The River of Life

The following is a short meditation I gave today at Sargent Mennonite Church's  fall retreat:

Have you ever noticed how the Bible's writers don't understand basic geography?

In the book of Genesis, at the beginning of time, God put us in a garden. From the Garden flowed a river, and that river divided into four rivers, the Pishon, Gihon, Tigris and Euphrates.

The problem with this image is that rivers don't work this way, rivers start at as tiny streams forming from melting mountain snow or rainfall and flow down hill, as they flow they meet more streams and form into a river, more and more rivers connect and eventually it flows into the ocean.

But geography lessons aside, the bible tells us that a river flows out of Eden, and this is important. This is the unfolding story of humanity, a story of life flowing out of Eden.

Between the Tigris and the Euphrates, a city was built, and was called Babylon... or as we know it in the Hebrew Babel, The Babylonians built a massive step-pyramid, with hanging gardens. It was here at Babel that humanity gets dispersed, and spreads throughout the whole world.

In the Revelation of John we see a reversal, where previously we were scattered because of a city we now see a gathering together of the nations into a new city, a new Jerusalem, the city of God. God will live on earth among God's people. Again basic geography goes out the window and from God's throne there flows a new river, this time it is the river of life. On either side of the river is the tree of life, whose fruit is the healing of all the nations.

As the church, we are the beginning of that new city. When Jesus was on earth he proclaimed “The Kingdom of God is at hand” The Kingdom of God, where God reigns, began during his earthly ministry, but when Jesus left this earth, it wasn't done, instead he left the church behind to continue bringing about the kingdom. To continue working at it.

Now, during yesterday's discussion some of is noted how As humans we are incapable of bringing the kingdom of God in it's fullness, Revelation shows that this will only happen when Jesus returns, and yet that doesn't mean we don't work at it. We participate in a Kingdom that is already, and not yet, and we invite others to join us in that Kingdom.

Like the river that flows from the city, we are called to go out into the world, and like the river flowing out of Eden, we break geographical bounds and spread out, travelling north and south and east and west. As we travel we come in contact with other people, and the Gospel, the good news of Jesus Christ, the Tree of Life, which surrounds us on both sides is offered as a way of healing all the nations.

The Greatest Among Equals

The following is an essay I wrote last year about the book of Job for a class I took on Justice.

Job as Primus Inter Pares

If we take the prologue seriously, Job had it all; He had wealth, power, a good family, and friends. However, after that first chapter, he's left with nothing, and the four people who are even around him at all are just there to gang up on him. By drawing on Girard and Nietzsche, we can see that Job's friends' speeches of temporal retribution are justifications for why they have removed him from his place in society.

Girard claims that Job is a broken Idol.¹ His initial economic success results in his friends making him the "primus inter pares," or first among equals. Because he is better than them, they strive to be like him, imitating him as a model. However, this creates resentment, "why is Job the one on top and not me?" they all ask, and so they begin to loath him.²

This ties in with Nietzsche’s writing "Homer on Competition," where we read about how the Greeks had two gods named Eris, or "Strife". One was a bad Strife, which causes people to kill and fight; the other is a good Strife, one which causes people to want to be the best.³ In a polis where everyone is roughly the same, then looking at the primus inter pares (to use Girard's term) inspires you to become better because you know that you can reach that goal. This pushes everyone to go forward, working harder and harder for your goal. However, if the primus inter pares is way above you, then competition becomes pointless, if you know you will never be as good as them, you will never even try.

In the Greek polis, they had a method to deal with this, when someone got too good, they would be ostracized, as the Ephesians said when they banned Hormodor "Amongst us, nobody should be the best; but if someone is, let him be somewhere else, with other people".⁴

In Highshool, I was on the wrestling team. I fought in the Heavyweight division. In that division there were about 7 of us who would compete regularly at tournaments, and so we got to know one another. However one wrestler, Fitzgerald, was way better than the rest of us; so it was always a given that he would win the tournament. Therefore we did not bother comparing ourselves to him. Instead, we looked at the rest of the pack. At any given match we could lose or win. Yes some of us won more often than not, but there was genuine competition between us as we tried to make it to the top of the pack. I remember the first time I beat Gallant who was older and bigger than I was, I can tell you exactly what five moves I used, but I don't remember any matches I had with Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald was ostracized from the group.

In Job's culture, they did not have this mechanism of exclusion, so as Job becomes more and more great/ powerful socially, there was one of two options, either let competition die, the culture around him becoming stagnant as he remained at the top, or find a reason to get rid of Job. When Job loses all of his possessions and gets sick the community uses this opportunity to scapegoat him, claiming that their total rejection of him, from his friends down to the people he would not even let watch his dogs, is because they are merely following God's will. Job must have done something to upset God, and if God has punished Job, then they should stay away from him.⁵

After Job loses his family, wealth and health and social standing, three of his friends come to him. After seven days Job opens his mouth and laments that he was ever born. His friends respond telling him that he has brought this disaster on himself, that God is punishing him for something that he did because "who that was innocent ever suffered?"⁶ According to them, God gives good things to those who are good, and punishes those who are wicked. Therefore Job must have done something to make God mad at him.

So they begin listing off things that Job has done. They think that he has not been treating the poor fairly. By charging unfair collateral for loans he's made, and being uncharitable with his actions, sending away the hungry and thirsty, he has set "snares... all around" himself.⁷ When he protests his innocence, Zophar sees this as blaspheming God. Obviously Job has sinned, or else he would not be getting punished, his suffering is proof that he has done something wrong.⁸

Girard looks at these speeches and says that this is only what's happening on the surface, that the friend's need for finding some reason that Job is suffering is in fact a means for his scapegoat process to work. Because they do not have a means to ostracize him the same way that the Greeks do, they sacralize their actions by putting blame on Job.

Job fights this, while he originally agrees with their understanding of temporal retribution, Job knows that he has not done anything worth the amount of punishment he is receiving. Over time he begins to realize that since he is innocent, he can find assurance knowing that the true God, his witness, is alive and will defend him against the "God" of mimetic rivalry and temporal retribution, even if this occurs only after death.⁹ He no longer needs his old standing in society because that is no longer the measure by which he defines success.

1 Rene Girard, “The Ancient Trail Trodden by the Wicked,” 20.

2 Ibid., 31.

3 Friedrich Nietzsche, “Homer on Competition,” 189.

4 Ibid., 191.

5 Rene Girard, “Job as Failed Scapegoat,” 191.

6 Job 4:7 English Standard Version.

7 Job 22:5-9, ESV.

8 Job 15:5-6

9 Rene Girard, “Job as Failed Scapegoat,” 202.

Concord

The following is a presentation I gave for my Theology of the Reformations Class on October 3rd. It is based on sections 4-6 of the Formula of Concord found here.

The Formula of Concord

            Following Luther's death in 1546, Pope Paul III and Emperor Charles V agreed to a military solution to the Lutheran problem they were facing, by 1547 he had conquered Wittenberg's Castle Church, the building where the 95 theses had been posted in 1517.[1] Following his military victory Charles V tried to settle church matters through the Augsburg Interim, a document which compromised allowing clergy to marry and give both elements in the Eucharist but demanded they submit to Rome in other manners such as affirming transubstantiation.[2] This compromise did not sit well with either side, the pope demanding total rejection of Lutheranism which caused the Lutheran rulers to realize they would lose everything if they accepted the interim.[3]

            This led to Charles enforcing the Augsburg Interim militarily. To appease this, Philip Melanchthon was willing to compromise with Rome, writing a document called the Leipzig Interim, which would grant a lot of concessions to Rome. Melanchthon’s Followers would become known as Philipists.[4] When the Leipzig Interim failed to give him the peace he thought it would, and realizing that he was then considered a traitor by many of his people, Elector Maurice betrayed Charles and drove Imperial forces out of Augsburg. This led to the peace of Augsburg and the principal Cuius regio, eius religio (he who rules, his the religion), drawing the major conflict between Lutheranism and Catholicism to a close.[5]

            However this did not create peace within Lutheranism. The Philipists and their compromises were opposed by the Gnesio-Lutherans (Gnesio meaning “Genuine”), who argued for a closer following of Luther's original Doctrines.[6] This theological conflict was brought to a close by the work of a third group led by Jacob Andreae and Martin Chemnetz. They saw that a lot of the arguing was centered around Personality Conflicts, and polarization caused by the nature of arguing.[7]

            Eventually in 1577 they signed the Formula of Concord and submitted it to Elector Augustus, spending the next three years persuading Priests, laypeople, and theologians to accept it.[8]

            The Formula of Concord is very methodical. For each Controversy it addresses, it gives a brief synopsis of the debate, ignoring mention of who said what, then gives the authors' solution to the debate in terms of Affirmative Theses and Negative theses. This form works very well because it acknowledges the merits of both sides while still being clear about what it rejects.

            The section of the Formula that we read for class develops an understanding of how actions, while unnecessary for salvation, are important to the life of a Christian. In “Concerning Good Works,” It is very careful to maintain that justification is through faith alone, but it also emphasizes that good works are necessary proof that your faith is alive.[9] This section draws James 2:17 into the discussion of Sola Fide, However the division between an alive faith, and salvation seems contradictory. If you faith is dead, shouldn’t that mean your salvation is lost?

            Then in “Concerning Law and Gospel” it distinguishes between law, that which is commanded to us, and gospel, the free gift from Jesus Christ which is “grace, comforting, and making alive”.[10] I find this division troubling because, while carefully nuanced, there is a sense in which it vilifies the law. In This context, the law is used to show how necessary grace is, ignoring the fact that the giving of the law is also an act of grace. While we were previously living in darkness, without any sort of moral compass, the law, even at its most basic- don't eat the fruit- is grace because it protects us from harm, like a mother telling a child don't touch the stove.

            In the Final section we read “Concerning the Third use of the Law.” The law is a teaching tool for those already saved. Because of the fallen nature of the world, Christians still need guidance in how to live. However, Christians obey the law with “a willing spirit... what no threat of the law could ever force from them”.[11]

            The problem is that faith in this context seems to be one of intellectual assent. If you believe in Jesus, then you are saved. That if we are saved sola fide, then we then we are automatically inclined to do good works/ obey the law.  I hold a more pessimistic view of human nature, that even after we are forgiven we will still face the temptation of sin, and that we will still fall to it. Instead, I believe that faithfulness also has an aspect of loyalty to it, that grace gives us the ability to struggle with sin, and the fact that we are struggling, even if we fall is important.

            Identity is often based in contrast to the other. Who we are is often defined by who we are not. The Protestants are not Catholic; the Philipists are not like the other Lutherans; the Gnesio-Lutherans are not Philipists. There have been literally thousands of divisions in the church since then, usually based on who they are not. The Formula of Concord is an attempt at taking some of these divisions and working in the opposite direction. It recognizes the differences in doctrine between the two sides, and works towards a common understanding, and should be applauded for what it accomplished: unity between two sides. I wonder if more statements of shared belief would be helpful in healing other divisions in the church?

---

[1] Paul Timothy McCain, “Editor’s Introduction to the Formula of Concord,” in Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2006), 443-445.

[2] Ibid., 445.

[3] Ibid., 446.

[4] Ibid., 451.

[5] Ibid., 452.

[6] Ibid., 451.

[7] Ibid., 453.

[8] Ibid., 457.

[9] Jacob Andreae and Martin Chemnetz, “Fromula of Concord (1580)” in A Reformation Reader: Primary Texts and Introductions, ed. Dennis R. Janz (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2008), 159.

[10] Ibid., 161.

[11] Ibid., 162.

How Do I know who Jesus is?

For a recent class I had to write an essay around Who is Jesus, one of the possibilities was to write about where we get our understandings about Jesus. The following is what I handed in:

 Introductory Essay

I would like to think that my primary source for my understanding of Jesus is the bible, of course that would be quite an oversimplification. In fact many books, classes and people have fed into how I read the bible, and interpret it. The following are some of the major influences when it comes to how I read scripture.

My Family has always been Christian, and I accepted Jesus at an early age. I attended Sunday School, Pioneer Club (a Christianized Boy Scout/Girl Guide program), Jr and Sr Youth programs. My Family also taught me about the importance of reading the bible devotionally. One of the images in my mind of my father is of him laying on his bed after supper reading his bible. Bibicaly literacy was important to him, he brought home cards with the names of the books of the bible from a conference and every day after supper we had to practice them. While I was never really good at memorizing the order, I learned a little about each one.

My parents also subscribed me to receive packs of 10 index cards once a month. These Index cards had a picture on the front of a biblical character, location, story, or theme, or some sort of cultural aspect. On the back it had a brief description as well as key bible versus referencing whatever the card was about. I used to spend hours looking at those cards, organizing them (I could never decide if they should be organized thematically or alphabetically), and reading the backs, they taught me about the bible and some of it's context.

I attended Rockway Mennonite Collegiate from grade 7 through 12. While there we had to take religious studies classes. In grade 8 Kathy Collins had us study the beatitudes, and in my grade 9 year, Kyle Gingerich Hiebert taught my class from Donald Kraybill's Upside Down Kingdom, where I began learning that Jesus's teachings don't always have the straightforward meaning we think they do because of the differences in culture between 21^st Century Canada and first century Palestine.

Another early influence was through the Left Behind series by Tim LaHaye and Jerry B Jenkins when I was in High School. After reading about the rapture, and the 7 year tribulation in those books, I wanted to learn more. As such, I read some of LaHaye's non-fiction books, I learned all about the Pre-Tribulation theory, and I was really bought into it. At one point LaHaye says that we should take the bible literally as much as possible, except when it is obviously metaphor. While I no longer accept this premise (see below), it is where I started (in tension with my lessons from Rockway).

Other early influences include Tony Campolo, especially his book Red Letter Christian where I learned the importance of Christocentrism, that scripture should be read in light of the words of Jesus (hence the bit about Red Letters), and Shane Claiborne's Jesus For President, where I was introduced to the Imperial imagery used to describe Jesus' triumphal entry and passion.

My first year in Undergraduate Studies was at Tyndale University College in Toronto, Ontario. That is where I was first introduced to Biblical Studies. I took two classes there that greatly impacted my faith and understanding of Jesus. The First Class was Stephen Thomson's Introduction to New Testament. There a lot of my earlier understandings from Sunday School and my literalistic reading of the bible. It seemed like every single class Professor Thomson would pick some foundational belief about God and in the course of an hour destroy it, demonstrating how completely wrong I was about it, and then somehow by the end of the class rebuild it with a deeper understanding. It also introduced me to Second Temple Judaism, and the world of first century Palestine.

The second class at Tyndale that influenced my understanding of Jesus was Benjamin Reynold's Hermeneutics Class. The Text books for the class were How to Read the Bible for all it's Worth by Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart, and W. Randoloh Tate's Biblical Interpretation: An Integrated Approach. This class completely destroyed my literalist approach to reading the bible. I learned that I needed to read passages understanding their form, structure, and genre, that I needed to know the literary and biblical contexts before I could come to some conclusion about what the bible says about an issue, as well as the tools in which to gain this knowledge. The class moved me from a literal understanding of scripture to a literary understanding.

Eventually I transferred to Canadian Mennonite University where I continued my studies in Biblical and Theological Studes. Again, two courses have influenced how I understand Jesus. First, Sheila Klassen-Wiebe's Synoptic Gospel's class. Which taught me more about the scholarship surrounding the three synoptic gospels, as well as introduced me to a bible synopsis, which is one of my favourite tools for when I'm looking at a text from one of them because I get to see multiple perspectives of the same story about Jesus.

The other class at CMU that has impacted my understanding of Jesus is Harry Huebner's class Theology of Peace and Justice. The main unit of the class was about working through John Howard Yoder's The Politics of Jesus. The Thesis of which is that Jesus left behind an ethic, or politic, which is knowable through the biblical witness.

This past summer I participated in Mennonite Church Canada's Ministry Inquiry Program for my practicum. I spent my summer working at Steinmann Mennonite Church in Baden, Ontario as a pastoral intern. This experience informed my understanding of Jesus as the head of the church. The church truly became to me the hands and feet of Jesus within the community. The various events and committees lived out Jesus' commandment to love our neighbours through various outreach and service projects. In worship I learned about the Post-Resurrection Jesus who is head of the Church, and still calls us to follow him.

These are most of my main influences when it comes to my understanding of scripture and who Jesus is. I am sure there are many more, that I could list, but I am only allowed 3 pages.