Summary:
I realize that I’ve written a number of posts dealing with the
subject of sin, and the struggle to overcome the barriers that divide human
communities was the denouement of “A New World: Tear Down Those Walls.” But
something struck me during a class that I was teaching recently that revealed
the overlap of these two topics. What struck me as result of reviewing some of
the classroom material that I use was that the human alienation that
accompanies human conflict can itself be construed as sin in that it alienates the
human community from God. Our relationship and connection to God cannot be
separated from our relationship and connection to one another.
In my course titled “Biblical Literature and the Ancient World” taught at the School of Continuing Studies at Georgetown University, I use one of the sessions to explore the topic of universalism and particularism, both in the Bible and in contemporary religious life. In the Bible, I ask students to explore what is something of a paradox. The Book of Ezra represents a rather narrow, particularistic understanding of the covenant community. This biblical work emerges from a Judean community that had recently returned to Judea following the Babylonian exile. The so-called "restoration" had been decreed by the Persian king Cyrus, conqueror of Babylon. Pursuing a theology that came to see exile as punishment for covenant disloyalty--an idea inherited from pre-exilic prophets like Jeremiah--the leaders of this Judean community are depicted as rejecting the participation of any elements of the community that had not experienced exile. If the Babylonian exile was God's way of punishing and purifying the covenant community, then only those who had experienced the exile were eligible for participation in that covenant community.
But there is another voice that arises from this post-exilic
restored Judean community. Beginning in chapter 40 of the Book of Isaiah, we
hear the voice of a prophet whom scholars recognize as
"Deutero-Isaiah," or II Isaiah, preaching to the exiles recently
returned to their homeland. Likely a devotee of the earlier Jerusalem prophet
for whom the book is named, this post-exilic prophet begins his work by
validating the theology of exile and restoration.
Comfort,
comfort my people,
says your God.
Speak tenderly to Jerusalem,
and proclaim to her
that her hard service has been completed,
that her sin has been paid for,
that she has received from the Lord’s hand
double for all her sins. (Isaiah 40:1-2)
says your God.
Speak tenderly to Jerusalem,
and proclaim to her
that her hard service has been completed,
that her sin has been paid for,
that she has received from the Lord’s hand
double for all her sins. (Isaiah 40:1-2)
For this visionary, however, the exilic experience was a clue
to another aspect of the divine/human relationship. Only a universal deity--a
God of all humanity--could micro-manage the historic process that both enabled
Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon to affect the requisite punishment of destruction and
exile and also orchestrate the subsequent restoration of the destroyed
community by the Persian king Cyrus, whom this prophet calls God's
"messiah"--God's anointed king.
It is precisely this vision of a universal God that elicits a
profoundly inclusive definition of the sacred community. Even eunuchs and
foreigners--emblems of those who had heretofore been excluded from the sacred
Temple service--are invited to bring their offerings into the newly rebuilt
Temple, now called by this prophet "a House of Prayer for all
people."
This forms a significant piece of the biblical perspective on
universalism and particularism that I share with students. The corollary
involves an examination of four contemporary documents that explore this theme
from the perspective of four faith communities: Protestant, Catholic, Muslim
and Jewish. The Protestant contribution consists of a policy statement of the
National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA titled "Interfaith Relations and the Churches."
This document reveals a true tension among the council’s 50 member
denominations that boils down to an apparent conflict between the church's
evangelical mission on the one hand and its interfaith mission on the other.
Can the church both spread the Gospel while also affording peoples of all
faiths the love and respect that the Gospel demands?
From the midst of this clearly confounding theological
struggle, the following statement arises:
"Too
often we set ourselves against each other. We become separated from God, and
alienated from God’s creation. We find ourselves in seemingly irreconcilable
conflict with other people. We confess that as human beings we have a
propensity for taking the gift of diversity and turning it into a cause of
disunity, antagonism and hatred—often because we see ourselves as part of a
unique, special community. We sin against God and each other."
What an incredibly profound statement! Conflict, disunity,
antagonism, hatred, seeing ourselves as somehow unique, special,
"exceptional," are all sins. They alienate us from one another and
thereby alienate us from God. I have said this before, but I feel compelled to
say it again. This is the struggle and the sacred mission of all people of
faith, and we must acknowledge that it is a struggle no less intense than the
struggle in which the various messianic/apocalyptic religious triumphalists are
engaged. It is a struggle to affect the essential unity of the human community
as the human counterpart to the unity of the divine. Indeed one might be so
bold as to insist that God's unity and the divine/human connection depend on
the unity of the human community. We cannot be denigrating, hating and fighting
one another while proclaiming “God is One.”
No comments:
Post a Comment