For we do not write you anything you cannot read or understand.
2 Corinthians 1:13 NIV
This verse has always strengthened me, and it is from the epistle that most closely reflects my own life,
2 Corinthians, though I best not call it my favorite... every word of God is my favorite!
I knew a Baptist pastor once, who wrote that John's gospel should not be given to new Christians to read, because it takes years and years of study, even seminary training, to understand it.
On the other hand, it is John's gospel, his three letters, and his startling book, Revelation, that I give to new Christians, indeed all Christians, to read, and in teaching evangelical Greek, our lessons are always drawn from John's writings.
Not only that Baptist pastor, but many others, warn us against reading the bible on our own, unaided. They tell that the Word of God is too high and holy, too full of mysteries for the layman to grasp.
Read the church fathers (the Orthodox tell us), read imprimatured authors (so say the Catholics), read so-and-so's commentaries (as Protestants are expected to do), or run the risk of personal heresy. Such are the warnings I have heard.
My general educational background, my life experience, my adherence to the norms of Orthodox Christianity, and my ongoing participation in the life of the Church, these are what qualify me to read the Word, understand and interpret it, on the human side.
The Word itself promises, ‘But you have not lost the anointing that He gave you, and you do not need anyone to teach you, the anointing He gave teaches you everything; you are anointed with truth, not a lie, and as it has taught you, so you must stay in Him.’
(1 John 2:27 Jerusalem Bible)
Whatever depths there are to be learned and understood in the Word of God, these the Spirit in us will teach us, nothing contrary to what the fathers have taught through the world and the ages. In fact, we will be confirmed in our faith, as we see our understanding and theirs agree, since there is only one Spirit.
4 comments:
Why do some clergy scare us like that? Why do they intellectualize everything? Why are they fighting against us? Do they feel threatened that a layperson might know as much as they, or more? No one can understand the message of the Bible without the aid of the Holy Spirit. So, education does not matter (except perhaps to do research in translation or historical background--which may or may not be connected to the message of the Bible). There are other qualities in the Christian life that give us permission to, and require that, we read the Bible--such as adherence to the norms of the Church, participation in worship and prayer, and the doing of good deeds (as you said).
There is an unfortunate caste system within Church hierarchy, and it should not be so. Everyone should be approachable, each having peculiar gifts, but democratically associated with one another and without any loss of respect for position. I think this is why there had to be desert monks and fools for Christ--to bridge those intellectual and social barriers. These are the saints who seem often to be people's "favorites," and not the scholarly saints or even the Church fathers. We turn to St. Chrysostom when we need to clarify a teaching or doctrinal point. But, how many people have an icon of St. Chrysostom in their homes?
I may be overgeneralizing a little. But my observation is that people are more attracted to saints who lived the Bible rather than wrote about it. Of course, St. Chrysostom lived the Bible and he was a great saint in every way.
I suspect that something happens to priests and pastors during their seminary training. They become a world apart from the rest of society, physically separated from mainstream academia, and then plunged into a parish where the majority of people are struggling with familial and economic issues rather than the fine points of doctrine. Some of them, unlike Chrysostom, cannot even preach a good sermon but tell little stories which, I guess, they think the average person can relate to. Sometimes, I wish I could go home and read the Bible....
'Some of them, unlike Chrysostom, cannot even preach a good sermon but tell little stories which, I guess, they think the average person can relate to. Sometimes, I wish I could go home and read the Bible....'
A few years ago, we had a priest who was very eloquent but actually almost never said anything at all useful or edifying, just a vague mixture of story-telling and New Age philosophy. I always brought my Jerusalem Bible with me to church, and whenever he would start his sermon I would listen until I saw where he was going. Then, I would open my bible and bury my face in it as I read it, sort of dropping out of sight.
Once, after the service, the deacon came over to me in the fellowship hall and scolded me for reading my bible during the sermon instead of paying attention. He said it was disrespectful and giving the people around me a bad example. I told him that I listen to the sermon as long as what I hear is the voice of the Shepherd, but when I hear the hireling, I turn away and read the Bible to stay safe. As for the people, I said, well, I am a sign to them too, because they know me better and longer than they knew the priest. If they see me reading the Bible, they know why.
That priest is no longer with us, nor is he still a priest. The deacon who scolded me and told me I should support this priest even if I didn't agree with him, whenever the ex-priest is remembered in conversation, speaks of him with thinly veiled contempt. He knew the man was a fraud, not even a Christian let alone being Orthodox and a priest as well, yet he supported and even promoted him out of churchly protocol.
This is why the Church must be a place of mercy at all times, because we are all deceived, even all hypocrites, at one time or another. We are God's work, though an unfinished work, and it helps no one to be confrontationally judgmental. All we can do when faced with evil within the Church enclosure is to try to get even closer to Jesus, stay with Him, and do what we see Him doing.
Yes, love covers many offenses.
It is also interesting to note that if a person converts from one religion to another, it is usually a matter of catechism and church attendance. Sincerity is measured by intellectual knowledge and by showing up on Sunday morning. Of course, people need a basic understanding of Christianity and denomination, but I doubt if the filioque or some other such point is proof of dedication to the Church.
Conversion, or eligibility for baptism or membership, is never measured by personal prayer, Bible-reading, lifestyle, character, or renunciation of sin and worldliness. The essence of conversion and church membership, from my observation, is usually a matter of understanding what makes this denomination different from the others. Again, those doctrinal points are necessary: otherwise, why convert? But, such learning only indicates an ability to study and memorize, and not necessarily belief in or commitment to the other aspects (norms) of Christianity.
Now that I am thinking about this, the concept of godfathers and godmothers also seems to fall apart--especially in cases of adult conversion. It is a formality, and not a real commitment to the lifelong guidance and support of the new convert. The agreement to be a godparent should be taken as seriously as marriage, as an ongoing relationship with certain responsibilities. However, it seems to be more of an honorary position.
All your points are well taken. The last point, about godparents, though, I must tell in my experience, in Orthodoxy it has usually been more than a formality. My Greek godmother has been of immeasurable help to me and my family, at least, in the beginning, and even now, twenty-five years later, who can blame her if she doesn't take as much interest in us; she is growing old and really needs some time for reflection and to spend on herself a bit more. Some of the godparents we have had, in the Catholic, Episcopal, and Orthodox churches, have been mere formalities, even in my case, but it all depends on a number of factors, in both the godparent and godchild (or godbrother, -sister).
One of the duties of a godparent, at least when I was growing up, was to give presents at holidays and birthdays, something an ordinary friend or relative might not be expected to do, and in the case of wealthier godparents and poorer godchildren, to help the child, materially as well as spiritually.
One of the most extreme examples of this was the case of my oldest son's original godparents. When my wife and I joined the Church for the first time as adults with our young first-born son Jacob, his godparents were the heiress of the Fort Howard Paper Company and her husband—millionaires, in fact. Within a couple of years of our conversion and Jacob's baptism, his godparents had themselves converted to Mormonism.
In spite of that fact, we remained friends (the motivation was on their side, though they never attempted to convert us), and every Christmas and birthday till Jacob attained his maturity (probably sometime during his teens, I'm not sure exactly when) his godmother sent him expensive presents and beautiful cards, things we could never have bought for him ourselves. And as they finally began to have children (in the end, five daughters and the youngest, a son), they would send us greeting cards with new photos on them showing how the family was growing.
We have fallen out of touch over the last two decades, and these Mormon friends have prospered and gone on with their lives, but we will never forget them.
Post a Comment