From arrogance to humility

SERMON 5.PROGRESSIVE CHRISTIANITY

VITALITY WITHOUT SUPERIORITY: From arrogance to humility

Children are not normally born humble, so one of the main tasks of parenting is to ease children away from the perspective that they are the centre of the universe, to living cooperatively in the human community.Parents need to teach most children to deal with winning and losing in civil ways, which is not always easy, especially when Australia is playing India in a one-day cricket series! It is also a challenge when the parents themselves are still competitive. I realized this to my shame the day I was a passenger in my son's car, and witnessed the way in which he abused other drivers.At that point I decided that as a driver I had to grow up (which was a humbling experience considering that I was 45 at the time).

As St Paul wrote to the grown-ups of the Corinthian church, "When I was a child I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult I put an end to childish ways" (1 Corinthians 13:11)

Obviously not all adults get the message, though some try to cloak their 'I am the best' tendencies with a veneer of humility. This can sometimes be amusing, like the incident in the play Camelot, where Lancelot, having described to Gwenivere an amazing list of qualities of a certain knight, and when she asks who this outstanding creature might be, sings "C'est moi, c'est moi, I bound to admit, I'm far to noble to lie- the man in whom these qualities bloom, cest moi, cest moi, TIS I"! It stops being a laughing matter when pride, arrogance, lust and greed lead to war.

Sadly, in religion as much as anywhere else, 'We are the best' easily becomes 'You are the worst', and when Christians, Jews, Muslims and others proclaim themselves morally, ethically and spiritually superior to everyone else, 'holy' wars ensue.

It was not always like this in the church.Jesus sometimes called his followers 'little children' perhaps because he was having such a hard time getting the humility message across.However by the time of the early church the followers of the Way of Jesus would often signify their meeting places with the motif of a praying woman- a sign that the church was growing up.Sadly, this all changed when the church became the official religion of the Roman Empire by the decree of Constantine in AD 13.Thereafter the church signified its presence with the symbolic representation of a man in Roman soldier's skirt, with the cross over his shoulder in the shape of a sword.The man was Jesus! History records the numerous encounters from then on between the great religions which have come at each other with swords drawn, or worse!

In his essay "Paying homage" Bruce Sanguin compares ways of relating to other faiths.

He tells how the occupation of Iraq has been seized upon by the International Mission Board of Southern Baptists as an opportunity to win Muslim souls for Christ. This group claims to hold ultimate religious truth, and a particularly slanderous view of Muslims as expressed by Jerry Vines, their former head, who called Mohammed "A demon-possessed paedophile". Islam is variously described as "a very evil and wicked religion" (by Billy Graham's son Franklin) or "an anti-Christ religion"( by recently returned missionary John Hannah).They deliver Truth with a capital T in the form of the Southern Baptist belief system. This attitude to people of other faiths sees "…the primary purpose of being a Christian to convert other people to our faith".

Sanguin sees in Matthew's story of wise men from the east another way to relate to those beyond our own faith. The so-calledMagi, see a new star in the night sky and set out to discern its meaning. He notes firstly that wise people, not so arrogant to assert that they have all the answers scour the sky for new truth, and are willing to journey to find it.

Secondly, when they encounter the Holy family they pay homage by the giving of gifts.They thus offer something valuable of themselves without attempting to convince or convert to their own way. Thirdly, they encounter in Herod the worst of what the other religion has to offer, but do not judge the whole religion by this bad example. They discern that Herod is a threat, but not typical of the Jewish people as a whole. Finally, they return home by another way, which could be taken to mean not that they have converted to Judaism but that they have been changed in some way for the better by this experience.

When engagement with the truth of other faiths happens in an attitude of humility, all are enriched.

Dr Lorraine Parkinson of the Progressive Christianity Network of Victoria articulates the progressive ideal as follows: "Progressive Christianity frees Christians from the constraints of doctrinal absolutes and literal readings from scripture.It refocuses them on the ethical teachings of Jesus, and their ultimate revelation of a God of love. It also understands that no faith has exclusive and exhaustive knowledge of God, that no faith is the single source or repository of all human values. Rather, that each faith has come independently to its own knowledge of the universal sacred values of compassion, justice, freedom, acceptance of others and peace.It is on that shared ethical foundation that people of different faiths can meet positively and productively, with a rich anticipation of respect, cooperation and peace.It is no coincidence that Progressive Christianity has emerged in a world where there is more opportunity than ever before for Christians to learn about other faiths."

But did Jesus not say "No one comes to the Father but by me?" Does that not prove that our way is the only way to God? It is amazing how such a huge conclusion can be reached on the basis of half a verse from the whole Bible, with little or no understanding of its context, or its meaning within that context! The words, attributed to Jesus, come from the sixth verse of John chapter 14. Intellectual integrity demands that we at least question whether or not they were literally said by Jesus.John's gospel was the last of the four to be written, around 100 AD, that is, seventy years after the death of Jesus. This gospel is significantly different to the other three in how Jesus is portrayed, leading liberal scholars to conclude that it is more likely the result of the experience of the early Church of the risen Christ in their midst than an historical account of Jesus' life and words. This does not make it inferior to the synoptic gospels, in fact some of the deepest and most profound teachings of our faith come from John.One must ask though, for example, how those long discourses which appear only in John, such as the encounter of Jesus with the woman at the well in Samaria, or the extensive speeches of Jesus in chapters 14 to 17 could possibly have been remembered and recorded as word for word accounts. Then there are those dramatic stories about Jesus which are given as 'signs' of his divine power, such as the 'first' sign of changing water to enormous quantities of wine at a wedding in Cana where the guests had already drunk the wine provided by the host, or the raising of Lazarus three days after he had died. If these were literal historical events, with large crowds present including the disciples, how could they possibly have been not known to Matthew, Mark and Luke? This does not mean that there is nothing of the historical Jesus in John; just that his turn-of-the-century interpreters probably used myth and metaphor to describe the indescribable power and compassion they experienced in the risen Christ.

Let's say though that we have thought about this and are still happy that Jesus actually said "No one comes to the Father but by me" What does this actually mean?Does it mean, as orthodox conservative Christian teaching asserts, that you have to profess faith in Jesus in order to get into heaven, and if you don't you are going to hell?

How could it? How could a God with any sense of justice and compassion condemn in this way all of the people who lived before Jesus? What about all of those people of the time who never heard the message and had no possibility of responding.What about all of the people alive today in non-Christian countries who earnestly follow other faiths? I have even had a Calvinist quoting to me the first chapter of Romans to prove that those who had never heard of Christ had enough evidence in creation to discern the reality of God therefore giving God grounds for condemnation, even though creation alone could not give them a saving knowledge of Christ. That is, our 'immortal, invisible God only wise' gave people enough knowledge to condemn them but not enough to save them! WOW! Once I allowed myself to actually think this through instead of blindly accepting fundamentalist dogma on the subject, I had to say, with Bishop Robinson "But that I cannot believe!"

So what does John 14 verse 6 mean? For a start, it is important to quote the whole verse: "Jesus said to him 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" Then, note the context, which is the reassuring words to Thomas about the many dwelling places in God's realm.The meaning could just as easily be understood in an inclusive as an exclusive way; in fact more easily especially if you understand the 'many dwelling places' as a sign of the breadth of God's hospitality and the openness of his arms!

Jesus is reported as describing himself as 'the way the truth and the life'.How can this be limited to just an assent of belief in him?Is his way not the way of care and mercy and compassion?Are not all who are caring, merciful and compassionate walking in his way? Could it possibly be true that an arrogant and uncaring Christian who says "I believe in Jesus" is assured a place in heaven while the caring person who does not profess faith in Jesus will burn in hell? I don't think so!

What is the way, truth and life of Jesus? I see many people living that way, that truth and that life without being Christian. On the other hand, we who claim all truth and completeness of revelation can sometimes leave a lot to be desired when it comes to actually walking the way, telling the truth and living the life as Jesus did.

For example, can the anti-Semitic ways of the Christian Church through history have anything whatsoever to do with the way of Jesus? Did Gregory of Nyssa speak the truth of Jesus when he called all Jews " …slayers of the Lord…advocates of the devil…wicked men, haters of righteousness" Did St John Chrysostom proclaim the truth of Jesus "The synagogue is a criminal assembly of Jews, the refuge of devils"Did St Athanasius declare the truth of Jesus when he said "I set fire to the synagogue, or at least I ordered those that did it, that there might not be a place where Christ was denied.It was burnt by the judgment of God" Could Martin Luther have ever imagined the disastrous consequences four centuries later of this interpretation of the truth: "What shall we do with this rejected, condemned Jewish people…we must exercise sharp compassion in the hope of saving a few of them" He listed seven measures, including burning their homes, synagogue and sacred books, forbidding the teaching of Judaism among their children, taking their valuables, denying them the protection of the law and segregating them into ghettos! When the best of us believe and do these things, what will the worst feel justified in doing? Hitler's answer? Genocide! Sad to say, this is a fire that was deliberately lit- not of course with these consequences intended, however, take care when you ignite the fires of hatred for you never know where they might spread!

In terms of conflict with Islam, what have the four Crusades of the Middle Ages to do with the life to which Jesus calls us? Is what is happening today not an example of repeating history because we have refused to learn its lessons. What does branding a whole religion as evil have to do with the way, the truth and the life of Jesus?A somewhat humourous example of this happened a few years ago when we had a Muslim come and speak at our evening service.Someone asked the following week how "Osama Bin Laden" had come across!

So often our strong views and broad assertions are based on the flimsiest of knowledge, and little or no intellectual integrity. I used to be quick to join in the mocking of Hindus for their proliferation of gods, until I came to understand that this way of 'having a god for every occasion' was actually a sign of their devotion to the myriad complexity of the Divine, which they tried to express in these manifold ways. I am still not sure if that is how they see it.Maybe I have just caught a glimpse of their star rising in the east!

Why do we do this?If we want to wave a flag at the world that says Jesus is the only way to God because he said "No one comes to the Father but by me" why do we ignore what he said just before that: "I am the way, the truth and the life", or the inclusive and compassionate context of those words?What happened to his way?What happened to his truth? What happened to his life in our midst?

Why do we persist in asserting superiority of our way when the way of our leader was just so much more humble and open? John Spong in his latest book sees it as typical of attempts by religious systems to provide security for its followers by asserting the certainty of their revelation over against others "Security is not finally achieved until the religious system successfully claims to possess ultimate truth by some form of divine revelation". Underlying this is the human need for a tribe to provide safety and security.The Old Testament describes the tribal nature of Judaism, and their Purity Codes which aimed to keep them separate and secure.On this basis you could walk over a person dying by the side of the road on the grounds that they were not of your tribe! A good way to understand the way, the truth and the life of Jesus is from the perspective of his mission to take the people beyond obsessions of purity to all-embracing compassion.We also need to remember that the early followers of Jesus were Jews, so steeped in the old tribal ways and the view of themselves a Chosen people.

When we assert our superiority on religious grounds it pays to reflect why it is that everyone seems to think that their way is the only way, from Jews to Christians, from Christians to Roman Catholics, from Catholics to Protestants, from Protestants to Jehovah's Witness to Mormons.Thus the torch of exclusivity ignites the torch of exclusivity for succeeding tribes; and other religions do exactly the same thing.The fact is, what we have in common is our humanity.Yes, those other tribes are human too, much as it sometimes hurts us to admit it!

I think St Paul has something to say to us about acceptance and humility when he reminds his Corinthian readers to not be puffed up with pride over their prodigious spiritual gifts like prophecy, knowledge and speaking in tongues.As he says, without love we are nothing. In fact, all that we know here is partial, "…for now we see in a mirror, dimly…""When I was a child…" etc leads to "When I became an adult I put an end to childish ways." In other words, 'Christians of Corinth, its time we all grew up'!

What do we have to gain by a new way of looking at those who do not profess faith in the same way we do? There are numerous good reasons for people of different faiths to work together for peace and understanding. Here is just one example:

Thirteen religious leaders have united to demand that the Federal Government set Greenhouse gas emission targets Those leaders are from Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Indigenous groups.Anglican Bishop of Canberra, George Browning asserts on their behalf that this is a moral issue. We have so much to gain by realizing how much of the common ground of wisdom we all have to offer each other.At the very least, think of how much energy could be saved for more productive use if we stopped our childish ways, and fully embraced the way, the truth and the life of Jesus.

The choice is between arrogance and humility; between a desire to understand and a determination to hang onto prejudice and exclusivity; to embrace or to reject. Ultimately, it is, as Michael Leunig so succinctly puts it, the choice between love and fear.

Brian Brown