REVELATION

/in /by

What do we feel when we hear the word, “revelation?” My assessment is that most of us feel uneasy, or are repelled. And why not, when we usually hear about it, the context is some charismatic preacher shouting about the end of the world and how only a few will be saved. It comes across as a judgment and a threat.

As much as Revelation is used and abused ironically, it almost didn’t make it into the canon of the Bible. The first person to present a list of accepted Christian writings was 4th Century bishop of Alexandria, Athanasius, who included it because he had used it to condemn heretics. Many others were against including it. The larger picture also includes Athanasius’ battle with another priest from Alexandria named Arius. Athanasius won the battle and Arius was sent into exile. Arius preached the idea that Jesus, while filled with the divine spirit, was not actually equal to God. Athanasius championed Christ’s divinity. It is my personal judgment that the faith would have been much better off without Athanasius. (He was also known to have been a bully.) All this is to say that Revelation is included in the Bible because of the whim of one person – who wasn’t, in my mind, even a good person. That doesn’t mean that there isn’t profound truth in Revelation. One of the strongest arguments against including it in the canon of scripture was that it would be misunderstood and then abused. That view was prescient – just look at what people are doing with it today!

This spring readings from Revelation are in the lectionary each week. I have decided to preach on Revelation each week until Pentecost (May 15th). (I will not be here on April 10.) My purpose is to get us to see Revelation less as a threat; by learning more about it to see it as even a means of grace. In fact, Revelation is greatly misunderstood. That isn’t a surprise since it is a collection of visions experienced by John of Patmos (not to be confused with the author of the Gospel According to John). The visions also include numerous metaphors and codes that the people who first read Revelation would understand, but we do not. So, most people reading about the Dragon or the whore of Babylon are left with interpreting it literally as prediction. While this can be interesting it is not enlightening. Like any other prophet John of Patmos was interpreting the times he lived in, prophetically insofar as saying that if things didn’t change the world would take a turn for the worst; but he was not a predictor, certainly not of events that would take place two thousand years later.

This Sunday the sermon is entitled, A Disturbance in the Force, and it will be about John’s visions and dreams; about the medium of being “in the spirit.” If the “medium is the message” it helps to know what the medium is; it helps to know what apocalyptic literature and mystical experience is all about. So… I hope to see you all on Sunday morning. P.Jim

Holy Week is Not a Trampoline Act

/in /by

Our worship professor at the Claremont School of Theology was an eccentric person. The Right Reverend Jon Olson ordered 16 ounce bottled Coke by the crate and drank it warm; he never drank any other soda and never out of a can. He was an Episcopalian cleric and his worship service was high church – incense, kneeling rail, drinking directly from the cup and he finished it off when everyone had partaken. He was known for his quotable lines. Once when we went to the symphony and sushi afterwards, he said, “Good sushi reminds us that everything will be all right.” About working with a congregation he said: “Whatever you do don’t move the flowers.” And about this holy season: “Holy Week is not a trampoline act.”

Historically American Protestant Churches moved away from all that was liturgical and over ritualized; many were anti-Roman Catholic. We forget that in the nineteenth century the immigrants that people wanted to keep out of America were Irish Catholics. Out goes the incense, the Latin, the traditional communion liturgy, weekly communion, all male priesthood, gaudy liturgical garments, the liturgical year, the worship of saints and special days for saints. Also, many special days were less emphasized – Ash Wednesday, Epiphany, All Saints (in the Presbyterian Church we celebrated Reformation Day instead), and the special Holy Week services: Maundy Thursday and Good Friday. This is where the trampoline reference comes in. Many Protestant churches celebrate Palm Sunday focusing on the praise of Jesus – his “triumphal” entry into Jerusalem and then are back in church singing Alleluias on Easter, neglecting important parts of the story.

During Holy Week we remember the story of Jesus – the whole story: Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem on a donkey, which was a rejection of triumphalism; Jesus’ confronting the powers that be by turning over the tables at the Temple; Jesus’ wrestling with his fate in the Garden of Gethsemane; The Last Supper, the Betrayal of Judas and Peter and the fleeing of the disciples; Jesus’ before the Council and Pilate (Herod too in the gospel according to Luke); Jesus’ crucifixion, death and burial – before we sing our alleluias on Easter. Most of the websites of other local churches focus on Easter. Interestingly, many of them have Good Friday services but not Maundy Thursday services. But the Good Friday services focus on substitutionary atonement – Christian Faith Center even has a picture from Mel Gibson’s movie, The Passion of Christ. (The website that was most similar to our – actually the only one – was Advent Lutheran.) In this theological perspective there is not invitation to live the story but only to believe that Jesus died for our sins. In this way, most Protestant Christians still avoid the difficult stuff – we don’t have to suffer because Jesus suffered for us, rather than being called to follow Jesus even into suffering and death. It remains a trampoline act. Rather, we are called to live the whole story: the humility of Palm Sunday, the anger in confronting the oppressive, cruelty and injustice of those in power, the anxiety of the Garden, the abandonment of betrayal, the blessed sense of connection in the Upper Room with the Last Supper, the humiliation of standing before Pilate, the utter pain of death and then to again feel the power of resurrection on Easter. This is the story of our lives. And there is real power in this story – spiritual power.

When I was growing up I didn’t know any of this. I think there was a Good Friday service at noon but I never went to it. (I went to their website and this year they have a Maundy Thursday service but no Good Friday service.) Over my years in ministry I have tried to attract people to these services but nothing seems to work. In our worship committee meeting we floated the idea of having just one service on Thursday, just like First Presbyterian in Corvallis. But I said no – this is what we do – this is our story and I will lead a Maundy Thursday service and a Good Friday service even if we only have three people. And they will be traditional services – no attractive frills – this is what we do and this is who we are. See you in worship. P. Jim.

Language Learning

/in /by

In the March 6 issue of The New Yorker I read an article about an alternative school – it’s called AltSchool, as a matter of fact. Started by a former Google executive it focuses on the use of technology to target each students needs and passions. Each preschooler is issued a tablet and much of their time is spent individually on the tablet learning “personalized learning projects.” The school wants to develop skills useful in the workplace as opposed to knowledge deemed important by historical precedence. At one point the author of the article walked into a classroom and the children were playing “restaurant” – it used to be “house,” didn’t it? Personally I would rather my child go to Cedar Cross Cooperative Preschool and learn how to interact with others, for example. Then the author mentioned that the school was not focused on learning foreign language because twenty years from now everyone will be walking around with live-translation apps. This in particular troubles me.

Learning a language is not limited to translation – to learn another language is to enter a different world – a different way of thinking and feeling. There is no perfect translation – no matter how powerful the live-translation app. When I was speaking Japanese all those years ago I felt like a different person. Learning a foreign language is learning about other people and the more language learning there is in our education curriculum the more mutual understanding there will be between countries of the world. I would go so far as to say that peace is at stake. In the same way that having a hand held computer means we do not have to remember anything, having a live-translation app makes us technologically rich but culturally, emotionally and spiritually impoverished. Even more than that, if we do not learn other languages we will lose the understanding that there are different worlds than our own, and we will approach all things strictly through the lens of our limited experience.

Many times I have said that to read the Bible is to go to a foreign country – and it is also to learn a foreign language. I’m not just talking about the fact that the Bible was written in Hebrew and Greek and it helps tremendously to be able to read these languages, even if just a little to get a taste of the language. I also mean that the lens through which the writers of the Bible viewed reality was totally different. For example, there is no concept in the scriptures of an isolated, independent individual as we conceive of today. Each person was perceived within the web of his/her relationships, dependencies and communities. In our Adult Sunday school class I asked them whether they were more or less interested in reading the Bible after understanding how complex it is, multivalent and it is necessary to use numerous tools to understand it. They said they wanted to read it more. It is no secret that most Progressive Christians are relatively biblically illiterate. That makes it hard to discuss the Bible with fundamentalists! We say that we take the Bible seriously but not literally. That “seriously” part is the openness and willingness to enter into the foreign world of the Bible; to learn the Bible’s language. I’m up for it. P.Jim