Loving God
[Jesus was asked this question by the expert on the law.] “‘Teacher, which commandment of the law is the greatest?’ Jesus answered, ‘You shall love the Most High God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’” — Matthew 22:37.
The week the well known entrepreneur and inventor Steve Jobs died, I used some memorable quotes of his in my comments. Jobs was something more than a celebrity, perhaps icon is the closest description, so I am not the only one referencing this zen master of computers in comments on the world around us, in comments about the society in which we live.
I was reminded of that because of an article in a newsletter I get which comes out of the University of Chicago Divinity School. That article also referred to Jobs as the author wondered about the memorial displays to the inventor which seemed to spontaneously spring up outside of Apple Stores all around the world right after he died.
These shrines— and that is certainly what they are: shrines— contained personal messages, flowers, candles, homemade artwork and images of Jobs. The writer of the article, Benjamin E. Zeller a Professor at Brevard College, wondered if public memorials like these reveal something profound for those who study religious practice as it plays out in the public square. Indeed, do not these spontaneous shrines seem to somehow be religious memorials? [1]
In fact, many have referred to Apple as a ‘cult,’ as if it was somehow connected with religion, and referred Jobs its ‘chief priest.’ I do not see it that way. The company is a simply a computer and media concern at the forefront of design and was led by an enormously talented individual.
On the other hand, there are lots of things in popular culture which look like and give the appearance of practices associated with religion. After all, the same kind of memorials suddenly appeared upon the death of Princess Diana.
And these days football games show all the trappings of people gathered for religious events. They all stand up and sit down at the same time, don’t they.
For me, a serious baseball fan, this might be too close to the bone but at the World Series game last night someone had a banner which said: “WE BELIEVE.” Believe? Believe in what? In baseball? In the team? Are these some kind of minor gods? (Slight pause.)
I would insist the aforementioned practices are not religious nor do they fulfill religious rituals. These shrines I mentioned are a cultural practice— a cultural ritual, not a religious one. (Slight pause.)
This is clear: much of what passes as religious practice in our society has little, in particular, to do with religion or the practice thereof. These merely have ritualistic trappings. And these trappings, as I said, are cultural.
You see, memorials to the deceased are a fairly common practice world wide both currently and historically. Let’s face it: what are the Pyramids except memorial shrines? In fact, memorial shrines are not a theologically central part— not a theologically central part— I’m going to say that one more time: not a theologically central part— of any major religion. Shrines are not central.
But, if that’s the case, it begs these questions: ‘What is religion?’ ‘What is the culture?’ And ‘What is the difference?’ (Slight pause.)
And these words are found in the work known as Matthew: “‘Teacher, which commandment of the law is the greatest?’ Jesus answered, ‘You shall love the Most High God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’” (Slight pause.)
There is a cultural argument which runs throughout all Scripture. And time and time again that cultural argument is countered with a theological argument.
I need to be clear when I use the term theological. Theology is about relationship, intimate relationship, nothing else— I’m going to say that one more time too— theology is about relationship, intimate relationship, nothing else. The conflicting positions between culture and theology can readily be stated this way: is our intimacy with God— is our intimacy with God— determined by a set of rules or is our intimacy with God determined by relationship? (Slight pause.)
Now, when I say there is an argument between the culture and theology throughout Scripture, you need to realize Jesus says nothing new here but is simply quoting Deuteronomy 6:4 and Leviticus 19:18. This is old stuff. And Jesus gives the theological answer, the intimate answer, the relational answer to the question being asked.
But the question put to Jesus is not about theology. The question put to Jesus is not about relationship. The question put to Jesus is clearly on the cultural side of that ledger because it asks (quote): “Teacher, which commandment of the Law is the greatest?” and it is asked by (quote): “an expert on the law.”
The rabbis counted 613 commands in the Torah. Among them there were 248 positive commands and 365 negative commands.
Although rabbinical teachers would also indulge in giving summaries of the Law, there was a self serving view among many that all commandments were equal. Why self serving? Because a lot of these 613 commandments were about mere ceremony.
They were, in short, cultural in nature— cultural in nature. Jesus responds by insisting that our relationship with God and with the children of God must take precedence.
Now I’m going to draw a little chart for you.
[There is an easel with newsprint on the platform where the pastor is speaking. The liturgist sets up the easel and the pastor goes to it and draws a box.]
If you promulgate unbending rules, the requirement is clear. You must live inside the box. There’s no way out.
[The pastor draws arrows from the lines which make up the edge of the box going toward the center.]
The requirement of relationship, on the other hand, is that you acknowledge rules are there, but that you are invited to be in intimate relationship with God.
[The pastor draws arrows going out from the lines which make up the the edge of the box.]
Intimate relationship invites you to live out from the box, live out from the rules. (Slight pause.)
It seems obvious (it certainly seems obvious to me) that this cultural/theological argument has been going on for millennia. And what can I say? It seems obvious to me on which side of this divide Jesus stands: the relationship side. (Slight pause.)
That still begs the question: “What is this loving God stuff and loving neighbor stuff about?” (Slight pause.) I think... loving God and loving neighbor is about... intimacy. And, boy, does that frighten our culture.
Indeed, what makes another person real to us? Is it not personal interaction and experience of that person? That is intimacy.
And at what level does that personal interaction, that intimacy, with someone else and that experience with someone else transform into trust? (Slight pause.) At what level does personal interaction, that intimacy, with God, that experience with God transform into trust? (Slight pause.)
If you do not have an intimate relationship with God, you will not love God. If you do not have an intimate relationship with God, you will not trust God.
And, in fact, if you do not have an intimate relationship with others, you will not love them and you will not trust them. And this one might be the big stumbling block: in fact, if you do not have an intimate relationship with yourself, you will not love yourself and you will not trust yourself.
So, what happens when you do not trust yourself? You readily buy into the culture and whatever the culture is selling. Buying into the culture becomes really problematic when you buy into the culture for signs of reassurance, signs of reassurance which claims that you are whole. Believe me: the culture out there cannot make any of us whole.
Further, I also want to suggest that this looking to the culture for reassurance of self is merely a way of avoiding intimacy. And I want to suggest that loving God and loving neighbor is not only a key to intimacy with God and neighbor, but if you are fully open to loving yourself, then it becomes a key to not just trusting yourself but to respecting yourself and to knowing yourself fully.
Last, I do not want to diminish the task of loving God and loving neighbor and loving self and make that task sound easy. After all, it seems to me this is a very counter-cultural task and it seems to me this has been a counter-cultural task for millennia. Further, I doubt that any of us will ever be perfect at it. That does not mean we should cease to work at it.
I do want you to rest assured that loving God and loving neighbor and loving self can and does lead us on fruitful paths. These are the paths called love, hope, freedom, peace and joy. Amen.
10/23/2012
United Church of Christ, First Congregational, Norwich, NY
ENDPIECE: It is the practice of the Pastor to speak after the Closing Hymn, but before the Choral Response and Benediction. This is an précis of what was said: “Scripture is riddled with cultural artifacts. Polygamy is culturally often acceptable in the narratives found in the Hebrew Scriptures. Slavery was clearly culturally acceptable in the era the Christian Scriptures are written. The Southern States here in America used those passages to justify slavery before the Civil War. Just because pieces of Scripture contains cultural artifacts does not mean they are theologically acceptable. Remember: theology is about relationship, intimate relationship, nothing else.”
BENEDICTION: God sends us into the world ready and equipped. God is with us each day and every day. We can trust God Whose love is steadfast and sure. Let us commit to doing God’s will and God’s work. And may God’s presence be with us this day and forevermore. Amen.
[1] The article was written by Benjamin E. Zeller in the e-mail Newsletter Sightings. He is Assistant Professor of Religious Studies, Coordinator of the Religion and Philosophy Major, and Director of Honors at Brevard College, a private liberal arts college in North Carolina's Appalachian Mountains. His academic website is http://www.nrms.net.
No comments:
Post a Comment