A View from the Back Pew -- Review

A VIEW FROM THE BACK PEW: God, Religion & Our Personal Quest for Truth. By Tim O’Donnell. Kansas City, MO: Linchpin Publishing, 2011. Xiv + 264 pages.

More and more people are identifying themselves as “spiritual but not religious.” This new category of religious people is comprised mostly of people who believe in God or at least some “higher power,” but are either dissatisfied with institutional religion or have been hurt by it. They like God, just not the institution. This “new” breed of spiritually-inclined people tends to be eclectic, though their understandings of spirituality often reflect aspects of whatever tradition they may have been born into. In this new age of spirituality, where religious observance and institutional membership aren’t required or expected people feel free to strike out on their own, picking and choosing from among the various religious offerings. In this new world of spirituality, there is no central authority, but because of the entrepreneurial spirit that is inherent in this new age, one can either choose to be one’s own spiritual authority or attach oneself to one of the many spiritual guides who have emerged in the age of new media. Ultimately, in this age of spiritual eclecticism the individual is the final arbiter of truth.

Tim O’Donnell’s apparently self-published book A View From the Back Pew offers readers a personal memoir of a spiritual journey that reflects this new spirit. The author is a business entrepreneur, former newspaper publisher, and most importantly is a former Roman Catholic. He writes about the journey he took from a rather traditional Roman Catholic upbringing, which included the requisite run-ins with narrow minded and physically abusive Nuns to the realization that he was free to embrace the God within. In large part this book is a product of what O’Donnell calls “The Deal,” a pact he made with God while a college student studying in Rome. He had a spiritual experience that led him to abandon college and pursue his fortune, which he would then use to serve God. When the Roman Church seemingly didn’t have much use for his gift, once he had made his fortune, he chose to strike out on his own and use his fortune to tell his story.

The book itself alternates between stories from his life that carry him to the point at which he could share his sense of the life in the Spirit, with his reflections on the nature of this life – including sharing his own doctrinal perspectives. In the epilogue O’Donnell provides the window by which the journey can be evaluated. The title of the book comes from a more recent experience in Rome, where he is sitting in the back pew of the chapel where he had worshiped as a college student. At that moment, he realized that “one could come to communion with God from within. In a rush of overwhelming understanding, I knew the Church was a man made institution that could not deliver a man to where God really dwelt” (p. 256).

As you read this book you can’t help but sympathize with his struggles, though as a Protestant I have to be careful not to embrace too eagerly a negative portrayal of the Roman Catholic Church (Protestants have been known to do this). But while I can understand why O’Donnell felt hemmed in by the institutional forces of religion, I also found myself needing to raise questions.

Although I could critique this book on theological and historical grounds that wouldn’t seem to make much sense. That critique might sound defensive, and I’m not sure the author would find my critique all that compelling. So, for the most part I’ll leave those issues alone. What I would like to do is raise some questions about tendencies I see in the “spiritual but not religious” movement, which are exemplified in this book, that do concern me.

I’ll start with O’Donnell’s relationship with Roman Catholicism. It is clear that his understanding of Christian faith is wrapped up tightly with what he learned and experienced growing up in the Catholic Church, especially his education in Catholic schools, including those encounters with rather physically abusive nuns. This schooling introduced Tim O’Donnell to a rather narrow view of faith, one that was rigid and punitive. There were, of course, signs of grace here and there, but these seem to be the exceptions. Although O’Donnell knows that there are other forms of Christianity, including Protestantism, he doesn’t seem interested in them. Like many who emerge from the Catholic context it’s hard to break free of this orbit. As we often hear – once you’re a Catholic always a Catholic, even if you’re a lapsed one. So, much of his argument with institutional Christianity is wrapped up in his experiences of the Catholic Church. Ironically, even though he is disenchanted with traditional Christianity, it is this faith tradition that provides the foundation for his own reflections. This Catholic Faith provides the lenses through which he reinterprets his own experiences.

More problematic in my mind is what I’ll call the “infatuation with Gnosticism” that is so prevalent among many “spiritual but not religious” folks. The idea that the Gnostic texts were excluded from the canon by a narrow minded religious institution seems to give them added authority. Whether it is the recent hullabaloo over the Gospel of Judas or the popularization of gnostic gospels in The Da Vinci Code, the idea that the Church tried to suppress alternative versions of the Jesus story has caught on in the popular mind. In an age that distrusts institutions, this process of canonization, rather than being an example of divine providence, is a sign that the church knows something to be true that they don’t want out. And what is that truth? Well, often the truth is that there is a pathway to God that bypasses the institution. But what we don’t see in this engagement with the Gnostic texts is a recognition that Gnosticism tended to be elitist (after all the Gnostics saw themselves as possessors of secret knowledge), docetic (by and large they denied the value of the physical/material world), and they also tended to be anti-Jewish (Marcion – one of the heroes of Gnosticism – believed that the God of the Old Testament was the creator of the world – which was evil – and not the God of Jesus). The existence of these texts do remind us that the early Christian community was diverse, but I would question the enthusiasm with which their message is being received, without much further examination of them.

The biggest concerns that I have about this movement, which are exemplified by the life of the author, relate to two areas that I think are related. First, there is the issue of a moral/ethical vision, and the second has to do with community.

I’ll deal first with the matter of ethics/moral foundations. Although, the author appears, from his own self-description, to be a man of high moral standards – he exhibits these in his business practices – I’m left wondering about where these standards were derived. My sense is that they were instilled in him by his Catholic upbringing. Despite this, I don’t see much concern for social justice in this understandings of spirituality. He criticizes the Catholic Church for excluding women from the priesthood, but that seems to be part of his overall reaction to the narrowness of the institution. I may have missed something, so I’d be glad to hear from the author about his vision of social justice, but something that did stick out was his rather angry rejection of a statement by a Catholic college professor that wealth was evil. Since the author wants to include Jesus in his own spiritual self-understanding, I’m wondering what he makes of Jesus’ rather regular denunciations of a pursuit of wealth, including his call for the young man to sell all his possessions and give to the poor or his suggestion that one can’t serve God and wealth. So my question is – if I am my own religious authority, who is in the position to challenge my moral/ethical standards?

The final concern that I have about the “spiritual by not religious” movement has to do with the individualism that is prevalent in this movement. O’Donnell, like many in this movement, has essentially created his own religion to fit his own perspectives (yes I know that to some degree we all do this). He is, by his own admission, the author and founder of his faith, which is rooted in the supposition that we are all somehow God incarnate. That is, while he honors Jesus, he believes that we can all be Christs, and he tries to interpret biblical texts in that light. As I read his interpretations of these texts, many of which are filtered through his embrace of the gnostic gospels, I found his interpretations to stretch the meanings beyond what they’re capable of holding, but again my focus isn’t on the doctrinal side of things. My concern is with the individualism that undermines the call to community. O’Donnell doesn’t say this, but there is a sense that if Christ is within us, and that all we need to do to find God is to look within, then why would we need a community? We are essentially spiritually self-sufficient. And if we’re self-sufficient then no one or no institution can challenge my sense of what is true and what is right. In the end, not only is the institution unnecessary (and human-made), but community is unnecessary? But as I read the biblical texts I see in them a call to community. Paul speaks of the church not as institution but as the body of Christ. It is a living being, in which every member is important. I’m wondering what will happen to the spiritual lives of those who have no connection to a community that challenges and supports one as one takes the journey of faith. I struggled with how to respond to this book, because I don’t want to come off as defensive of my tradition or the institution. I must admit that the institution and the tradition needs critique. At the same time, while I found O’Donnell’s book to be a well-written and expressive of his own journey, I believe that there are important questions that need to be posed to those who have embraced this “spiritual but not religious” idea. And these questions need to be asked now while this movement is growing at an increasingly fast pace, so fast that it is in many ways leading to the emptying out of the church that employs folks like me. So, I do have a vested interest in this conversation.

What we on the institutional side of things can learn here is that there is a strong sense of disappointment and frustration among the populace. The traditional institutions aren’t speaking to their hearts or their minds. The question is why? Why do people feel the need to strike out on their own? At the same time, I wonder if this new movement pushes the pendulum of institutionalism too far in the other direction, and what that will mean for people’s journeys as they become less and less connected to traditions once held? These are all questions that I pose to further the conversation, and not cut it off.

This review is offered as part of the TLC Book Tours,

which provided this review copy.

Being Church

I am leading a study of spiritual gifts in the church using materials I've been working on for more than 25 years -- since seminary really.  I also just began reading Eugene Peterson's new memoir called The Pastor.  I'll be writing a review of the book later on, but near the beginning of the book, in a reflection on the similarities between church and his father's butcher shop -- that should get your attention -- he wrote:

I am quite sure now that the way I as a pastor came to understand congregation had its beginning in the "congregational" atmosphere of our butcher shop.  Congregation is composed of people, who, upon entering a church, leave behind what people on the street name or call them.  A church can never be reduced to a place where goods and services are exchanged.  It must never be a place where a person is labeled.  It can never be a place where gossip is perpetuated.  Before anything else, it is a place where a person is named and greeted, whether implicitly or explicitly in Jesus's name.  A place where dignity is conferred.  (Peterson, The Pastor, p. 41).   

I'll let you check out the book, if you want to know why Peterson uses this analogy, but the point I'd like to raise here concerns the nature of congregation.  What happens in this place we call church?  Note that Peterson defines congregation in terms of people, not building, institutions, or even clergy.  It's people who make up the church, the rest is simply context and support for the people of God to worship and serve God and love one's neighbor.  But also note the importance of church being a place of safety and dignity.  It is a place where "dignity is conferred."  I realize this is describing the ideal.  We know that churches as places harbor gossip, that people can find themselves unwelcome in Jesus' name, and dignity isn't always conferred, but this is the calling, this is the purpose.  So my question is -- how do we become this place, knowing that we are human and we will fail, but how do we move toward such a reality?

Creating Communities of Faithful Service

Diversity and unity seem so opposite and contradictory. Yet, they are both hallmarks of the Spirit endowed community of faith. Americans are by definition individualists, even “rugged individualists.” We honor those who “pull themselves up by their bootstraps.” Square-jawed John Wayne represents the vision of the “can-do” spirit of American life. As Christians, many Americans have cultivated a similar understanding of the church. We honor those who represent the entrepreneurial spirit. We commend those who are willing to take risks, to try new things, to blaze new trails. There is value in this spirit of adventure, this willingness to go it alone if necessary. But the church is not a gathering of independent individualists, it is a community gathered and formed by the grace and love of God. It is a body, a system that is more than the sum of its parts. It is diverse but it is also one.

The Spirit’s gifts create within the church this unity in diversity. As we discover and begin to understand these gifts of the Spirit, we will begin to realize that we are dependent on each other. Therefore, we have a duty to work for the common good (1 Cor. 12:7), to build up the body (1 Cor. 14:12). As a body whose members depend on each other, when one suffers, all suffer, when one rejoices, all rejoice (Rom. 12:15; 1 Cor. 12:7, 25-26). Therefore, when a family suffers the death or illness of a loved one or loses a job, the community comes alongside and provides a meal, housekeeping assistance, or just an ear to listen.

This support for one another is the essence of body building, which comes naturally to the Spirit-gifted community. It comes without guilt inducing coercion or expectation of something in return. Such selfless acts come out of a sense of love for the body, a love that is rooted in the grace that is the foundation of the Spirit’s gifts. But, for this grace to become evident, our giftedness must be feed and nourished by our relationship with the living God, whom we know in the person of Jesus Christ. Therefore, our ability to hear and respond to this call to use gifts to build the body is fed spiritually as we attend to our prayers, our study, our worship, and our fellowship with one another.

The key to understanding the role the gifts play in the life of the church is to think in terms of the health of the human body. A healthy body is one that has harmony and balance, with every part working together as one. As with the human body, this balance within the body of Christ lasts only temporarily. It must be continually attended to or it falls out of harmony. Therefore, even as we must continually attend to proper diet and exercise to keep our own bodies in proper working order, the same is true of the body of Christ. Spiritually healthy churches are ones that emphasize worship, prayer, study, teaching opportunities, and fellowship. These are the foods and vitamins that nourish the body.

Proper diet, however, is not enough. Our bodies also need exercise or our muscles will atrophy. By using our gifts to teach, to build houses for the homeless, calling on the home bound, leading grief support groups, to lead worship, we build and strengthen the body of Christ. When we use our gifts we help create an environment where God’s message of reconciliation can take root and lives will be changed.

Happy People? -- A Sermon on the Beatitudes

Matthew 5:1-12

This morning we begin a rather lengthy journey through one of the most powerful sections of Scripture. Although there will be a few breaks in this journey, we will focus our attention, between now and Palm Sunday, on the Sermon on the Mount. In the previous chapter of Matthew, Jesus calls to himself a group of disciples from among the many who came to hear him proclaim the message of the kingdom and bring healing to the body and spirit, giving them a new identity and purpose. Now, Jesus draws to himself this small group so he can teach them what it means to live in God’s realm. As he takes them with him to the mountain, he teaches them that God’s realm is very different in tone and purpose from human realms and empires. It doesn’t matter if these worldly governments are limited or big, democratic or autocratic, they are not the same as God’s realm, and if they are to follow Jesus, then they must give their complete allegiance to God’s reign. And, as Warren Carter points out, if you’re going to live under God’s reign, you ’ll need new instructions and laws, which is what Jesus provides in Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount. Carter writes

When God’s empire, God’s saving empire, comes among people, it claims their lives, disturbs the status quo, creates new priorities and identities, and gives new purpose, commissions people to new tasks, and creates a new alternative community that is going to need formational instruction as in the Sermon on the Mount. [Warren Carter, “Power and Identities: The Contexts of Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount,” Preaching the Sermon on the Mount: The World It Imagines. David Fleer and Dave Bland, eds., (Chalice Press, 2007). Kindle Edition. Narrative Contexts.]

Christians have wrestled with how to respond to Jesus’ call for us to give total allegiance to God, even as we seek to live in this world. More often than not we either ignore the message of this sermon, or pick and choose what we like, because this vision is far too radical for most of us to handle. Consider the call to refrain from taking oaths or loving our enemies, what do we make of Jesus’ call to discipleship? What does it require of us?

As we take this journey, we need to understand that Jesus speaks these words to a community with the understanding that it is impossible to live out this call to discipleship outside the community. This is, therefore, not an ethic for individuals to try to live out on their own. There is simply no way for us as individuals to live in the way Jesus describes. That may be why, in Matthew’s presentation, Jesus doesn’t give the sermon to the crowd, but to those who have chosen to follow him. It is to this community that has chosen to follow Jesus that he gives the call to be light and salt in the world.

We begin our journey by attending to what we call the beatitudes – nine statements of blessing. Jesus says to the disciples, blessed or happy are those who are poor, grieve, are humble, who hunger and thirst for justice, who show mercy, have pure hearts, seek to make peace, are harassed because of righteousness, and are harassed and insulted because of their allegiance to Jesus. Stanley Hauerwas calls these gifts to the church. These are the blessings, the kinds of people who inhabit the community. He writes: “to learn to be a disciple is to learn why we are dependent on those who mourn or who are meek, though we may not possess that gift ourselves” [Stanley Hauerwas, Matthew: Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible, (Brazos, 2006), p. 63.]

This description seems so contrary to the way we tend to define blessings and happiness. Our culture would want us to believe that God blesses some people with success, those who apparently help themselves. Therefore, God helps teams win Super Bowls and National Championships. Of course, one may wonder why God seems to like the Yankees more than the Cubs, and the Packers more than the Lions. Does God really love the winners more than those whom society often considers losers? This idea that God wins games and fills bank accounts is based on a theology of success, but that theology seems very different from the one that Jesus espouses in the Beatitudes?

1. BEING BLESSED

So what does it mean to be blessed or happy? Studies suggest that religious people are happier than nonreligious people. What is interesting is that this happiness doesn’t seem to be linked to one’s theology, but rather to the fact that religious people tend to be part of a caring community. Rachel Naomi Remen, a Jewish doctor and author of My Grandfather's Blessings, tells the story of a woman who confessed that she didn’t need to reach out to other people because she prayed every day. All she needed, she believed, was God. But, Dr. Remen responded: “prayer is about our relationship to God; a blessing is about our relationship to the spark of God in one another." [Rachel Naomi Remen, My Grandfather's Blessings, (NY: Riverhead Books, 2000), p. 5]. In other words, blessings are relational, and that is because when we are in relationship with one another, we tap into the God who is present in the other person.

If happiness and blessedness are relational then perhaps we need to rethink what we mean when talk about our inalienable right to pursue happiness. We often read Thomas Jefferson’s words, as they are enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, in a very individualistic way. It’s all about my freedom to get whatever I need to make myself happy. That may be what the Declaration promises, but is the kind of happiness that Jesus desires for us to experience the kind of happiness that could come at the expense of my neighbor?

As we listen to Jesus’ description of God’s blessings, it becomes clear that God isn’t in the business of blessing the arrogant and the proud, the selfish and the self-sufficient. Instead God blesses the poor, the meek, the one who grieves and the one who makes peace, the harassed and the pure in heart. Happiness, therefore, really has nothing to do with living in the lap of luxury.

Rachel Remen knows something about finding happiness in the midst of suffering. For almost half a century she has suffered from Crone’s disease. But in the midst of her wounds, she says, that she encountered “life for the first time.” Her wounds became the source of wisdom and knowledge that enabled her to look at herself and see a “life that is both true and unexpected” (p. 25).

Wounds can either fester into bitterness and anger or bring us insight into what it means to live life and offer hope for the future. A cancer survivor sees the beauty of life and begins to enjoy it more. Spouses see a marriage hit a wall, but wake up to rediscover the love that brought them together in the first place. A spouse dies and the surviving partner begins to die emotionally, only to find in the community new relationships that bring blessings to one’s life.

It’s important that we hear in this text one very important truth: As Jesus defines what it means to be blessed, he is not talking about earning this blessing. He’s not talking about voluntary poverty or seeking martyrdom, it is simply that the community is composed of people like the ones described, and we are blessed by their presence, for they are a gift of God. Even as God is present in their lives, they help bring sustenance and peace to the community.

2. BEING A BLESSING

The Beatitudes serve as the foundation of Jesus’ sermon. They help describe the community that will be salt and light to the world. To those whom God calls blessed belongs the kingdom of God – both in heaven and on earth. These are the marks, Dietrich Bonhoeffer writes, of “the community of the Crucified. With him they lost everything, and with him they found everything” [Bonhoeffer, Discipleship, DBW vol. 4, (Fortress, 2001), p. 109].

The community, as we will see in subsequent weeks, is a visible one. Those who hear this word of blessing are called to be salt and light to the world. Bonhoeffer points out that the ones whom the world deems “unworthy of living” are the “most indispensable commodity on earth. They are the salt of the earth” (pp.110-11).

Those who are blessed are in turn a blessing to the community and ultimately to the world. Although some of the beatitudes describe a state of being – poverty, humility, and grief, other beatitudes describe a life of action and service. You are blessed, Jesus says, so take these blessings and share them with others, be merciful, seek justice, and be a peacemaker. Again, we need to remember that Jesus gave these instructions not to the crowd or to individuals, but to the disciples. He did this to remind us that this active life of blessing is to be lived in community with an outward vision of ministry in the world.

It’s interesting that to each of the blessings is attached a reward. It’s not that we earn these blessings, but it is a reminder that even as we are called to minister from these blessings that are present in the community, blessings that enable us to love others, we must not lose sight of Jesus’ admonishment – that we love others as we love ourselves. There is therefore, a circular nature to the blessings that come to us.

Rachel Remen tells another story about a man who got a second chance in life. A successful stock broker who developed non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma, he survived a horrible year of treatment that included chemo and a risky bone-marrow transplant, in large part because of the love he shared with his wife. But, having survived the cancer, he became convinced that he had to save the world. So, he quit his job and started working with the conservation movement. Before too long he was spending sixty hours a week on this new job, and he was gone so often that he no longer had time to spend with his wife and kids. When his neglected wife left him, Dr. Remen stepped in and told him that although he had been given a second chance in life, that life no longer was full of joy, but instead was just a burden. This reborn stock broker didn't think he had a choice, but his doctor reminded him that if he was going to serve others he had to take care of himself as well. Although he valued life, he failed to value his own life and that of those closest to him (Remen, pp. 20-21). Blessings go out and they return. You can work for justice and peace, you can pursue purity of heart, but unless you experience the blessings of community you will end up in despair - what they call burn out!

Micah says that God requires three things from us: justice, kindness and humility. The Law says, love God and love your neighbor and you will fulfill the entire law. That second commandment, though, has a second part to it: Love your neighbor, as you love yourself. There are blessings galore. There are enough to go around. Be blessed and be a blessing. Then as Jesus says: You will be a light to the world!

 

Preached by:

Dr. Robert D. Cornwall

Pastor, Central Woodward Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)

Troy, Michigan

4th Sunday after Epiphany

January 30, 2011

The Lord’s Table: A Place of Community

On Saturday our Elders will gather for a retreat and I'll be leading a conversation about the Eucharist or Lord's Table -- as a Christian communion, the Disciples are fairly unique in that lay elders offer the prayer(s) of consecration for the Supper. As I'm preparing for this, I'm putting together a few pieces or reflections.  Since the Table can easily become a very "private" affair between me and Jesus, it's important to remember the communal context.

There is, of course, a place for meditation and reflection at the Table, but the Table was instituted in a communal setting. Until the middle ages, when Transubstantiation fully took hold in the Western Church, the Lord’s Supper was always taken in the context of a community. If we are to truly understand the meaning and value of the Supper, we must remember this context.

Canadian theologian Douglas John Hall provides good insight into this communal element:

The community enacts its unity with its head its members with one another. Partaking of the one cup and the one loaf, the members, “though man,” as Paul says, affirm and are confirmed in their oneness.”

This interpretation of the Eucharist calls in question all privatistic practices of the sacrament. The communion is a corporate act, and even when it must be administered apart from the worshiping community, the latter as in the case of baptism, ought certainly to be represented. This corporateness seems to me more important than whether one regards th Eucharist from the vantage point o of the tradition of transubstantiation, the mediating position of consubstantiation, or the Zwinglian symbolic or memorial conception. The critical question is not the substantialistic one (whether the bread becomes body, where the wine becomes blood); it is, rather, the relational question: How does the Sacramental function sustain the community? (Douglas John Hall, Confessing the Faith: Christian Theology in a North American Context, Fortress Press, 1996, pp. 114-115).

Thus, the point of the Eucharist isn’t creating pieces of Jesus in the form of bread (forgive the crudity of my statement), but creating community, which reflects and embodies the person of Jesus in the world.

If the Table is a communal act, it requires the presence of community. Even when we take the Supper to the shut-in, we do so understanding that in taking the bread and cup in the home or the hospital, we gather as an extension of the larger body.

This concern for the community is reflected in Paul’s discussion of the celebration of the Supper in 1 Corinthians 11. It is in this chapter that Paul lays out the words of institution – for the first time.  Paul writes:

This is why those who eat the bread or drink the cup of the Lord inappropriately will be guilty of the Lord’s body and blood. Each individual should test himself or herself, and eat from the bread and drink from the cup in that way. Those who eat and drink without correctly understanding the body are eating and drinking their own judgment. Because of this, many of you are weak and sick, and quite a few have died. . . . If some of you are hungry, they should eat at home so that getting together doesn’t lead to judgment. (1 Corinthians 11:27-34a Common English Bible).

Paul has been, traditionally, interpreted here as referring to the mystical body of Christ in the elements – thus giving rise to the doctrine of real presence and then transubstantiation. But, I think that the Common English Bible makes it as clear as possible, that the point is understanding the body of Christ as the congregation. By acting in a way that dishonors the community, leading to drunkenness and hunger, the community had dishonored the one who called them to the table. There is little of the mystical here, but much that is concerned about the behavior of those who gather at the table.