I grew up in the Jones United Methodist church. My family helped found the First Presbyterian church in Jones, OK, which later became the Jones United Methodist church. My grandmother was the organist; my mother was/is a lay leader and song leader. I acolyted, sang in the choir, and participated in youth. My entire life involved church in some way, shape, or form. I was expected to participate in whatever I could to help and serve the church. Like most teenagers in this rural town, I attended Wednesday night services at a Pentecostal church on occasion. My parents took the time to explain doctrines and allowed me to ask questions. They would sit me down to talk, or point me in the direction that might have answers. They never once discouraged me from finding my own faith.
I have traveled the world and encountered many different cultures, abroad and at home. Growing up my grandmother lived on the reservation, and I fancy danced at pow-wows. This introduced me to the Muscogee spiritual beliefs that then became part of my embedded theology. My Jewish uncle never shied away from questions I had, and our incorporation of Hanukah and Rosh Hashanah influenced my perceptions of God. While living with my sister in Poland, I saw up close and personal Polish Catholic and Greek Orthodox practices and beliefs that shaped my theology. I have had Muslim and Buddhist roommates that willingly shared their perceptions with me and I with them. All these observations and conversations have led me to form my own ideas and understandings of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. I rely heavily on experience and reason, but do not deny the role that the Bible has as well as the role other literature has played in my thought formation.
GOD
God. YHWH. Allah. The Universe. Brahman. Atman. Every culture has its own idea of God. In the Methodist tradition I was raised in, “there is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body or parts, of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the maker and preserver of all things, both visible and invisible.”[1] With this embedded in my understanding, I have reasoned that God is bigger than we can describe. Moreover, if God is bigger than what our words can handle than surely every culture and language provides yet another opportunity to gain a better understanding of God. Even then, I gather that God is bigger than what all our languages can use to describe the deity.
Judeo-Christianity uses “Elohim” and “YHWH,” terms that identify and translate as multiple spiritual beings and I AM, respectively.[2] But these traditions also use many adjectives as names to describe the complexity of God.[3] The Tanahk and the Bible use both masculine and feminine pronouns in supplanting God’s name at various places.[4] Allah in the Qu’ran is referred to in terms of characteristics, i.e. “the Merciful, the Compassionate.”[5]
Hindus call the Godhead, Brahman, which is “an infinite, indivisible reality in which the transient data of the world cohere.”[6] In the Bhagavad Gita, Sri Krishna reveals to Arjuna “a million divine forms, with an infinite variety of color and shape…gods of the natural world, wonders never revealed…the entire cosmos turning within my body and other things you desire to see.”[7] Many American Indian tribes view the Earth as mother, life giver, and creator.[8] Explanation of revered beings reflected the life around them.
Science, which has stereotypically been the archrival of religion, has begun to look for answers to questions like, is there a God?, Why are we here?, etc… The field of neurotheology has taken practices from neurobiology, psychology, neuroimaging, and prayer to gather information searching for any conclusions. This burgeoning field “try[s] to pinpoint which regions [in the brain] turn on, and which turn off, during experiences that seem to exist outside time and space.”[9] The study found overwhelming support for a correlation between brain activity and spiritual experience, but could not determine if or which one caused the other.[10] So the question for me remains, did humans create God or did God create us?
My belief in God being larger than I, or anyone else can imagine, leads me to think that God created us. My arrogant, sometimes right, most of the time wrong, human brain wants to believe that my growing faith can withstand my searching. I want to believe that my faith can withstand the statement that we are capable of constructing a God for our own reasons, comfort, blame, and explanation of things unknown. Science makes new discoveries all the time. With these new understandings and a shrinking unknown world, does God shrink or does our understanding of God grow?
Jean-Paul Sarte concluded that “we all fundamentally desire to be God in the sense that we want to ‘be our own foundation;’ that is we would like to be perfectly complete and self-justifying…we aspire to become ‘in-itself-for-itself.”[11] But while I read Sarte’s metaphysical theories, I cannot help but imagine this man as a whiny, self-perceptively oppressed, rebellious teenager that never physically worked a day in his life. In his work Being and Nothingness, “There is no heavenly Father to tell us what to do or help us do it; as grown-up people we have to decide for ourselves and look after ourselves.”[12] I could not agree more with the last part of this statement. As we grow, we do need to decide for ourselves and look after ourselves. However, I do not use Sarte as a basis of my own belief of God, but rather the antithesis. God does not tell us what to do or how to do it. God only calls us to “love one another.”[13] What he writes does not prove that there is no God. Sarte seems to write from a misunderstanding of the nature of God and immature process of theology. My faith in God and God’s infinite being grows as I learn more of God’s nature. However, as my faith in God grows, my belief in Jesus as the Christ is unaffected.
JESUS
I do not believe that Jesus is the Christ, “the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one Being with the Father.”[14] In Matthew, God proclaims, “This is my Son, the Beloved, with whom I am pleased.”[15] In Mark, “a voice came from heaven saying, ‘you are my Son, the Beloved; with you I am well pleased.”[16] Luke gives the same account of baptism as Mark but follows with a patrilineal genealogy that traces back to Adam, thus roundaboutly proclaims Jesus as the Son of God.[17] John tells a different tale, speaking “No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known.”[18] Later, John quotes Jesus with, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no one comes to the Father except through me.”[19]
Tertillian, an “Apostolic Father’ of the church” wrote in his Treatise that “Jesus Christ can be both human and divine…of ‘one person’ and ‘two substances’ or ‘natures.”[20] The Methodist Church claims, “The two whole and perfect natures, that is to say, the Godhead and Manhood, were joined together in one person never to be divided,” aligning with Tertillian.[21] The Evangelical United Brethren Church similarly confesses Jesus to be “truly God and truly man, in whom the divine and human natures are perfectly and inseparably united.”[22] If God created humankind in God’s image, then what makes this one man more special than you or I? Humans also are both substance and spirit. If God is the creator and Jesus is the “Christ, the Redeemer of creation,” did God mess up creation so much that it needed redeeming?[23] For Jesus to be a redeemer of a messed up world, God would inevitably be less than what I believe God is.
To me, Jesus was a 1st century Jewish man who provided a different interpretation of the Torah. “The synagogue leader… represents not ‘the’ Jewish view but rather ‘a’ Jewish view.”[24] I ask again, what makes him so much more special than you or I?
“Jesus does what no one else ever did or could do; he is distinct, special, better… depicting a Jesus who stands out as unique in his Jewish context…also…means enhancing the distinction…allow[ing] Jesus to emerge as a unique ethical teacher who is able to cut through whatever hampers anyone from living life to the fullest.”[25]
I view his teachings as right and proper, but not his deification or kidnapping by modern ‘Paulanity.’
The story of Jesus’ death and resurrection teaches believers that Jesus arose from his quickly prepared tomb three days after he was crucified as prophesied in earlier Scripture. On Easter this year, one of my students asked, “So… is Jesus a zombie?” No. Jesus is as much of a zombie as a zombie is. I view zombies as analogous for people who are now empty, monstrous reincarnations of their former selves, body but no spirit. Jesus was body and spirit, analogous for how humans can live and bring the kingdom of God to earth. What he taught was the important part of the message, not his substance.
HOLY SPIRIT
The Holy Spirit is a construct of humankind in the effort to explain God’s entirety. In much the same manner of Jesus, “the Holy Ghost, proceeding from the Father and the Son, is of one substance, majesty, and glory with the Father and the Son, very and eternal God.”[26] Paul’s Letter to the Romans explains that we are “sanctified by the Holy Spirit” in order “to be a minister… to the Gentiles.”[27] The Council of Constantinople solidified the doctrine of the Trinity by giving the Holy Spirit the same standing as Jesus.[28] This aspect of God “comforts, sustains, and empowers the faithful and guides them into all truth.”[29] So yes, the Holy Spirit is God, but more definitively the Holy Spirit is just another name given to God by humankind in an effort to explain all that God is and of which God is capable. The imagery of “wind” as a depiction of the Holy Spirit through out the entire Bible is processed through my embedded theology from my American Indian ancestry. God is everything and is in everything. Just because “wind” is separate from a solid being or sometimes lacking does not cause me to separate the Holy Spirit from God. As for Holy Ghost, as a child I imagined a Casper-like figure that was waiting for me within the church’s walls. The Holy Ghost terrified me; I wanted nothing to do with it. Now that I am an adult, I understand the word ghost as different from spirit and accept spirit as more definitive in my understanding of this aspect of God.
The human mind functions on such a high level that we are unable to cognitively recognize all that surrounds us and all of that with which we are posed. Going back to neurotheology, when deep in prayer or meditation those studied showed a higher functioning of the frontal lobes of the brain, which controls focus, attention, and concentration.[30] When one is fully activating these lobes, one is capable of finding answers, creating, feeling at peace, etc… However, I stress again, that causation was not linked, just a correlation. I like many have felt that helping hand guide me towards the unclear path, once in Greece at the Megalo Meteoro while praying at a 12th century alter, again, while on a boat tour of Norwegian fjords, and another time while in prayer after my first fiancée died. I have had semi-prophetic dreams and have encountered angels in human form along the road of life. All of these experiences have led me closer to God, but I would attribute that result to God and not a separate Holy Spirit.
BIBLE
My mother jokes that I am the worse Christian ever, a borderline apostate sometimes. Yet, I know she is joking because we agree on most subjects, corporeal and ethereal. She does have a point though; I do not adhere to most tenets of Christianity. For example, as mentioned above, Jesus was no more the Son of God then you or I am a Child of God; I lack the faith that says otherwise. Again, the lessons and message that Jesus taught sit true in my heart, however, just because his teachings are proper doesn’t mean that his deification is.
Spiritual realization can be achieved through many different channels and writings. I have experienced self-actualization by listening to music, reading philosophers and poets, even painting, dancing, and yoga. To me, the Bible is not infallible. It is no more divinely inspired than the Quran, the Tanakh, the Bhagavad Gita, or the writings of Rumi, Henry David Thoreau, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Deepak Chopra or Margaret Atwood. To me Francis Bacon, Montesquieu, Adam Smith, Plato, Socrates and Tom Robbins are all inspired authors. The Bible belongs among these works, as a piece of literature, holding no more importance than others do. All deserve rigorous study with the purpose of enlightenment.
The current canon does not provide comfort or evidence of a loving God for a vast majority of humanity. So I find that true apostasy is not when we begin searching elsewhere for answers; it is when we cease to search at all. When we cease learning, we cease believing. The true apostate is one who is content with a stagnant faith. My job as a teacher in Christian Education is to reassure students and learners of the acceptability of examining their own canons that allows them to experience God and his love. The Bible must be part of this canon, but it should not be expected to be the only or the final authority.
The Bible is a collection of histories, poems, correspondences, and lectures from the minds of men. The male species of one particular race and religion wrote their own philosophies in the tradition of their people. One must read this holy book while regarding the context in which all included books were written. Reading and taking 1 Thessalonians or 1 Peter at face value without knowing the recipients of these letters and their mentality has the potential to lead the modern world to slavery and spousal abuse. Thus, research in regards to each book becomes an integral part of studying the Bible as well as strictly reading it. The conclusions from said research will enhance the interpretation of the Scripture.
History is cyclical, and humanity never seems to learn from its mistakes. The Bible is one lens through which history and human nature can be viewed. The Bible is not the full history or full truth of all humanity. It is only a small part. Since God is truly omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent, how then can only one people’s book or faith be the end all be all? There are many different peoples, with many different societal structures. Life is more complex, interwoven, and beautiful than the Bible has room for. However, the same is true for the Quran, the Tanakh, or any other holy book alone. I believe they are all needed for a full comprehensive understanding of life and one’s own particular faith.
There are plenty of examples of extreme fundamentalists for each religion. Society has seen those who take their respective holy texts at face value, as divinely written. However, the Thermadorian Reaction is a perfect model for the need of middle ground. Society moves from one extreme to the other before settling in the middle. Piaget’s theory of assimilation and accommodation is another example of the process of learning that happens in all people. When presented with new ideas, a person must reject it all together, assimilate it into their current belief system, or make accommodations for it to reside in their mindset. Hegel’s Dialectical Model of History provides the same theory as well. Life continues down a path until a spark occurs. That spark becomes a conflict and out of that conflict, a new path emerges. Thesis meets Antithesis, which results in Synthesis. Faith is not immune from these same processes, nor should it be.
Context is the most important insight one needs to study the Bible. We as disciples must understand that the Bible was written by men at specific times in history with specific purposes of relaying events, ideas, and advice to others and future generations without the expectation of two thousand years’ fortitude. A particular book must be understood within the culture, social and political, of the era it was written. We must understand these past people’s psychology and daily hardships to understand their faith. When we do that, we can then start to understand our own faith in a modern, global and regional, society.
THE CHURCH
When I think church, when I hear the word church, my mind automatically begins to sing, “I am the church. You are the church. We are the church together.”[31] The lyrics of this hymn are forever embedded in my mind. As I ponder what I believe as an adult, this hymn still sticks out. The authors intentionally state, and I agree with them, that “The church is not a building; the church is not a steeple; the church is not a resting place; the church is a people.”[32] Often we hear people say that they are going to church. This statement implies a location associated with church, however, this hymn asserts that church is community; it is ever evolving, ever changing, not a bastion of stagnation.
Jesus tells his followers, “For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.”[33] Matthew continues to quote Jesus when he answered the question of the greatest commandment saying, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”[34] Matthew 28:16-20 tells of Jesus’ Great Commission to the disciples, “Go therefore, and make disciples of all nations…teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”[35] Using these verses, the church is made of people in service as God’s people and for God’s people. Likewise, Acts 2 tells of the organization of the church. The first disciples “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.”[36] Again, the church is made of people in commune with other people.
For understanding in our post-modern, pluralistic society, a group is defined as a compilation of five characteristics.[37] Ronald L. Johnstone asserts a group is,
“two or more interacting people who (1) share common goals or aims that stem from common problems and a desire to resolve them; (2)agree upon a set of norms they hope will help them achieve their common goals; (3) combine certain norms into roles that they expect persons within the group to fill and carry out in the interests of the group; (4) agree(often only implicitly) on certain status dimensions and distinctions on the basis of which they rate on another; and (5) identify with the group and express or exhibit some degree of commitment to the group, what it proposes to do, and how it proposes to do it.”[38]
The aforementioned biblical and hymnical basis of church fits into the modern sociological definition of group. However, the distinguishing characteristic of church is the religious aspect. People can be in commune with one another no matter what their purpose. It is the common goals and aims set in the biblical references that distinguish church from group. The church uses the Law and prophets to lead and guide its people to reach the set goals. Thus, the church, much like the government, is “of the people, by the people, for the people.”[39]
The Book of Discipline of United Methodist Church says “the church exists for the maintenance of worship, the edification of believers, and the redemption of the world.”[40] However, I question this stance, only because of the word, redemption. God called the creation good. If the creation is good, then why does the world need redeeming? If the church is made of people loving their neighbors and serving God and God’s people, from what does the church need to be redeemed? God-given life? Hell? Themselves and the choices made possible by free will? God gives free will graciously. What we do under free will is also deemed good because it comes from God. The use of redemption substitutes eschatology or fearful theology for sound theology. For me the definition of church stops at “a community of all… believers under the Lordship of Christ.”[41] While this definition puts me outside of the mainline church, I recognize that the changes I would make, substituting God for “the Lordship of Christ,” might mark me as a follower of Judaism rather than distinctly as a member of the Christian church.[42] However, if one takes the scriptural definition, above, of the church than I am fully a member of the Christian church.
BAPTISM
My parents decided to baptize me as an infant, so I do not remember it. I remember going through confirmation and being jealous of my peers who got to make that profession. That one act which was so richly symbolic to all, confirmands, sponsors, and those in the congregation, and I got a certificate that was thrown away less than a month later. Through all this, I felt my commitment to Christianity was somewhat less because my parents made the decision long before I was able to do so myself. This one instance helped shape my belief of what baptism actually is.
My father chose to be baptized at 13 because a pastor proclaimed at one of his friend’s funeral that the boy who died was going to hell because he was not baptized. Is baptism the proclamation of faith one makes in front of a congregation for acceptance into the community? Is baptism symbol only? Is baptism necessary for God to accept the believers into God’s kingdom? I would say no to all questions, but not an absolute no.
Baptism as the means of salvation defeats the purpose of Jesus’ death, if one believes in the saving nature of Christ. Thus, baptism is the recognition of God’s grace at work in our lives and the promise that we make communally to ourselves and to others in our congregation to live faithfully. Baptism is a profession made by one who feels compelled to do so. It is not an entrance requirement, nor is it ritual without meaning. One can be Christian and be in community without having been baptized, however, from my perspective of the ritual, it is not an experience one wishes to deny him or herself.
Infant baptism, then, holds no promise or relief in the knowledge of salvation to me because baptism is a conscientious decision. Tradition of the universal church dictates that we baptize an infant because of original sin or the sin committed by the parents to have given that child life. Under this understanding, children, infants, are born sinful and thus must be baptized to save their soul before death has a chance to claim them. As a student of history, I agree with Rene Descartes’ conclusion of children being a blank slate. They are not inherently good, nor inherently bad. The nurturing provided to us guides us into those arenas. In the United Methodist Hymnal, the baptismal liturgy asks the congregation to support this person in his/her search as well as asking the sponsor or parents. I believe a parent can make a promise to a congregation to raise the child in the church community, but baptizing the infant is robbing him or her of a life-altering decision. Parents and the supporting congregation should pledge to guide the child in Christian faith so that he or she may accept God’s grace on his or her own.
Water is essential to life. I know not a huge revelation, but that statement is central to my belief of baptism. Water sustains and shapes life. Science has proven that if there is even a minimal amount of water, life can thrive. The American Red Cross and The Center for Disease Control and Prevention recommend in emergency life threatening situations that one should drink at least two to three quarts of water a day.[43] With the assumption of good health and good weather conditions, a human being can only live three to five days without water.[44] Just 10 years after the nuclear reactor in Chernobyl melted down, a “flourishing new ecosystem is ‘one of the first examples of how, in the absence of human intervention, nature in the zone could recover its balance."[45] In destruction, disaster, and chaos, water is the catalyst for life. The same is true for one’s spirit. The flowing water of a river shapes its path and direction. The age of a particular river can be determined by the amount of meanders, bends, in said river. As the water erodes the landscape, meanders conjoin to form an oxbow lake. From the oxbow lake, a new river begins to form, straighter taking the path of least resistance. The same is true for the spirit. The spirit moves in ways uncontrollable by natural dams, claiming the power to flood an area until a new path becomes apparent.
In Genesis, the waters existed before God created life.[46] The waters were already there. Out of the waters, spring all forms of life.[47] Water is thirst quenching and cleansing. God first cleanses the creation with the flood.[48] However, after that water becomes synonymous with relief for God’s children. Isaiah 55:1 and Jeremiah 2:13 both give examples of relieving thirst with water. Ezekial 36:25 tells of the water’s ability to cleanse not just the body but also the spirit.[49] John extols the properties of the “living water…that…will become in them a spring of water gushing up to eternal life” in the story of Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well.[50]
Knowing this, baptism then, is the acknowledgement of the life giving properties water holds for our spirit. If water can do all this, just imagine what God can do with the water. We as humans make meaning. A symbol only means something when we give it meaning. When one decides to be baptized, he or she is accepting the possibilities of the combination of God and water into his or her life. He or she is allowing that force to move him or her toward the direction God is calling him or her. Water then serves as a vehicle for God’s grace. Because it is God’s grace that gives the water potential, not the amount of water used, neither sprinkling nor immersion nor pouring take precedence over the other as the acceptable act of baptism, though I prefer pouring just as a happy middle ground. Thus, the water in baptism is both highly symbolic and very real, but still not necessary for salvation.
EUCHARIST
I will admit that I have used the moment of Eucharist as my own personal confessional prayer as well as breakfast. As I grew up in the church, there was rarely much time before Sunday School for me to eat breakfast. Communion Sunday was the best for that reason. My brother’s afternoon snack when we were younger was half a loaf of King Hawaiian bread and Welch’s grape juice because he liked the taste. As I have grown older, my ideas about communion have shifted, but in the back of my mind I still think, Oh good food!
In Luke 22:14-23, Jesus established the meal with the practice of Passover traditions and emphasized the thankfulness for the meal.[51] “Then he took the cup and after giving thanks” he addressed the disciples with instructions.[52] “Then he took a loaf of bread and when he had given thanks,” and instructed again this practice to be done ‘in remembrance of me.”[53] From a feminist perspective, the feminine language Jesus used when speaking about the bread being the body and the wine being the blood also spoke of the life-giving properties of God. Just as a mother completely gives of her body and blood so that her child may have life, Jesus reminds us that God gives us life through every aspect of his creation. The meal was more than bread and wine, but as the universal church formalized the practice, the meal was reduced.
The etymology of the word Eucharist comes from the Greek word Eukharisteo which “is the usual verb for ‘to thank, to be thankful’ in the Septuagint and New Testament.”[54] Then the Eucharist was a meal shared in commune with God and other believers.[55] Early followers included fish in their meal, because when friends and family gathered food provided the physical nourishment that fellowship provided to the spirit. That practice has since subsided. Today, traditionally known as the Lord’s Supper or Holy Communion, the act consists of bread and wine or juice in most churches and a presiding ordained clergy blesses it. It is more “in remembrance” rather than thankful for community.
Church reformers in the Reformation Era held the Eucharist as one of the contentions with the church. While not even in the top five reasons for change, leaders wanted to reexamine every aspect of church life, to make it more relatable to the people, to give meaning back to the practice. Martin Luther addressed the Holy Sacraments in 1520 with The Babylonian Captivity of the Church saying, “there were not seven sacraments…but only two, baptism and the Lord’s Supper.”[56] Of the Lord’s Supper, Luther quotes Luke 22:19-20 to support “that these words meant the body and blood of Christ were truly present in the consecrated bread and wine” while still rejecting “the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation.”[57] Luther believed “the words of Jesus must speak for themselves, unencumbered by human efforts to explain God’s ways” thus giving rise to the term consubstantiation.[58]
Huldrych Zwingli, a Swiss reformer, disagreed with Luther completely. He believed that Jesus’ words in Luke 22:19 “should be taken figuratively, not literally.”[59] In his own treatise in 1523, 67 Articles, he maintained that “the true body of Christ…was not a piece of bread, but the assembly of the faithful gathered to commemorate the Last Supper” and claimed that the Eucharist was merely symbolic.[60]
John Calvin, however close to Zwingli’s argument, presented another view of the Eucharist, spiritual presence. In The Institutes of the Christian Religion of 1599, Calvin wrote, we are “certainly to conclude that they [bread and wine] are as truly exhibited to us as if Christ were placed in bodily presence before our view, or handled by our hands.”[61] He supports his argument with this analogy:
“As bread nourishes, sustains, and protects our bodily life, so the body of Christ is the only food to invigorate and keep alive the soul. When we behold wine set forth as a symbol of blood, we must think that such use as wine serves to the body, the same is spiritually bestowed by the blood of Christ; and the use is to foster, refresh, strengthen, and exhilarate.”[62]
Likewise, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church asserts “the Lord’s Supper is a representation of our redemption…and a token of love and union which Christians have with Christ and with one another.”[63] Not only do Methodists affirm the analogous state of the Lord’s Supper, but also states the idea of transubstantiation as “repugnant to the plain words of Scripture.”[64]
In the UMC, the authority of the clergy is derived from the succession of apostolic ministry.[65] These ordained men and women take the responsibility of Service, Word, Sacrament, and Order.[66] Their duties in regards to the sacraments are administration and education.[67] They are “to explain the meaning of the Lord’s Supper and to encourage regular participation as a means of grace to grow in faith and holiness.”[68]
The elements, bread and wine or juice, are dependent upon the scriptural tradition of what Jesus blesses establishing the Lord’s Supper in all three synoptic gospels. The bread represents the body, and the wine or juice represents the blood shed by Jesus. The kind of bread and wine or juice depends on a congregation’s practices. Some use wafers or crackers to reduce germ sharing, while others use whole and half loaves of bread of which all partake.[69] Whether in one cup or individual shot glasses, some use wine because the scripture calls for wine. Others began to use grape juice after Prohibition passed, but continue to do so, so all, even alcoholics, may partake.[70] Since Holy Communion is a vehicle of God’s grace which is freely given, I understand the bread as being torn from one loaf and given to each participant. The grape juice should be in one cup shared with all through the practice of intinction (dipping the bread into the cup) for hygienic purposes. I prefer wine in general, but since God’s grace is offered for all, then all children, adults, alcoholics and not, should not endure any barrier through the Holy Communion.[71]
From all these sources, I conclude the Eucharist as meant to be shared with others “in remembrance of” Jesus’ teachings and God as life-giver.[72] Intent of the heart and reverence of the soul change the act of communion from “Oh good, food!” to the power of God within us.
HUMANITY
Humanity, I believe, is God’s greatest creation. Other animals can be majestic, graceful, and even humorous. Landscaping is awe-inspiring, and the oceans are complex. Space beyond our atmosphere is vast. But with all the beauty and intricacies of creation, with all of our perceived flaws, humanity remains the best.
Genesis 1:26 tells the reader, “Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness.”[73] I interpret this as we are copies of the divine. Anyone who has tried to make a copy on a Xerox machine knows the copy does not always come out perfectly. Sometimes it is crooked, ink-splattered, faded, or completely blacked out. I look at humanity and I see asymmetrical, blotchy, pale, or dark. However, just because we are not perfect does not mean we are not complete or “good.”[74] If we have faith in an omnipotent and omniscient God, then we have the faith that God does not make mistakes. All of our perceived flaws are no more than our neurotic tendencies. God’s grace is more than we perceive.
The psalmist understands this. In the eighth psalm, he writes, “what are human beings that you are mindful of them, mortals that you care for them?”[75] We are the most cared for creations, yet we treat each other horribly. Luke reinforces the psalmist when he quotes Jesus as saying, “Consider the ravens: they neither sow nor reap, they have neither storehouse nor barn, and yet God feeds them. Of how much more value are you than the birds!”[76] The same free will that God gives graciously is what gets us into trouble repeatedly.
We are complex beings, each of us having the capacity of good and bad within us. When disaster strikes, such as Hurricane Katrina, the earthquake in Haiti, and the trifecta of destruction in Japan, all varieties of humanity responds. We make irreverent, off-color jokes, and we openly declare these acts deserved. We declare war without caring about the human collateral damage. We allow greed to overpower empathy and equality. We routinely glance away from “the cry of the needy” on the street corner.[77] We can be so completely awful.
Yet we do show signs of the good within us through caring. The fence that is permanently part of the OKC National Memorial showcases the heartfelt prayers offered for those affected. Organizations such as The Spero Project regularly fight for justice for the fringe society and opens doors for those who have to bust down walls. We send care to other countries in our funds, time, and skills through organizations such as the American Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders, etc… Children’s programs, rehabilitative services for inmates, chaplains, etc… all show the depth of care and concern people have for the rest of humanity.
All of this, our good and our bad, are all part of the imago dei that we are.
SIN AND EVIL
Sin and evil are related to each other but are not synonymous. Sin etymologically means “moral wrong-doing.”[78] Sin is not necessarily an action, though it can be. Evil is not necessarily manifest sin, but it is a lack of balance. Too often people use sin and evil to guilt others into good behavior. In a recent medical study concerned with heart patients, researches found that we “should consider addressing guilt as both a motivation for, and a barrier to, lifestyle change, particularly in patients with a religious background.”[79]
Sin, sins, sinner, sinned appears in the Bible thirty-two times. Each time, the verse represents sin as something humanity does not want to be but with which cannot help being associated. For example, “your sin will find you out,” “if someone sins against the Lord,” “forgive their sin and heal their land,” “against you, you alone, I have sinned,” “so that I may not sin against you,” “do not let your heart envy sinners,” “yet he bore the sin of many,” “our ancestors sinned, they are no more,” “only the person who sins shall die,” “if your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away,” “forgive us our sins,” “so that your sins may be wiped,” “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory,” “for the wages of sin, is death,” and “loves us and frees us from our sins” all showcase the importance of sin when trying to live a life that is right with God.[80] The sheer number of entries overwhelm a searcher with the reality of sin in our lives. Sin is a part of our lives and has been throughout our historical heritage. But these quotes are not evidence of evil.
Evil in the Bible seems to be presented as something that is inescapable but not intrinsic in humanity. Genesis starts with “the tree of knowledge of good and evil.”[81] Humanity did not know of evil until they ate the fruit of that tree. Judges tells the story of the evil performed by the Israelites.[82] Even God’s chosen people practices that are not usually associated with God. The psalmist praises the lord for the lack of fear, “I fear no evil.”[83] Matthew distinctly places evil outside of ourselves, “but rescue us from the evil one.”[84] If our actions show anything but love, we must then be in the grips of something outside of us that is intrinsically evil. John also states the same placement of evil outside of us, “to protect them from the evil one.”[85] 1 Timothy says, “money is the root of all kinds of evil,” also placing evil outside of us.[86]
However, all of these examples are problematic for me. My belief in God and humanity affect my belief of sin and evil. Since God is omnipotent and omniscient, the free will God gave us is a gracious gift of God’s likeness. Our decisions also reflect God in us. Genesis 1:26 quotes God, “Let us make humankind in our image.”[87] We are copies of the “us” and “our.”[88] I do not believe God makes mistakes. We are to use our free will to choose compassion rather than evil. Because both are options, both are natural. Society makes sin and evil stigmatized. Really, it’s just a fact of reality. Good and compassion also have preconceived notions attached, but these also are just facts of reality. If we want people to understand and rejoice in God’s love, why do we use sin and evil as guilt motivations? Should we not instead use love?
THE CHURCH’S ROLE IN THE WORLD
In our world, we are confronted with real hurts, pains, crimes of injustice, and horrible acts of cruelty. Because of this, the church’s role in the world is to guide its members through this life with spiritual tones and be the peaceable community of people that seekers look for when searching for spiritual answers or care and comfort they need.
Humanity’s propensity for enacting horrible atrocities on each other is astounding. We wage war against others who are different from us because neither will make the effort to understand the other. We tell the poor and the sick that they are a burden. We convince each other that one is more important than the other. Too often, those inside the church look like the world and its ills; “its very dividedness is a hindrance to [the church’s] mission.”[89] After all, we are merely human. But as Christians we are called to be more, to “be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another as God in Christ has forgiven you.”[90] We are to be “the visible church of Christ.”[91] The church is “the redemptive fellowship…that exists for the… edification of believers and the redemption of the world.”[92] We need to show “gratitude” for the “opportunities for reunion” of the broken pieces.[93] Yet, we continuously fail at this.
I believe love, care, and forgiveness are characteristics the church should strive to embody. Jesus called and commissioned his followers to “fish for people.”[94] He sent his original twelve disciples out into the world to “cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the leper, [and] cast out demons. You received without payment, give without payment.”[95] Jesus calls us to act in bringing healing to all of God’s people. We are to “make disciples…teaching them” what Jesus taught the twelve, for free.[96] Paul tells Timothy in his second letter “all who want to love a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.”[97] This tells us that following what Jesus taught will not be easy. The dog-eat-dog world says it is not natural for us to help and care for each other. But that is what we are called to do.
The United Methodist Church continues this call with is mission, saying “make disciples…provide the most significant arena through which disciple-making occurs.”[98] The ways that this happens reiterates Jesus’ commission to the disciples in Matthew by describing the church’s mission to “nurture persons in Christian living through worship, the sacraments, spiritual disciplines, and other means of grace…and send persons into the world to… heal the sick, feed the hungry, care for the stranger, free the oppressed, be and become a compassionate, caring presence, and work to develop social structures that are consistent with the gospel.”[99] The Social Principles is an entire part of the United Methodist constitution dedicated to the treatment of humanity, the natural world around us, and everything else in God’s creation. The United Methodist church states its stance on issues that affect the hurt and dying, the righteous and doubtful. These statements are “a call to all members” to practice what is preached and to care for more than ourselves.[100] As United Methodists we sponsor many different missions that work to fulfill Jesus’ commission.
The church must offer respite for the hurting, the pained, the offended and the criminal, and the cruel. God’s forgiveness is bigger than we can imagine. If we are able to show just a fraction of that love, forgiveness, and grace that God extends to us, imagine what the world would look like then!
[1] ed. Harriet Jane Olson, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville: The United Methodist Publishing House, 2004).
[4] Leslie Stevenson and David Haberman, Ten Theories of Human Nature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 52.
[8] Suzanne Crawford, Native American Religious Traditions (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2007), 41.
[9] Sharon Begley, "Your Brain on Religion: Mystic Visions of Brain Circuits at Work?," Newsweek, May 7, 2001.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Leslie Stevenson and David Haberman, Ten Theories of Human Nature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 181.
[12] Leslie Stevenson and David Haberman, Ten Theories of Human Nature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 181.
[20] Justo L. Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity (New York, New York: Harper Collins, 1984), 67, 77.
[21] ed. Harriet Jane Olson, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville: The United Methodist Publishing House, 2004), 60.
[22] ed. Harriet Jane Olson, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville: The United Methodist Publishing House, 2004), 67.
[23] ed. Harriet Jane Olson, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville: The United Methodist Publishing House, 2004), 124.
[26] ed. Harriet Jane Olson, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville: The United Methodist Publishing House, 2004), 60.
[29] ed. Harriet Jane Olson, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville: The United Methodist Publishing House, 2004), 67.
[30] "Neurotheology: This Is Your Brain on Religion," Talk of the Nation (New York: National Public Radio, December 15, 2010).
[31] Richard K. Avery, Hymnary, Hope Publishing Co., 1972, www.hymnary.org/hymn/UMH/558 (accessed 3 3, 2011).
[32] Richard K. Avery, Hymnary, Hope Publishing Co., 1972, www.hymnary.org/hymn/UMH/558 (accessed 3 3, 2011).
[37] Ronald L. Johnstone, Religion in Society: A Sociology of Religion (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1992), 35.
[38] Ronald L. Johnstone, Religion in Society: A sociology of Religion (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1992), 35-36.
[40] L. Fitzgerald Reist, Neil M Alexander, Judith E Smith and Marvin W Cropsey, The Book Of Discipline of The United Methodist Church (Nashville, TN: The United Methodsit Publishing House, 2008), 133.
[41] L. Fitzgerald Reist, Neil M Alexander, Judith E Smith and Marvin W Cropsey, The Book Of Discipline of The United Methodist Church (Nashville, TN: The United Methodsit Publishing House, 2008), 21.
[42] L. Fitzgerald Reist, Neil M Alexander, Judith E Smith and Marvin W Cropsey, The Book Of Discipline of The United Methodist Church (Nashville, TN: The United Methodsit Publishing House, 2008), 21.
[43] Preparedness Today, August 7, 2006, www.redcross.org/preparedness/cdc_english/foodwater-2.asp (accessed March 24, 2011).
[44] Charles W. Bryant, Discovery Health, 2011, http://health.howstuffworks.com/diseases-conditions/death-dying/live-without-food-and-water.htm (accessed March 24, 2011).
[45] Life After Chernobyl:A Surprising Ecosystem Flourishes In No-Man's Land, September 29, 2005, www.physorg.com/news6858.html (accessed March 24, 2011).
[54] Online Etymology Dictionary, 2010, www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Eucharist (accessed March 24, 2011).
[55] Browning, “The Eucharist: The Lord’s Open Table,” The Sacraments in Religious Education and Liturgy, 168.
[56] James D. Tracy, Europe's Reformations 1450-1650 Doctrine, Politics, and Community (Lnaham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2006), 54.
[57] James D. Tracy, Europe's Reformations 1450-1650 Doctrine, Politics, and Community (Lnaham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2006), 54.
[58] James D. Tracy, Europe's Reformations 1450-1650 Doctrine, Politics, and Community (Lnaham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2006), 54.
[59] James D. Tracy, Europe's Reformations 1450-1650 Doctrine, Politics, and Community (Lnaham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2006), 62.
[60] James D. Tracy, Europe's Reformations 1450-1650 Doctrine, Politics, and Community (Lnaham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2006), 62.
[61] M. John Calvin, The External Means or Aids by Which God Invites Us Into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein, Vol. 4, in The Institutes of the Christian Religion (London: Bonham Norton, 1599).
[62] M. John Calvin, The External Means or Aids by Which God Invites Us Into the Society of Christ and Holds Us Therein, Vol. 4, in The Institutes of the Christian Religion (London: Bonham Norton, 1599).
[63] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville: United Methodist Publishing House, 2004), 68.
[64] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville: United Methodist Publishing House, 2004), 64.
[65] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville: United Methodist Publishing House, 2004), 194.
[66] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville: United Methodist Publishing House, 2004), 194.
[67] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville: United Methodist Publishing House, 2004), 194.
[68] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville: United Methodist Publishing House, 2004), 239.
[69] Gayle C. Felton, United Methodists and the Sacraments (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2007), 76.
[70] Gayle C. Felton, United Methodists and the Sacraments (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2007), 77.
[71] Gayle C. Felton, United Methodists and the Sacraments (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2007), 55, 71.
[78] Douglas Harper, Online Etymology Dictionary, 2010, www.etymonline.comindex.php?term=sin (accessed March 31, 2011).
[79] Cardiovascular patients' perspectives on guilt as a motivational tool, April 4, 2011, http://esciencenews.com/articles/2011/04/04/cardiovascular.patients.perspectives.guilt.a.motivational.tool (accessed April 26, 2011).
[80] Numbers 32:23, 1 Samuel 2:25, Proverbs 23:17, Psalm 51:24, 119:11, Isaiah 53:12, Lamentations 5:7, Ezekial 18:4, Matthew 5:29, Luke 11:4, Acts 3:19, Romans 3:23, 6:23, Revelations 1:5, New Revised Standard Version.
[89] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2004), 21.
[91] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2004), 62.
[92] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2004), 68.
[93] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2004), 21.
[98] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2004), 87.
[99] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2004), 88.
[100] The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2004), 95.
