Saturday 23 August 2008

It's not just my appearance that's changed.

I've travelled such a journey over my Christian life. I was reflecting on this a week or so ago when I attended a meeting I go to once a month in the city nearest "my" jails. It is for ministry leaders and most of us are clergy but not all. One of the things we have in common is that we would all be termed "evangelical", at least by those who disagreed with us, even if not by ourselves. I think the word "evangelical" can be most unhelpful at times and I wouldn't introduce myself as evangelical any more as I see how it is a loaded word. If you say it, a lot of people immediately think of some of the worst examples of American tv evangelists on the God channels on television, promelgating a prosperity gospel or making money out of very earnest but simple-minded viewers. I'm SO not one of them. To be perfectly honest I don't care any more what term somebody cares to apply to me, and that's an example of what a long way I've come.

I grew up a church goer. I had no choice as my dad was the minister! I don't think my dad would describe himself as either left or right, high or low, liberal or evangelical. At least I've never heard him use any of those terms of himself. My faith was real when I was a child but of course I didn't understand any theology or doctrine. When I was thirteen I went to a Scripture Union camp. On Good Friday (Friday the thirteenth, lol) 1979, I suddenly understood what the cross was all about and I look back on that as the moment when I stopped being one of God's grandchildren, with an inherited (though real) faith, and became one of His children. No, that's not true. God doesn't have grandchildren. I was one of His children anyway, but now I understood it. Or whatever. I don't mind any more. Such is the change in me.

As a young adult I had a wee spell going to a Baptist church and a wee spell going to a charismatic independent church. But almost all my life I've been in the Church of Scotland, which I love although I'm often exasperated by it!

Christians the world over, we believe, are brothers and sisters in Christ. We believe we are one body with many parts. We believe these things about ourselves, and yet there are thousands of different protestant denominations, plus the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches. When I first learned about the number of protestant denominations I literally cried. It's so sad.

However, now I'm old (!) I understand that although the divisions are indeed sad, they are not evidence that Christians are all nasty horrible squabbly quarrelsome types. Rather I now understand that most of the divisions have come about because people earnestly want to do what pleases God. It's just they can't agree on what that is! For example, my being an ordained minister is controversial in the Christian world where many of my brothers and sisters (and that's how I see them) think that I'm disobeying the Bible. I'm not offended in the least by that. Actually I can see how they arrive at their position, though I disagree with it. I can see both sides of the debate about infant versus adult/believer's baptism too, and could argue both cases (and have done).

Most splits in church history have occurred because people were earnestly trying to do the right thing.

However, the splits are still really sad, and even though the motivation wasn't bad as such, the results were. God is no doubt pleased that people want to please Him but I have come to the position now when I think that nailing down every finer point of doctrine is NOT the way to go about pleasing God. He'd be much more pleased with us if we left off worrying about all that stuff, and got on with the business of loving people, and indeed loving each other and loving Him.

I said I'd come a long way in my Christian life. When I was at university studying for my bachelor of divinity degree, in the early nineties, I used to get frustrated by Calvin's Institutes (pictured). We had a two volume edition, great big tomes of the sort people use to prop up their bed if it collapses. I used to get frustrated with John Calvin becaue I felt there were areas in his systematic theology where he was too vague! Every now and again, Calvin has the sense (I now see it is sense but I didn't then) to say simply, "There is a mystery here..." and leave it at that.

I wanted every i dotted and every t crossed as a student. No doubt it was good for me at that time to be robust in my critique of various doctrines and ways of thinking.

However now that it's 2008 and I'm a prison chaplain, all is different. I'm part of a two person team, the other member of which is a Roman Catholic priest. We're not employed by the churches but by the prison service. In the eyes of the prison service, and in the eyes of most prisoners, we're totally interchangeable. At least once a week I will be asked by a prisoner if I'm the priest. (They don't know that the fact I'm a woman immediately signals I couldn't be...).

That's not the only thing that's changed me. In the past, as a minister, I've been caught up in all the intrigue of church politics and ecclesiology and doctrine issues too - issues which seem to matter in church circles. Over the past year I've realised just how much of that baggage I needed to shed, and working with prisoners has taught me to focus on what really matters. I've realised the most important thing I can do is love the prisoner, and if at all possible to point them in God's direction.

I haven't actually abandoned my "evangelical" theology at all. In some ways it's stronger than ever. More than ever I believe in the need for redemption. More than ever I believe in the need for the cross. More than ever I believe in man's inability to earn his own salvation. The Bible sounds different when you read it to prisoners but just in the sense it's more real and immediate somehow. And if I'd to pick a group of clergy to hang out with, far and away my comfort zone would be the one with the evangelicals in it, but I don't need to be garrisoned away in there any more. I am so much more able than I was as a young student to work with those of other theological persuasions and look for the good in what they say. But I haven't sold out and I don't hold with the "all paths lead to God" stuff. Just look round the jail and you'll see some paths leading in the exactly opposite direction, sadly.

But I've definitely mellowed in my way, and it's so ironic that I've been liberated by being in prison!

The meeting last week was attended by 23 people. There were quite a few apologies. But among those 23, LOADS of different denominations were represented. Not once was a doctrinal or ecclesiological difference even mentioned. We meet together for mutual support, to pray for the city and to pray for one another's ministries. Some of us come from denominations where babies are baptised, some from denominations where only grown believers are baptised. Some of us come from denominations which have women in leadership, some not. Some of us are Calvinist and some of us are Arminian, and others another variation. In those meetings, it matters not a jot. We love and support each other and pray together. I find those meetings a real highlight in my month.

6 comments:

Ruth Hull Chatlien said...

You express so much wisdom in this post. I wish so much that we could focus on what we have in common and, as you say, get down to the business of loving.

Mr. Nighttime said...

Anne - Unfortunately, Christianity shares the same burden as most, if not all other religions, that of the concept of who is practicing the "one true faith." Judaism suffers from the same malady. We have the Ultra-Orthodox in the form of Hasdism, Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform. There is even an Ultra-reform movement, at least here in the US as well. The different divisions in Hinduism are staggering, and even Buddhism has two main schools of thought on the teachings of the Buddha and the correct path to Nirvana.

"But I haven't sold out and I don't hold with the "all paths lead to God" stuff. Just look round the jail and you'll see some paths leading in the exactly opposite direction, sadly."

I think the term you mean might be "All RELIGIONS are a path to God," which was actually a quote from the Indian sage Ramakrishna. Personally, I hold with that, though as you know I don't ascribe to any religion. I have not, for some time, thought that ANY religion has a stranglehold on the truth. There is another Indian saying that I like:

"Truth is one. The sages know it by many names."

If your own personal faith sustains you, if your believe is strong enough to carry you through your day-to-day living, then no organizational divisiveness should shake that. I understand that you are very connected to your denomination, and can sympathize with your frustrations regarding why Christians let their differences divide them so. I saw it with my own parents that would talk down upon certain other denominations in Judaism. I remember my mother saying "Those Hasids! Who do they thing they are! They think they are the only ones that can decide who is Jewish and who isn't!"

"Some of us come from denominations which have women in leadership, some not. Some of us are Calvinist and some of us are Arminian, and others another variation. In those meetings, it matters not a jot. We love and support each other and pray together. I find those meetings a real highlight in my month."

Ah! Now, is this not the key? But let me ask you: Could you find yourself praying together with a religious gathering of Jews, Hindus, Taosits, Buddhists, Navajos Greek Orhtodox, Russian Orthodox, Roman Catholic, all in the same room?

I'll leave you with a quote by Carl Jung: "Religion is a defense against the religious experience."

It took me a bit to decipher that one, but finally did.

AnneDroid said...

All religions are a path to God, are they, Mr N? I'd like to hear more about how you can believe that and yet not want to follow one - do you not want to get to God, or do you think you have a path of your own? It can't be that you don't believe in God, or you couldn't believe that all religions were a path to Him...

I don't believe all religions are a path to God, and I don't share your problem with believing one thing and rejecting others. It is definitely possible to believe other people are wrong without either feeling superior, or treating them badly. For example, you know I'm a great fan of yours!! I am not the tiniest bit offended by the thought that you think I'm wrong, or that my Muslim friends think I'm wrong, or that my atheist friends think I'm wrong and I'd hate to think they were offended by my believing something contrary to what they believe. We still love each other.

As regards multi-faith services, I don't get them. I'd love to spend time in a mixed group as you suggest, and I'm sure we'd learn a lot from each other etc.. But as far as worshipping together I'm not sure how that's supposed to work - to whom do we pray, what writings do we read, and basically and fundamentally what would be the point?

This coming week I will be escorting a prisoner to a spiritualist service. Will that do? I won't be participating though as I fundamentally and quite strongly disagree with what they're about.

Mr. Nighttime said...

Anne - Sorry for not responding sooner, but yesterday was a busy one, as there was repair work to be done on my house. A lot of small things, but enough to make me exhausted by the end of the day.

I first think that there needs to be some clarification.

I get the sense that you think I am attacking you for your beliefs, and nothing could be further from the truth. You have faith that I do not have, and most likely will never have. It issimply a reflection of our life experiences that brings us to the place where we are today, in a spiritual sense.

"All religions are a path to God, are they, Mr N? I'd like to hear more about how you can believe that and yet not want to follow one - do you not want to get to God, or do you think you have a path of your own? It can't be that you don't believe in God, or you couldn't believe that all religions were a path to Him..."

I think that to answer this query, the first thing that needs to be defined are the differences in the paths we follow when it comes to the concept of God. You come from a traditionally theological approach. Your belief in God is rooted in your religion, and your own personal faith, and is something that has been deeply ingrained in you since childhood. Having so many in your family that were ministers certainly played a role; how could it not? At the same time, it is obvious that you came to your own spiritual/religious convictions on your own as well, based on what you wrote.

My path on the other hand, was the result of a dissatisfaction of what I experienced as a result of my own religious upbrining, or rather lack of it. It was superficial at best, though as you probably are aware, being Jewish carries its own cultural identity as well. I think that perhaps on relfection, it was my lack of this identity that started me on hte road of questioning my own faith, and the very existence of a literal God.

I struggled for many years to reconcile this. There was this part of me that wanted to believe in a literal loving God that watches over us, but the part of my brain that is steeped in reason and science refused to accept this. Finally, through a conversation with with a friend, I was introduced to mythology, the writings of Campbell, Jung, Heinrich Zimmer and others that showed me there was a way of looking at the concept of God in a completely different manner; I began to see religion through the lens of mythology, of metaphor, as opposed to theology. This allowed me to see that the idea of God was not something unique to Judaism, or Christianity, Islam, or any religion for that matter.

I also began to understand that, from a metaphorical point of view, God was the ultimate metaphor that we use for the transcendent energy that is the source of all life, hence my going away from the thinking that God assumes either a male or female role. This source is something that both religion and science seek. The problem is, in my view, that there is a tendency from a theological approach to concretize these ideas, to make them a literal fact.

My own path does not take me down that road. Hence, I have discovered that while religions may differ in the way they have been culturally inflected, their basic goal is the same: To find the source of all life, which is reflected in the metaphor of the word "God." Some religions believe that God assumes a male form, some believe that for God to be God, it is transcendent of all names and forms.

"I don't believe all religions are a path to God, and I don't share your problem with believing one thing and rejecting others. It is definitely possible to believe other people are wrong without either feeling superior, or treating them badly."

I understand completely why you wouldn't believe all religions are a path to God. "No one comes to the Father but through me." This is about as blanket a statement as ever has been one, and if you are a true believer, there can be no other path.

You misunderstand me though. I don't accept one thing and reject another. I reject all religious ideas based on the concept that one particular belief system is superior to another. In short, no one religion has the handle on truth, and neither does science for that matter, from my point of view.

"For example, you know I'm a great fan of yours!! I am not the tiniest bit offended by the thought that you think I'm wrong, or that my Muslim friends think I'm wrong, or that my atheist friends think I'm wrong and I'd hate to think they were offended by my believing something contrary to what they believe. We still love each other."

Anne, Anne, Anne, I am NOT offended for you believing the way you do. I will never have your experience, nor should I. we may disagree on the basic idea of God, but that should not preclude us from liking each other as people. I have friends that are very devout in terms of their faith, and they make me crazy sometimes when they ascribe all their blessings to God instead of the fruits of their own efforts, but I love them to death. On the other side, I have atheist friends, Richard Dawkins devotees, who are just as trident, almost militant in their beliefs. (Is that an oxymoron for an atheist, to have a belief? ;-) ) Believe me, they get me pissed off too for their inability to look beyond just their own limited world view.

I am pleased you like my writings, as I like yours, otherwise, I would not be coming back to your blog as often as I do. Friends can disagree about many things, but always find a way to the things that brought them together in the first place.

I hope this clears some things up.

AnneDroid said...

Hey, what a full answer. Thanks for taking the time. I appreciate it. And as regards "I get the sense that you think I am attacking you for your beliefs", I didn't think that at all, so no worries.

"God was the ultimate metaphor that we use for the transcendent energy that is the source of all life, hence my going away from the thinking that God assumes either a male or female role. This source is something that both religion and science seek." I'm closer to this thinking than you might suppose. I too see God as the ultimate metaphor for the transcendent energy that is the source of all life, and think He's way above comparison to mere male of female roles. I just happen to additionally think that, astonishingly this transcendent being doesn't want to remain aloof, but wants a relationship with us, his creatures, whom He loves, and made with the spark of His image within them.

Re science, I LOVE science but I don't find it takes me away from faith but rather confirms it. My uncle, who was a professor of nuclear physics, says that science neither proves or disproves your faith. If you have faith you see things as supporting it, if you don't you see science as providing alternative explanations. And herein lies the issue. I think faith can be "caught" to some degree, like an infection, but in a good way! But I don't think anyone is EVER argued into believing. Sometimes I forget I believe that and try it anyway. But even if I had the apologetic skill, which I by no means have, to try to answer all your objections, it would be to no avail. Same if you tried to argue away my faith (I know you don't want to). We would both just become more entrenched.

To a degree you're right that I was of course hugely influenced by my upbringing. On the other hand my brother had the same upbringing, and as far as I know isn't a believer. My husband, by contrast, didn't have a church upbringing and was converted as an adult. So it's not all childhood, as you acknowledge.

What I do believe, and you'll think this is nuts, is that if God calls you to faith one day, you'll find that irresistible, and your objections will dissolve...

Mr. Nighttime said...

"Re science, I LOVE science but I don't find it takes me away from faith but rather confirms it. "

You know it's funny. Joseph Campbell remarked that he saw no conflict between religion and science; religion had to accept the science of the day and penetrate it to the mystery. Stephen Hawking commented that to if a unified theory of physics were developed, we would know the mind of God.

As for your brother, it just goes to show how our own individual natures can influence us more strongly than outside forces sometimes.

"What I do believe, and you'll think this is nuts, is that if God calls you to faith one day, you'll find that irresistible, and your objections will dissolve..."

Good thing I have call forwarding on my phone. Can I give him your number? *wink*