The Great Schism

We talked a little bit about the Great Schism today in class and I thought I'd read more into what made this event perhaps the most significant split in history.

This Great Schism was also known as the East-West Schism and was primarily the split that became the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church. Something that was new to me, was that before the Great Schism, the religion is known as Chalcedonian Christianity. I guess almost one thousand years later, that word doesn't come up anymore...

The more I look into the reasons for this split, the more I think how petty the whole thing was. In the long run, clearly the differences were matters of identity. And as a whole, these were fundamental reasons that defined the sect, yet when I read about it, it almost seems silly to me that there were arguments about such silly things. Is it worth splitting the church over unleavened bread? Maybe not by itself, but when seen as one dividing characteristic among many, it makes more sense that two different churches would emerge. Because in the same way, the idea of universal jurisdiction was a topic that couldn't be agreed upon. And the authority of the Pope is definitely a pretty big topic that would be a possible reason to split.

Anyway, it's an interesting and comprehensive topic. It's fun learning about it, and all the complications that accompany the history of Christianity.

St. Aidan's Episcopal Church

This upcoming Sunday I plan to visit St. Aidan's Episcopal Church, the location I selected as the topic of my site visit paper.  I honestly just have no idea what to expect from it. I grew up in a very large Disciples of Christ church in Texas, so that is almost entirely what I'll be comparing my visit to. I'm going to focus on identifying the practices and traditions that are a part of their weekly worship, and how they relate to those that I'm more familiar with. In addition, I'll be very attentive as to distinguish what their beliefs are as a denomination. I'm always fascinated with the details that identify each religion, and especially each denomination of Christianity. It should be a good time, and I'm looking forward to an educational and insightful visit!

If you want to check it out for yourself, be sure to take a look at their website!

http://www.saintaidans.org/

God Questions

I found this website called gotquestions.org, where several popular questions about God are discussed. At first I was immediately frustrated to think that someone has the authority to answer questions and put an end to topics that have been debated for hundreds of years. The more I read, the better I felt about the approach to these questions though. Mostly the questions are answered with Biblical support, but for the most part, the author of these answers recognizes that a lot of these questions can only be answered with evidence, and nothing can really be completely proved right or wrong. So although I didn't always agree with the answers, I understand the perspective and respect the opinion nonetheless. 

It's an interesting website and I urge you to check it out. At the same time, take these answers with a grain of salt and understand that this is just one side of the debate.

http://www.gotquestions.org/questions_God.html

Jesus Action Figures

I  stumbled upon the greatest find today: JESUS ACTION FIGURES.

Some just portray Jesus in robes, similar to the Jesus character found in the Gospel:

Others present Jesus as a part of our American culture:

My favorite of all though is definitely...

SURFER JESUS.

They may just be silly action figures, but what does it say about us? I can imagine that a lot of people might be offended by these. Those with a really strong relationship with Jesus might see these things as idols that completely insult and disrespect their Lord and Savior. In my opinion, I think it reflects the American culture that is pretty lax about religion, and specifically Christianity. It seems that people are more interested in the historical Jesus than his purpose. Ultimately, I think people are entertained by the story of Jesus, but not captivated by it. And as a result, well...we get this:

A Look at the Gospels

The book I'm reading for the presentation is by Marcus Borg and it is basically a take on reading the Bible in light of its historical and metaphorical context. With that in mind, I've come across some really interesting perspectives and insights. I don't want to give too much away though, I'll give a much broader presentation of everything tomorrow when I present.

 Right here though, I want to include an interesting look at the Gospels. The four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, were written in the last third of the first century. At a general level, they are public biographies: accounts of the public life--the message and activity--of Jesus. The Gospels were a product of history remembered and history metaphorized. The Gospels were just these accounts written to certain communities, and that's why there are such contrasts between the books.

This is a fascinating view of the Gospels. It's just one of many insights provided by Borg in his book. I'm excited to present tomorrow and explain many more! I find this stuff to be so interesting.

The Pope's Resignation

I read an article about Pope Benedict and his intentions after his resignation. According to this article, the Pope claimed that he would "remain hidden from the world" and would live a "life dedicated to prayer." It seems that the Pope is resigning because of political reasons. Whether that's true or not, it's sad that we've reached a point where political implications are more important than the job of the pope and the progression of a religion. Pope Benedict was simply evaluating reform issues such as religious freedom, ecumenism, and liturgy. His speech makes clear that the reforms were not a break from the ancient tradition of the pontificate. Regardless, here we are today with a Pope who is choosing to resign. The idea to make changes seems to have caused such distress among people that they pressured the Pope into resignation. It makes me question whether or not we value searching for improvements and change in our life and spirituality. Do we need the traditions and consistency of this religion? Or are we really just scared that change will lead to a new, unfamiliar identity?

It just makes me think. Check it out.

http://www.religionnews.com/2013/02/14/benedict-intends-to-live-hidden-from-the-world/

Veterans' Afflictions

There was a great article in the NY Times about veterans and the moral problems they face as soldiers. This article is about Rev. Rita Nakashima Brock, a faithful Christian and theologian at Brite Divinity School in Fort Worth, Texas. She's also the daughter of a veteran. That part of her life has challenged her faith and made her question where morality and peace exists in war. She's devoted much of her years towards healing spiritual wounds of veterans. She refers to this as "soul repair" and moral injury. Much of her work is based on looking for theological answers to the conditions of these veterans. 

It's an incredible article, and I urge you to read it, but I want to wrap up this post by including a great quote at the end of this article about her views on an evolving pacifism: "I don't envision a world where a standing army isn't necessary. If that is the case, then whether or not I agree with an administration and the wars it chooses to fight, I feel that as a citizen, I have a responsibility to restore people who've fought, to restore them to our communities. It's nothing wrong with them individually. It's what we owe them as a society."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/12/us/12religion.html?_r=1&

Hateful Christians

Something I've been interested in, and something I've blogged about a little bit already is the reputation of Christians. I was fortunate enough to stumble upon a blog article on CNN.com by John S. Dickerson. He specifically talks about the way Christians are so aggressive through the social media and seem to send so many hateful messages when attacked about the religion. Dickerson points out that that's not at all the "Christian way." His main point is that Christians claim to be following the teachings of Jesus, but apparently disregard that when they defend their beliefs. It's not so much being persecuted for your beliefs as it is being persecuted because you're being hateful.

It's a pretty neat post, check it out!
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/02/09/my-take-a-word-to-christians-be-nice/

The Theology of Ray Lewis

I know it's about a week late to be writing about the Super Bowl, but I read an interesting blog article on the Huffington Post by Rev. Tim Schenck, and I had to rehash the hype one last time before NFL play disappears for seven months.

Behind the matchup of the Harbaugh brothers, the biggest media story leading up to the big game was Ray Lewis' journey. He claimed that this was his last season, and in doing so he rallied the Baltimore Ravens in an incredible playoff run to a Super Bowl victory. Heartwarming story, really. When Ray Lewis was asked about this emotional run, he brought up a controversial topic... Lewis claimed God wanted him to win the game, and God wanted Ray to have this. It's interesting, because at Rev. Schenck points out, that would imply God wanted the 49ers to lose.

After the game, Ray Lewis spoke to a reporter and said "When God is for you, who can be against you?" Lewis' words almost intend to mean that you are either with God or against God, implying that there is no middle ground.

 Rev. Schenck clears up the theology and says that "the human relationship with God is much more nuanced that this-- our faith ebbs and flows, there are moments of inspiration followed by periods of doubt."

He goes on and concludes that "it just doesn't work that way since God is "for" everyone who seeks God out and takes even the most tentative step toward relationship."

Check it out!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-tim-schenck/the-theology-of-ray-lewis_b_2617107.html?utm_hp_ref=religion-and-sports

Same Difference?

At CU there are several different religious organizations on campus, and a good number of those are Christian related. CRU, YoungLife, and Annex are just to name a few, but I want to talk about the two that I've gotten the chance to know pretty well, Navigators and PRISM.

The Navigators is a group that is focused primarily on evangelism. They stress spreading the Word to everybody as their theology states that its their only hope for salvation. In addition, the urge each person to grow in a strong, personal, relationship with the Lord. The group is made up of an absolutely wonderful cast of guys and girls. In fact, they're who I spent a lot of my time with last semester.

Progressive Radical Inclusive Student Ministry, PRISM, is a smaller ministry of guys and girls. Their purpose is particularly focused on social justice and promoting peace. There is little focus on evangelism and an important part of their message is to live out a selfless, gracious life.

Both Christians. Both very different focuses.

I find it interesting how both Christian ministries take a very different angle on Christianity. Regardless, both ministries are based on an understanding of God. What does it say about Christianity that the same religion can differ so greatly? Maybe it provides an explanation for why Christianity has had so much conflict in history. Or maybe it explains why the term "Christian" is still so messy.

Either way, I think it's interesting to look at the many ways people and ministries take on Christianity.

Mysterious Ways

It may be cliche, but I wanted to talk about a song lyric that really got to me. One of my favorite bands, U2, does a lot of their songs focused on God, life, meaning, and things along those lines. A popular one called Mysterious Ways has a lyric in it that's always struck me as insightful.

"If you want to kiss the sky,

Better learn how to kneel"

What does it mean? Is 'kissing the sky' a reference to heaven? I could see that interpretation, but for me these lyrics talk about trusting, valuing, and worshipping God.

The entire song is focusing on the objectification of women. It looks into the way men often put women on pedestals and idolize them, worshipping them essentially. Sure it's not bowing down to them and kissing their feet, but in the mind of men, occasionally they sees women as flawless. 

I think Bono's lyrics here are conveying how the only thing worthy of worship is God himself.  In my opinion 'Kiss the sky' is a way of saying worshipping. And Bono is really saying that if you're looking to worship something, get on your knees in prayer. Worship the God that's worthy of worship.

I think it's just a really cool, succinct way to sum up the idea in lyrics that no other idols should stand in the place of God, and that only God is uniquely worthy of praise.

Prophets

For my book report project, I'm reading a book called Reading the Bible Again for the First Time, by Marcus Borg. In one of the chapters, Reading the Prophets Again, he gives an overview of the prophets, their significance, and then how they play a role in the Gospel.

It's fascinating.

He discusses the former prophets, Joshua, Judges I and II, and I and II Kings. These prophets narrated the history of Israel from the occupation of the promised land until the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians in 586 BC. He also discusses the latter prophets and the distinctions between Major prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel) and the 12 Minor prophets including Hosea, Zaechariah, and Obadiah.

The fascinating part though, is how he interprets the way the prophets are used in the Gospel according to Matthew. Matthew includes Old Testament prophecies in the New Testament story of Jesus. One might claim that the correspondence between the New Testament and passages from the Hebrew Bible indicate that the prophets correctly predicted the coming of Jesus, and those prophets must have been divinely influenced. It seems sensible, but Borg claims otherwise. He believes the correspondence is a result of prophecy historicized, not a product of prediction and fulfillment. The New Testament used passages from the Hebrew Bible to generate historical narrative.

It's so interesting how the historical and literary context of the Bible can completely turn around a perspective on historical fact in the Bible. It makes me question how much of the Bible is factual. Is this a true historical account? or is it simply an attempt to generate historical narrative?