. In 0.6 seconds it located 3.57 million entries. That’s certainly more than entry-level knowledge. Narrow it down by adding “Ireland” in your search bar. Still overwhelmed? Add “Christian response”. I hate to say it, but now there remains no excuse.
We’re not overtly bad people, we just turn a blind eye to human suffering, assuming someone else is taking care of the “problem.” It’s the government’s job anyway, right?
As Christians, we already have the template. While we were still slaves: slaves to sin, corruption, and our own carnal nature, Jesus heard our cry, giving Himself as a sacrifice to free us. He paid the ultimate price. He set the example.
We might say we didn’t learn, but we can’t say we didn’t know. We might say we were fascinated by the virtual world and the ease with which we kept abreast of our friends’ every fleeting moments and social contacts.
But it’s just as easy to invest that time learning to do right. We were created to love each other. If we just start somewhere, we can someday say, we learned about injustice and we learned to do right. Yes, that’s uncomfortable. We’ll have to gaze at human suffering but these are lives we can change. Jesus calls us out of our complacency. He demands that we serve.
Last month I encountered Anik from Africa. She had been a prostitute. Before you condemn her, consider this. Her passport had been taken and her children were being held captive. Every sexual encounter was an exercise in hope: a hope that her captors would release her children unharmed. They had no such notion. Freedom was denied her, until Christ’s people intervened.
Jesus launched His ministry quoting Isaiah the prophet. “…proclaim freedom for the captives.” In our modern day world, His servants, fighting for justice, made this a reality for Anik and her children. That’s what His people are supposed to do.
The script is already written. The actors are being chosen. Which part for you? Which part for me? Which part for the Church in Ireland? Ultimately, there are only two supporting characters: Those on the left who depart from the King for doing nothing and those on the right, who enter His courts for serving the oppressed.
Today you choose which character you will be.
Ken Gibson is CEO of The Leprosy Mission Ireland, serves on the boards of Christian organisations dedicated to fighting injustice and acts as development consultant to organisations across Europe. Watch out for his book on Overseas Aid being published this autumn!
Join The Conversation: Would you prefer to be ignorant of what is going on in the world? What can you do to avoid the apathy trap? Is cutting down on things like social networking the answer? How should we invest in doing right? Post your comments and questions below.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Evangelical Christians and the Civil Partnership Bill 2009
Following the statement by the Evangelical Alliance Ireland about the Civil Partnership Bill, VOX magazine has offered our Conversation blog as a forum where Christians can share their views on this issue. Below is a copy of the statement. Please join in The Conversation and post your views below.
Statement by Sean Mullan, General Director of the Evangelical Alliance Ireland
The Irish Government has published a Bill that will establish Civil Partnerships for same sex couples to give them rights, obligations and protections once they are registered with the state. Many of the rights are similar to those currently offered to married couples under Irish Law.
What is the Civil Partnership Bill 2009?
The Bill
The Bill is the Government’s response to the fact that same-sex couples are now a part of life in Ireland and to political pressure to legislate for gay marriage. The Bill’s aim is to provide rights, obligations and protections for same sex couples that are, in many ways equivalent to those which are provided under law for married couples. In addition the Bill provides some protection for other cohabiting relationships but this protection is limited compared to what the Bill provides for same-sex couples who register as civil partners. (Full details of the Bill are available at http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2009/4409/b4409d-memo.pdf )
The Context of the Bill
The context in which the Bill arises is that of a radically changed Irish society. While by international standards Irish marriages are reasonably robust there are huge changes taking place. Co-habiting couples are now the fastest growing type of household in Ireland and less than one in five households in Dublin are “traditional” families i.e. a married couple with children. One third of all births are outside marriage and marital breakdown is approaching 10% (all based on Census 2006 figures). Same-sex couples have become a part of Ireland’s social fabric and there has been a growing pressure both from within Ireland and outside to provide legislative protection for same-sex couples.
Responses to the Bill
The Bill is opposed by people on numerous sides of the social cultural debate.
1) It is opposed by those who want homosexual couples to be allowed marry because the Bill doesn’t include the word “marriage” and does not confer rights to adopt children. They see this as being unfair and treating homosexuals as second class citizens.
2) It is opposed on the other side by those who believe that the Government is actually legislating for homosexual “marriage” and believe that this will undermine the commonly held view of marriage which, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in 1995, means “the voluntary and permanent union of a one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others for life”.
3) The Bill is also opposed by those who believe it will infringe on the freedom of conscience of those who disagree with same-sex civil partnerships. They believe that the Bill will be used to punish those who refuse to facilitate civil partnership ceremonies. Some people in this group are willing to support the Bill if an opt-out clause is added for those who do not wish to facilitate such ceremonies for conscientious reasons.
Despite the variety of opposition it appears that the Bill would have the support of a majority of people in the State who now see providing legal protection for same-sex couples as a human rights issue.
What the Bill does and does not do
The Bill is 118 pages long and is a complex piece of legislation. One expert says it is “the most far-reaching reform of family law in a generation.” But the Bill does not redefine marriage. This would require a Constitutional Referendum. What it does is legislate for relationships outside of marriage.
The Bill offers to same-sex couples the opportunity to have their relationship legally recognised and registered by the State. The registration of the partnership would take place before a State-appointed Registrar. The Bill provides for a ceremony to take place should the couple choose it but this would only be a civil ceremony. There is no legal provision for a religious ceremony.
The Bill provides for rights and protections for same-sex couples in areas such as
1) Protection of the couple’s home
2) Tax
3) Inheritance rights
4) Hospital visitation rights
5) Pensions
6) Maintenance payments
7) Separation and dissolution of the partnership
There is no provision in the Bill for same sex couples to adopt children. Nor is there any provision in the Bill for the protection of children in the event of a civil partnership being dissolved.
The Bill does not directly challenge the traditional understanding of marriage in Ireland. It is a piece of civil legislation that establishes a new form of civil relationship under law. The Bill does not deal with religious matters.
How should evangelical Christians respond?
We suggest that evangelical Christians should support the basic thrust of the Bill. The Government is seeking to legislate for greater justice and fairness for co-habiting couples, both same-sex and opposite-sex couples. As Christians we should support that stance. Co-habiting couples are a reality – this legislation seeks to deal with that reality from a legal perspective. We may disagree on the detail of the legislation but as followers of a just and compassionate God we can recognise the justice and fairness of providing some legal protection for the reality of both same-sex and opposite-sex cohabitating relationships.
Why do we say this?
There are a number of important Biblical and practical principles that have led us to this conclusion. As evangelical Christians our response to any situation should be shaped firstly by our understanding of who God is and how he acts in the world. The Scriptures are our foundation for this understanding. Jesus has come to the world, has died for love of all people in the world, has risen and will return to judge and rule the world. These realities must shape all we think and say and do.
The Christian Scriptures make it clear that God’s purpose for his gift of sex is that it would be the ultimate physical expression of love between a man and a woman in the context of the covenant of marriage. However, the Gospel requires of us that we show grace to those who fundamentally disagree with our convictions and who do not shape their lives according to what we believe is good for them. Jesus requires of his followers that they love and do good to those who oppose them or who hold to different ethical standards than they do.
The question we face is how followers of Jesus Christ are to live in a society that does not believe as they do and may even oppose principles we hold to, seeing them as out-dated, illiberal and even oppressive.
How do we move forward?
Some will criticize such a stance as a “cop out.” But the challenge to incarnate and commend an alternative way of living as followers of Jesus is no cop out. We face this challenge of showing the power and beauty of marriage as God’s intended context for sex, for the raising of children and for the thriving of society. We face the challenge of showing the strength of friendships, both same gender and opposite gender, that are based on loving as Jesus has loved us. Facing these challenges is no cop out. It is the essence of Christian discipleship.
The freedom of conscience issue
Churches or individual Christians may be fearful that the new Bill will be used to force them to co-operate with ceremonies to which they have a conscientious objection. It does seem from the text of the Bill that this is a possibility, however unlikely it may be in reality.
On a legal level, such enforcement would seem to clearly contradict the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights 2000 which guarantees “freedom of thought, conscience and religion.” However as followers of Jesus we can remember that he envisages such difficulties for his followers and prepares us for how we should respond to them.
Fighting for our rights on this one emotive and controversial issue is likely to be misunderstood and unproductive. However, given the importance of the freedom of conscience issue it may be wise to begin engagement on the issue with government and other interested bodies without narrowing it down to this one Bill.
Evangelical Christians should be the foremost advocates of freedom of conscience and religious liberty. It is the essence of the Christian faith that it is freely chosen, never imposed. It is a tragedy of church history that the church ever thought it could use the power of the state to impose Christianity on people. With that power now almost completely gone we live in different times.
As Canadian theologian John Stackhouse cautions us:
“Indeed we should use what influence we have left to help construct the sort of society in which we ourselves would like to live once our power to affect it has disappeared. ... How unseemly it is for Christians to fight in the courts and legislatures for what remains of the dubious honors and advantages of Christendom. There is no more prudent time to do unto others as we would have them do unto us.”Making the Best of It: Following Christ in the Real World p 346.
Conclusion
Evangelical Christians have no automatic right to have their views preferred to those of others. Nor do we have a duty to try and impose Biblical morality on public life by force of law. We are in a new social situation in which the religious identity markers are losing their meaning in non-religious society. But why should we be afraid? If we are called to live as a minority in a society that no longer pays Christianity any particular respect then so be it. The early church lived in such a society and flourished. Christian churches live in such societies today and thrive.
It is possible to both articulate and live Christian values in a way that contributes to the debate on the lost point of moral reference in public life. In doing this we can and should support the notion of a public square in which all voices are free to present their case and argue for it in public life, including religious voices. In that arena it is up to us to argue and show that the way of following Jesus is the most attractive, the most intellectually coherent and the most life-giving way of all.
I wish to thank all those in the advisory group who helped me with the drafting of this statement. Sean Mullan
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Spoilt for Choice by Warren Nelson
Choice and variety are strong selling points - ask any shopper. The attraction of the bigger shop, and the colourful catalogue, is in the amount of choice they offer us. We walk past the shop that only carries one type or brand of item.
Yet in the area of our faith and beliefs we quickly settle for one way of expressing what it is to be a believer. Maybe we feel safe with descriptions like ‘saved’ or ‘born again’ or even the more neutral ‘being a follower’ ‘a believer’ or ‘having a fulfilling relationship’. No wonder people soon walk past us; no wonder they soon stop listening to what we want to say.
This should not be because we have in the Bible a wealth of ways to express the privilege and blessings of being a Christian. The authors of Scripture used an abundance of rich and varied ideas to convey the greatness and wonder of their new life.
They spoke of being: In Christ; raised with Christ, citizens of heaven, or God’s own. They knew they had passed from death to life; they had been washed and renewed. They described themselves as living stones, heirs and children of God and a new creation. They had realized that God had said “Yes” to them in Christ. And so on...
There are dozens of pictures describing our new standing. You could do worse that note them down for yourself as you read the Scriptures, perhaps starting with all the descriptions given in Ephesians chapter 1.
If we make an effort to discover what we have, and are, more fully, then it will enrich our own faith as we explore our privileges and responsibilities. It will also help cooperation with other believers, because avoidable misunderstandings often occur merely because two believers are using different, and equally valid, biblical pictures to describe the same reality and experience.
Also, getting back to the shopping analogy, our witness will be more attractive. We will be using all the rich and varied resources given to us share our message with others. We should realise that people, being diverse in temperament and interests, will respond differently to ideas or explanations. If one way of telling our story doesn’t work, try another. We are provided with plenty to use. Like Paul we should be all things to people in order to win some.
A carpenter watched as his apprentice, making short shaky erratic strokes, tried to saw a piece of wood. Taking the saw the carpenter soon cut through the wood with long smooth confident strokes.
Turning to the apprentice he said “You bought all of the saw, so use all of it”. We have a storehouse, laden with truth in all its shapes, sizes and colours. We should use all of them in the task before us.
Warren Nelson, originally from Drogheda Co Louth, worked in the linen industry until he took up the challenge to communicate the good news, this lead to teaching at Irish Bible School in Co Tipperary. He now enjoys active retirement and DIY near Tullamore.
Join the Conversation: Do you think Christians have become limited or lazy in the way they describe and express their faith? How does Christian jargon hinder our message? Do you believe that the words and images we use can cause misunderstandings between believers? How do we deal with this challenge? Share your views, comments and questions below.
Yet in the area of our faith and beliefs we quickly settle for one way of expressing what it is to be a believer. Maybe we feel safe with descriptions like ‘saved’ or ‘born again’ or even the more neutral ‘being a follower’ ‘a believer’ or ‘having a fulfilling relationship’. No wonder people soon walk past us; no wonder they soon stop listening to what we want to say.
This should not be because we have in the Bible a wealth of ways to express the privilege and blessings of being a Christian. The authors of Scripture used an abundance of rich and varied ideas to convey the greatness and wonder of their new life.
They spoke of being: In Christ; raised with Christ, citizens of heaven, or God’s own. They knew they had passed from death to life; they had been washed and renewed. They described themselves as living stones, heirs and children of God and a new creation. They had realized that God had said “Yes” to them in Christ. And so on...
There are dozens of pictures describing our new standing. You could do worse that note them down for yourself as you read the Scriptures, perhaps starting with all the descriptions given in Ephesians chapter 1.
“Misunderstandings often occur merely because two believers are using different… biblical pictures to describe the same reality”
If we make an effort to discover what we have, and are, more fully, then it will enrich our own faith as we explore our privileges and responsibilities. It will also help cooperation with other believers, because avoidable misunderstandings often occur merely because two believers are using different, and equally valid, biblical pictures to describe the same reality and experience.
Also, getting back to the shopping analogy, our witness will be more attractive. We will be using all the rich and varied resources given to us share our message with others. We should realise that people, being diverse in temperament and interests, will respond differently to ideas or explanations. If one way of telling our story doesn’t work, try another. We are provided with plenty to use. Like Paul we should be all things to people in order to win some.
A carpenter watched as his apprentice, making short shaky erratic strokes, tried to saw a piece of wood. Taking the saw the carpenter soon cut through the wood with long smooth confident strokes.
Turning to the apprentice he said “You bought all of the saw, so use all of it”. We have a storehouse, laden with truth in all its shapes, sizes and colours. We should use all of them in the task before us.
Warren Nelson, originally from Drogheda Co Louth, worked in the linen industry until he took up the challenge to communicate the good news, this lead to teaching at Irish Bible School in Co Tipperary. He now enjoys active retirement and DIY near Tullamore.
Join the Conversation: Do you think Christians have become limited or lazy in the way they describe and express their faith? How does Christian jargon hinder our message? Do you believe that the words and images we use can cause misunderstandings between believers? How do we deal with this challenge? Share your views, comments and questions below.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
"Suffer the children to come unto me" by John McKeever
In the light of the Ryan Report John McKeever examines the concept of structural sin.
These words of Jesus have forever gained an additional, bitter poignancy in the Irish psyche. The children who did ‘come unto’ some of Christ’s earthly representatives for care and protection did suffer, and appallingly. While the country reels in shock, and grieves over the horrific detail of our hidden history, a critical analysis of the whole concept of structural sin may help us come to terms with the past and prevent further abuses.
It is difficult to imagine a more flagrant and systematic contravention of the central tenets of the Christian value system than the revelations of the Ryan Report. Both Old and New Testaments emphatically command us to protect the powerless – the raggy boys, the maggies, the migrants, the addicts, the prisoners and those people excluded by virtue of a physical or mental disability. This litany of some of the categories of exclusion may be collapsed into one meaningful term – the other. How are we collectively faring in regards to our treatment of these other others?
The theological study of sin is called hamartiology. This word derives from Greek and denotes missing the mark, as in archery. It is personal, individual and subjective.
Structural sin by contrast is corporate, communal and diffuse. It may be characterised more as a sin of omission than as a sin of commission. Our collective actions – through the proxy of our elected or appointed representatives – may be in the realm of commission; but our collective failure to monitor and challenge these representatives is often a sin of omission.
When our failure comes to light we experience a sudden collective guilt which painfully interrogates our individual and communal conscience. It is natural to seek someone else to blame. While the primary culprits are a relatively small and identifiable group of ‘serial abusers’, who may or may not face criminal justice, there remains the sweeping societal culpability for privileging the powerful and silencing the powerless.
The scriptures have much to say about structural/ corporate sin. God addresses and reproves the corporate nation of Israel again and again through the prophets. Injustices and abuse of priestly privilege are common themes. Jesus lambastes the Pharisees collectively with a blistering critique. He weeps over Jerusalem.
When the painful machinery of justice has ground to an eventual halt, this rhetorical question will still require a long and searching engagement. This is a ‘Damascus moment’ for the Irish people and like Saint Paul we would do well to not hasten to interpret what has just happened.
My 87 year old mother, a devout Catholic and daily communicant all her life, shocked me with her own considered response to the uncovering of this structural sin. “There is only one solution to this awful situation. That’s a new reformation. I am sorry to say it has come to that.”
Those unselfconscious words are for me a telling measure of the depth of the shock and disbelief we are all going through. I agree with her, but I think reform of the church alone stops short of what is needed.
John McKeever is 49 and from Belfast but living in Dublin. He overcame chronic alcoholism and has developed an award-winning personal devlopment programme, Staying Real, based on his own experiences and his reading in theology and philosophy.
Join The Conversation:
What do you think Jesus would say to the nation in the light of the Ryan Report? If reform of the church stops short of what is needed, what other changes must happen? Are we in danger of pointing the finger and blaming others rather than facing our corporate responsibility in preventing abuse? Post your comments and questions below.
These words of Jesus have forever gained an additional, bitter poignancy in the Irish psyche. The children who did ‘come unto’ some of Christ’s earthly representatives for care and protection did suffer, and appallingly. While the country reels in shock, and grieves over the horrific detail of our hidden history, a critical analysis of the whole concept of structural sin may help us come to terms with the past and prevent further abuses.
It is difficult to imagine a more flagrant and systematic contravention of the central tenets of the Christian value system than the revelations of the Ryan Report. Both Old and New Testaments emphatically command us to protect the powerless – the raggy boys, the maggies, the migrants, the addicts, the prisoners and those people excluded by virtue of a physical or mental disability. This litany of some of the categories of exclusion may be collapsed into one meaningful term – the other. How are we collectively faring in regards to our treatment of these other others?
The theological study of sin is called hamartiology. This word derives from Greek and denotes missing the mark, as in archery. It is personal, individual and subjective.
Structural sin by contrast is corporate, communal and diffuse. It may be characterised more as a sin of omission than as a sin of commission. Our collective actions – through the proxy of our elected or appointed representatives – may be in the realm of commission; but our collective failure to monitor and challenge these representatives is often a sin of omission.
When our failure comes to light we experience a sudden collective guilt which painfully interrogates our individual and communal conscience. It is natural to seek someone else to blame. While the primary culprits are a relatively small and identifiable group of ‘serial abusers’, who may or may not face criminal justice, there remains the sweeping societal culpability for privileging the powerful and silencing the powerless.
The scriptures have much to say about structural/ corporate sin. God addresses and reproves the corporate nation of Israel again and again through the prophets. Injustices and abuse of priestly privilege are common themes. Jesus lambastes the Pharisees collectively with a blistering critique. He weeps over Jerusalem.
What would Jesus say to us as a nation in the light of the Ryan Report?
When the painful machinery of justice has ground to an eventual halt, this rhetorical question will still require a long and searching engagement. This is a ‘Damascus moment’ for the Irish people and like Saint Paul we would do well to not hasten to interpret what has just happened.
My 87 year old mother, a devout Catholic and daily communicant all her life, shocked me with her own considered response to the uncovering of this structural sin. “There is only one solution to this awful situation. That’s a new reformation. I am sorry to say it has come to that.”
Those unselfconscious words are for me a telling measure of the depth of the shock and disbelief we are all going through. I agree with her, but I think reform of the church alone stops short of what is needed.
John McKeever is 49 and from Belfast but living in Dublin. He overcame chronic alcoholism and has developed an award-winning personal devlopment programme, Staying Real, based on his own experiences and his reading in theology and philosophy.
Join The Conversation:
What do you think Jesus would say to the nation in the light of the Ryan Report? If reform of the church stops short of what is needed, what other changes must happen? Are we in danger of pointing the finger and blaming others rather than facing our corporate responsibility in preventing abuse? Post your comments and questions below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)