Healing our image of God

While currently enrolled in an on-line study on Franciscan spirituality, (how topical at this time) presented by Fr. Richard Rohr, our group was presented with the following questions dealing with our image of God.

Discussion Questions

 

• What words spring to mind when you think of your image of God?

•  Sitting with these descriptors for a while, let them sink in and go deeper. Where did these descriptors come from? Do they also describe your life? Do you want them to?

•  Where in your life is the mysterious image of God beckoning you to expand?

Here is my reflection on these questions:

The Protestant school I attended in Holland as a youngster. between ages six to ten. started each morning with a half hour of Bible lessons.  Sixty years later I am still in love with the stories about Abraham, Joseph, King David, etc., etc., and of course Jesus.   I recall the excitement among us as students to the colored poster pictures the teacher would present to help us better understand the dress of the characters and cultural background against which these stories were told.  I will always recall the way in which the enduring  gentle nature of Jesus was portrayed. At the same time I was particularly attracted to the way Jesus dealt with sinners, especially about the adulterous woman who was about to be stoned by her towns’ people.  I doubt if I knew what an adulterer was but intuitively  understood that Jesus’ form of justice was based on love not punishment.

In later years as an adult striving for worldly success I lost track of God as a direct influence in my daily life. My struggles with fear, anxiety and depression had become all absorbing and consuming.    During the intervening years it was my wife who helped me find a way to dialogue directly with God. For me the most direct and profound way was through journaling.  Not that journaling is easy for me. It remains a struggle between my ego and the true self.  But in it I rediscovered the God of my early youth.  A Creator who desires nothing more for us than a life to be lived to the full.  A Being who meets us where we are; not where others would have us be.

Not so many years ago as coordinator of our parish Adult Religious Formation classes (RCIA) I asked our eager inquirers and their sponsors if they understood God as someone who does not punish, reward, or hand out favors.  The immediate response was totally surprising – not from the inquirers but their sponsors.   Had I not read the passages in the Bible about God smiting sinners and finally separating the chaff from the wheat?  Even more surprising was that the troubling response came from an individual who I knew had attended several years in seminary.

Today God’s synchronous presence is often revealed in our children and grandchildren and the many struggles we have encountered together.  The most powerful experience of God presence came during many months of my struggle with stage 3 cancer.  Today I am 100% cancer free only because I was able to overcome my ego and listen and absorb his healing messages not just for me but for our entire family.  No, our struggles continue but God in his mysterious ways gives us hope for tomorrow.  

Fr. Rohr has stated that our image of God is directly related to our own personal understanding of God.  In other words if we view God based on a deity who seeks punishment than we will perceive the world or creation in the same manner.  In severe cases we may perhaps demand the death penalty for extremist in Boston or a kidnapper and rapist in Cleveland.  Life’s experiences for many can have been totally without any supporting love or compassion.  Is it any wonder then that these individuals learn to be cruel and totally inhuman?  Of course I am speaking here of extremes.  Hopefully most of us have received encouragement and love from a parent, teacher, grandparent, minister, etc.  Others may have been brought up under strict rules subject to punishment for failure to obey same.  Similarly perhaps you were warned about God’s punishment should you fail to meet your parents rigid commands.   Is any wonder than that some or most of us carry with us a fear filled image of God?  And that image can then become our way of viewing the world.

In their best book ‘Good Goats – Healing Our Image of God (1994), Dennis Linn, Sheila Fabricant Linn and Matthew Linn present a unique and healing transformation for those who seek freedom from the fear of judgment and eternal punishment regardless of your age.  Here are some of the contents covered in this rewarding book:

·       Why Wasn’t I Healed?

·       We become Like the God We Adore

·       How My Image of God Changed

·       God Loves Us at Least As Much As the Person Who Loves Us the Most

·       What About Vengeful Punishment in Scripture?

·       Jesus’ Response to Vengeful Punishment

·       Reading Vengeful Punishment Passages Literally Can Drive Us Crazy

·       Does God Send Anyone to Hell

And many more.

Original Sin or Original Blessing?

click on image to enlarge

Recently  a national Catholic weekly published an article in which several ‘experts’ or academics again tried to explain how ‘Original Sin’ has been responsible for much of the pain and suffering in this world. The article read as follows: 

         

     

Mankind’s natural desires behind our sinfulness

BY EVAN BOUDREAU

The Catholic Register March 24, 2013  p.21

TORONTO

Mankind's capacity to sin comes from an unquenchable thirst to consume rather than a direct desire to act sinfully, according to Kathleen Roberts Skerrett.

The dean of arts at the Uni­versity of Richmond in Virginia was exploring the concept of original sin at a roundtable dis­cussion March 12 at Toronto's University of St. Michael's College. Roberts Skerrett was one of three academics who gave their views during the afternoon discussion The Evolution of Sin: Past, Present and Future.

"Human beings have inde­terminate desires," said Roberts Skerrett. "Our ordinary desires for food, sex and sociality do no have an object that satisfies them. There is always a kind of going beyond the job, not so much insatiability, but more uncertainty of end in human desire."

For Roberts Skerrett, the source of sinfulness is a derivative of our thirst for more rather than a willful desire to sin. In other words, human beings have an innate tendency to sin but do possess the free will to act contrary to these inclinations. Free will means that our sins, although influenced by an innately engrained and often subconscious inclination towards sinfulness, are an expression of freedom.

"There is something that drives us constantly beyond the goals that an animal desire would set for itself," said Roberts Skerrett, author of Original Sin in the 21st Century: The Wanton, the Addict, the Pervert and the Deviant. "We are constantly pressing past or transcending or going beyond the object of an animal or embodied desire."

Roberts Skerrett categorized the tendencies of humanity to push beyond the most basic satis­faction of our desires — the way in which an animal would act — into four characteristics.

The first is the wanton, a tendency towards continual stim­ulation and attention which sac­rifices quality of satisfaction for frequency.

"The wanton wants a little hit of stimulation and attention, a little bit of pleasure on a regular basis. Facebook was made for the wanton," she said.

Second, all human beings suffer from the tendency of the addict who strives for pleasure over pain.

"The addict finds something to fix it for however long," she said. "It keeps going to recalculate the pleasure-pain dynamic in one's soul by hitting that fix over and over again."

This tendency, which can find satisfaction in the practice of devotion through prayer, repre­sents our metabolization of utility — the maximization of pleasure in one's life.

Third, she noted that everyone has a tendency toward perversion, in that humans view all of creation as a means to satisfy our desires.

"There is no sense of these other beings as having a use or value other than the use or value of being bought and sold," she said.

Finally, humanity is plagued with deviant tendencies which have manifested a culture of dis­ciplinary institutions: prisons, militaries, even schools. Roberts Skerrett noted that these institu­tions, which range from punish­ment to employment, function as a means of using individuals for a rational purpose with the expecta­tion they will exemplify self-con­trol of their own desires. "The person who is identified as deviant is constantly and systemically extracted from purpose­ful life," she said. "The end of the deviant is to be extracted from all purpose. What the deviant most needs is mission and purpose in order to orient life in order to orient desire."

By casting the concept of original sin in this light, it becomes the theme of our political and ethical discourse in secular society. Doing so, she said, explains why we sin.

Ephraim Radner, a professor of historical theology at the Univer­sity of Toronto's Wycliffe College, said a more traditional Augustine view better explains our sinful actions — at least those of the past century or so.

Global conflicts, genocides and capitalism's quest for greater satis­faction through further industri­alization without regard for harm caused to creation are all signs that humanity is not just inclined to sin, but that sinful acts are in our nature. "We are all brutal people," said Radner, author of Cross-Cultural Encounters in the 17th and 20th Century Compared: The Miti­gation and Return of Original Sin. To ground this argument Radner focused heavily on the suffering of infants, citing their susceptibility to pain, hunger and disease as signs that we are innately damned and need salvation.

"Infants suffer because they are damned and they're damned because all of us and Adam are damned," he said. "There is no other possible reason to explain why children go through this."

Therefore infants are born with a universal damnation due to original sin's inherent condemna­tion which can only be distanced through the sacrament of Baptism, though he noted we are still at risk of sinning, and will, following this ritual.

Fr. Clement Majawa, a theology professor from the Catholic Uni­versity of Eastern Africa, agreed with Radner that sinning is un­avoidable by man because human beings are damned from the moment they are conceived.

"Like a shadow evil, or sin, is an inseparable reality which follows each person throughout life," said Majawa, author of Sin, Reconcilia­tion and Mission in African Chris­tianity and Global Transformation. Similar to Radner, Majawa ref­erenced the suffering of Africans as proof of the universal condem­nation of humanity which can only be momentarily lifted off our shoulders through religious sacra­ments.

How can we as Christians best respond to this intensely negative view which many  still hold?  Others such as Matthew Fox in his book ‘Original Blessing’ (2000) suggest that it will first be necessary to understand the question of Original Sin in its cultural and theological context.  For example Fox states:

1. Original blessing is far more ancient and more biblical a doctrine.
2. The Council of Trent never said what original sin means.
3. Augustine mixed his doctrine of original sin with his peculiar notions about sexuality.
4. Whatever is said of original sin, it is far less hallowed and original than are love and desire.
5. Doctrine is not the basis of faith or its starting point.
6. Since doctrine is for people, not people for doctrine it is important to consider this question:  How much pain and how much sin have come about because of an exaggerated emphasis on the doctrine of original sin?
7. The sooner churches embrace the more primitive doctrine of original blessing, the more compassionate our living will be.

You will have to purchase Matthew Fox’s book for a detailed explanation behind these points, however they should provide and offer the reader more food for thought.

In the meantime is it not time to re-examine our understanding of `Original Sin`?

The negative focus on mankind`s natural desires (see article above) completely contradicts and detracts from the Good News and Jesus` promise ʺI have come in order that you might have life-life in all its fullness``. (John 10:10)  Have we forgotten that we are ALL Holy Creations capable of untold Holy actions as well as unholy reactions? The Good News is that God is more interested in our potential than our sins.  When we miss the mark, meaning "sin" it can become the stepping stone toward God`s free gift of salvation and renew us in a new life in Christ.  For most of us this can take a life time, yet from the very beginning God promised   ″I will lead you and be with you.  ``I will not fail you or abandon you, so do not lose courage or be afraid.`` (Deuteronomy 31:6)   

Until we realize that God’s greatest gift to humankind is our freedom to choose, we will probably never understand what it means to be loved unconditionally. This universal gift, according to Jesus, is bestowed on ALL of humankind when he said ″for he makes his sun to shine on bad and good people alike, and gives rain to those who do good and to those who do evil″ (Matthew 5:45).  Nowhere in scripture does Jesus ever suggest that salvation is dependent on baptism. Rather when we choose to be baptized it means that like Jesus we ʺagree to do all that God requires″.  Furthermore, Jesus taught that children are already in the Kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 18:3). The battle against evil was won a long time ago – it is merely our refusal to accept its victory that prevents us from loving God, our neighbor and ourselves.

 Perhaps now we can begin to better understand and  experience Original Sin as God`s `Original Blessing`!   

 

SIN

One of the disconcerting-and delightful

-teachings of the Master was: ʺGod is

closer to sinners than to saints. ʺ

This is how he explained it: ʺGod heaven

holds each person by a string.  When you sin,

you cut the string.  The God ties is up again,

making a know-and thereby bringing you a

little closer to him.  Again and again your sins

cut the string-and with each further knot

God keeps drawing you closer and closer. ʺ

-  Anthony de Mello, One Minute Wisdom

Vatican III - an Option to Real Reform

 

Now that the election of a new Pope has been resolved we can perhaps focus on the future of the Roman Catholic Church.  David Perlich reporting today for the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. summarized the situation well when he stated “Pope Francis has accepted an enormous burden. He's the leader of a Roman Catholic Church beset with grave challenges. Amongst them: a dysfunctional curial government culture, a church whose reputation has been plagued by scandal and questions over its relevance in the modern world and the everyday lives of Catholics.”  At this point Catholics should ask is it fair or reasonable that one man, the Pope, should be burdened with such a huge problem and be expected to bring about the necessary reform"?  

It might surprise some to learn from Hans Küng and his scholarly work ‘Christianity – Essence, History and Future’ (2002)  “the great ecumenical reform Council of Constance which met from 1414 to 1418 declared: the council is above the Pope. The gathering understood itself to be a general council [like Vatican II] legitimately assembled in the Holy Spirit, representing the whole church.  Its authority was directly bestowed by Christ, and everyone, even the Pope, had to obey it: in matters of faith, the abolition of the schism and church reform.  Anyone – even if this should be the Pope – who refused to obey the commands and resolutions of this council and any legitimate ecumenical council on the points mentioned was to be duly punished.  This was a clear defeat for the Roman curial system, which had taken the Catholic Church of the West to the edge of the abyss.  Authority in the church does not lie in a monarch but in the church itself, of which the Pope is the servant not the master.”

Küng tell us that the Council of Constance, while still normative, was amazingly soon replaced by the restoration of papal absolutism.   One can easily see its implications on papal authority or power; which was only further advanced by endowing the power of infallibility on a Pope,  as decreed by the First Vatican Council at Rome in 1869.   Summarizing Küng’s views on this important fact:

• The papacy has increasingly become an institution of power

• The papacy developed more and more power structures by adopting highly developed Roman jurisprudence and imperial legal practise [note the current Catechism & canon law]

• The papacy has preserved the trappings of power and control

Accordingly, is it not reasonable now to suggest that the many challenges facing the Roman Catholic Church and Pope Francis I* be placed in the hands of the next ecumenical council?  This would not only release Francis from having to deal with all these difficult issues by himself but put it in the hands of many perhaps even through the influence of the laity?  Is it not in the interest of ALL Roman Catholics to have a spiritual leader, such as Jesus, who is a true shepherd instead of an enforcer of the law?

Again Küng asks " Should the church of the future no longer appear as the bulwark of reaction against democracy but in the spirit of its founder as a community in ‘freedom, equality and brotherhood’?   In the light of the gospel should the future church not consist of a community of free men and women and at the same time be an advocate of freedom in the world and become a community of those who are fundamentally equal?  The church a community of brothers and sisters instead of a system ruled in patriarchal fashion"?

Speculating on the future of Catholicism Küng asks “under a new pontificate might not and should not the question of infallibility be investigated again, with objectivity, scientific honesty, fairness and justice?” Addressing the question of ecumenism Küng suggests that "the pluralization of religion will give men and women new spiritual perspectives –deepening their own religious feelings through insights, symbols, ethnical demands and meditative practices of other religions and alternative movements".  

Finally, the idea of a Third Ecumenical Council as envisioned by the Council of Constance more than 600 years ago, may be the only means through which the Vatican along with the People of God can break through the current crisis of the institution.

* on his second day as Pope Francis I  was already and unfairly  accused of failing to speak out against human rights abuses during military rule in his native Argentina. See details here.

 

Link:  election of Pope John Paul I

http://www.cbc.ca/archives/categories/society/religion-spirituality/a-pope-is-chosen/pope-john-paul-i-chosen-in-1978.html