You are browsing the archive for 2010 April.

Thresholds

April 28, 2010 in General, Religion

I’m finishing up Crossing the Threshold of Hope. The title never really meant anything until I began to hope. I find it to be the most inviting book title I’ve heard in a very long time. It seems to be what I’m doing, but to cross a threshold, one must walk.

And there’s the rub.

John Paul II writes,

Christ wants to awaken human hearts. He wants them to respond to the word of the Father, but he wants this in full respect for human dignity. In the very search for faith an implicit faith is already present, and therefore the necessary condition for salvation is already satisfied. (193)

I’ve read that a dozen times, and it brings a smile each time. It’s not that I’m thinking, “I’m searching, so I’m home free!” Rather, there’s been this sense, this ineffable feeling, that this working on faith is itself a kind of faith.

The old adage about longest journeys and first steps isn’t merely an empty cliche. In picking up my foot, I have to have a certain kind of — dare I say it? — faith that it will land on solid ground. I take this for granted daily, but only because it has been confirmed again and again. And because I constantly and unconsciously check my environment countless times as I walk to make sure I am on firm ground. Yet infants don’t have that experience, and each step is an adventure.

This surely is what Paul had in mind when he wrote of “mere babes in Christ.”

A Community of Believers

April 13, 2010 in General, Religion

Today’s reading:

The community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they had everything in common. [...] There was no needy person among them, for those who owned property or houses would sell them, bring the proceeds of the sale, and put them at the feet of the Apostles, and they were distributed to each according to need. (Acts 4:32, 34, 35)

Conservatives descry “redistribution of wealth,” but on the surface, this certainly appears to be an apt description what’s going on here. Many commentators have noted the sharing involved in the early church, and this sounds positively communistic.

What’s the difference? On the face of it, the voluntary nature is the most obvious. There’s no indication that anyone commanded these believers to surrender their relative wealth. Further, there’s no indication that the Apostles used guilt as a motivator. This is in clear contrast with what many televangelists have done throughout the years.

The Gospel

Knowing and knowledge appear twice in the same week. Perhaps that’s intentional?

The Gospel reading for today was the story of Nicodemus. In the midst of this story I’d heard so many times growing up, something new: “[W]e speak of what we know and we testify to what we have seen, but you people do not accept our testimony.” It’s interesting that Jesus presents a dichotomy: “what we know” is not necessarily “what we have seen.” Reliance only on the latter to inform the former is the materialism I’ve embraced for so many years. They’re not necessarily the same, and to insist that they are identical is limiting.

It all calls to mind, once again, the division William James makes about those who seek truth versus those who avoid error. In being a strict materialist, I felt I was avoiding all error because I was relying on my senses or others’ senses. Yet in relying on others, I’m essentially relying on their testimony. Granted, with many matters (particularly science), I can verify what others testify by observing things in question for myself. But in reality that only represents a small fraction of knowledge available.

This is essentially what I’m wrestling with: can I trust the testimony of the authors of scripture? I don’t yet have an answer for that

Knowing and Believing

April 11, 2010 in General, Religion

The Gospel reading today seemed particularly appropriate for me.

On the evening of that first day of the week, when the doors were locked, where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. The disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.”

Thomas, called Didymus, one of the Twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples said to him, “We have seen the Lord.” But he said to them, “Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands and put my finger into the nailmarks and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”

Now a week later his disciples were again inside and Thomas was with them. Jesus came, although the doors were locked, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace be with you.” Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here and see my hands, and bring your hand and put it into my side, and do not be unbelieving, but believe.” Thomas answered and said to him, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him, “Have you come to believe because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed.”

Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of his disciples that are not written in this book. But these are written that  you may come to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that through this belief you may have life in his name.

That is I: show me the nail marks. Give me proof. But it’s more than that, because I’ve always been able to explain away everything like a good materialist.

This proof mentality is a direct result of my religious upbringing, because everything not only could but should be proved. Never mind that the proving was little more than proof-texting, ripping verses completely out of context to back up a Victorian-era pet conspiracy theory. But believing doesn’t require that kind of proof. I’m growing strangely comfortable with that.

When the film Dogma was released, I remember seeing protest letters proudly displayed in the art house theater were I watched it. Catholics were angry and offended. I scoffed at their hypersensitivity, and even now, I have no major issues with a film that mocks this or that religion. We’re all adults. Still, there is one element of the film that lingered in my mind, and oddly enough, it’s framing how I view proof and certainty. Rufus, the thirteenth apostle, asks the main protagonist, Bethany, about the certainty of her newly-found religious belief. “I have a pretty good idea,” replied Bethany, and Rufus smiles approvingly.

A “pretty good idea” works well for me right now.