Q&A with: Bard College’s Bruce Chilton | PoughkeepsieJournal.com | Poughkeepsie Journal

Q&A with: Bard College’s Bruce Chilton
Tell us about “Abraham’s Curse.”

“Abraham’s Curse” shows how human sacrifice has been incorporated within Judaism, Christianity and Islam in the story of the patriarch’s offer to kill his own son. Such sacrifice has been fundamental to who we are, from the Stone Age until the present day. But “Abraham’s Curse” also reveals the hidden wisdom within ancient texts that turns patriarchal violence into the promise of blessing.

What is the book’s fundamental message?

At base, I want to show both that human societies, especially in the Abrahamic traditions, resort too easily – and without reflection – to the sacrifice of their young, and yet that these traditions have also produced the means to overcome that curse.

Has writing this book affected your personal life?

The murder of a young woman on the doorstep of my church in 1998 made me realize my emotional engagement with the topic of sacrifice had to be expressed. The book has permitted me to see that once what seemed a purely intellectual interest in fact was grounded in a profound and troubling human atavism.

 

Organized by Rev. Samuel Seabury [in] 1756, built 1760. Provincial congress met here Sept. 1776. Used as hospital during Revolution

It is a very simple structure, not in the original layout, but form (so the rector told me). Note the stain-glass. There is no depiction of human or animal forms, but the lovely geometric representation of the Trinity. (Does anyone know what that is called? There must be some specific name, there always is in iconography.)

 

The Episcopal church is now well known for our fractions and factions. The debate, it is often stated, is about human sexuality and sexual practices, but I am not so sure. Even without arguing that the aforementioned debate is centered around one’s view of the primacy of Scripture (or lack thereof) it is clear to me that the ECUSA and most main line denominations are, in fact, debating far more foundational issues.

No, strike that. They are not debating these foundational issues, but rather they are avoiding them completely by poking in the sand. I mentioned earlier in the month that I was at a retreat with another priest and two seminarians. In that post I was commenting on the fact that the priest stated that she could not believe in a God that required the death of anyone, let alone his own son. At that moment, I failed to report, the seminarian behind me whispered, “that’s replacement theory.” Ugh. I will assume he knew the word “atonement,” but amazingly he did not realize that it was such a central concept of the New Testament.

All of that is by way of commenting that the teachings that the author of Hebrews understood as fundamental and central to Christianity are not foundational for many of our churches any more. The debates that are raging over sexuality are obscuring the fact that many seminarians graduate without understanding, let alone believing, the “basic teaching about Christ.”

How is it, for example, that preaching about the literal resurrection of Jesus is so exceptional at Easter? Or why is it that so many people I meet, including many seminarians and ministers, are stunned to realize that Jesus, more than any other figure in the New Testament, is the one who taught us about the coming day of judgment, about heaven and hell? These are not Victorian constructs intended to keep people in the vicious clutches of a misogynistic hierarchy. They are instead basic teachings of the New Testament, the Church, and ancient Judaism.

Yet before we know how to crawl we are trying to run the New York marathon. We are trying to mix our own tapioca pudding before we are weaned from our mother’s breast. My interactions with others is not so limited to assume that these folks haven’t read the Bible or that those who have gone to seminary didn’t have good teachers. But at some point there is a disconnect between what is claimed in the New Testament as basic teachings regarding Jesus and what is actually believed and promulgated in our parishes. Many very smart and well educated people have very good and thoughtful reasons for no longer holding to the creeds. But it should not surprise us that without having that firm foundation of which Hebrews speaks about we are unable to deal with the tertiary issues that take up so much of our time and energy. If we are not all working from the same base, the same premises and principles, then we will never be able to build a satisfactory and sustainable solution to these issues.

So let us again renew and affirm that foundation and “let us go on toward perfection.” And I take further encouragement from our author’s assurance that “even though we speak in this way, beloved, we are confident of better things in your case, things that belong to salvation” (Heb. 6:9).

==
Read previous posts in this “devotional” series in this archive.

 

Presiding Bishop – Heal thyself!

Turns out that five Anglican primates have announced their intention to boycott the 2008 Lambeth Conference. (I wish they would not. Even if it turns out Lambeth 2008 is a waste of time and effort – at least give it one last chance if only to prove that playing by the rules is a waste of effort and time.) Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori of the Episcopal Church had something to say about this:

The gathering will be diminished by their absence, and I imagine that they themselves will miss a gift they might have otherwise received… None of us is called to ‘feel at home’ except in the full and immediate presence of God. It is our searching, especially with those we find most ‘other,’ that is likely to lead us into the fuller experience of the body of Christ. Fear of the other is an invitation to seek the face of God, not a threat to be avoided.

Insofar as any bright eight year old can understand this I offered the following response at Midwest Conservative Journal by Christopher Johnson:

A painfully obvious question is whether she regards orthodox Anglican (arch)bishops as ‘Other’. (Just as rhetorically she assumes they regard her/ECUSA as ‘Other’.) And if so – are they a threat to be avoided? Does she think that searching with these orthodox/conservative Anglican leaders she and the TEC will be led into a fuller experience of the body of Christ?

We may surmise (such as from the aforementioned NPR interview) that her answer would indeed be ‘yes’. But we may also surmise that she already knows what this fuller experience of Christ looks like. She already knows where the search will take them. We may then challenge her and TEC – is it possible that by engaging the ‘Other’ (where ‘Other’ = Anglican leaders who differ strongly with you, those who may boycott Lambeth) your search will lead *you* (and TEC) somewhere you do not expect? such that you might need to do some repenting? (Fairness requires we raise the possibility that both ’sides’ will be led somewhere new that none of them expect.)

Her invocation of ‘Other’ may be rhetorical hypocrisy. (My guess it is.) She expects ‘them’ to walk with her (as ‘Other’ to them) but is not open to the reverse. But perhaps her rhetoric is somehow sincere. But even then is she sincerely open to its implications?

I am reminded by a famous question often asked by Linus the theologian from the cartoon “Peanuts”. “Has it ever occurred to you that you could be wrong?”

(Via http://livethetrinity.net/feed/atom/.)

 

Akma has pointed out that the official release is here.

Not Closing

I spent a long time in a conference call with home base in Evanston yesterday afternoon, and among the aspects of that call that struck me, the most forceful was the very firm insistence that Seabury is not closing. I’m passing that along to you, because you may otherwise be tempted to reach an incorrect conclusion when I indicate that Seabury will not admit a new class of incoming students this year; Seabury will try to arrange that current students can complete their degrees at other institutions; Seabury will no longer offer a 3-year residential M.Div. (they might try to offer a different kind of M.Div, program — that’s up in the air); and, unstated but clearly implicit in current goings-on, some people will have to lose jobs. I would guess off-hand that “some” will end up pretty close to “many.” (Since I didn’t receive the faxed official Executive Board motion, and don’t have the approved talking points in hand, I may be slightly in error on one of these elements of the picture; if so, I’ll correct myself as soon as the error comes to my attention.)
 
You may imagine that I have a lot to say, and a lot of strong feelings, about this turn of events. In the interest of not complicating the Dean’s and Transition Committee’s work, though, I’ll withhold further comment. On the other hand, if I seem dazed, somewhat anxious, maybe a little grouchy, incongruously teary, or (as right now) persistently headache-y, I apologetically beg your indulgence.

(Via Akma.)

 

2008 Lenten Meditation Guide

Creating Space for Grace
This devotion is a guide to help “create space for grace” through the season of Lent. Grace is a shorthand way of speaking of the incredible love of God. John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, understood grace as God’s mercy that comes to us, even though we do not deserve it. It is a free gift…

Download it directly here.

 

Every year the Gospel reading for Ash Wednesday (Matt. 6.1-6, 16-21) in the Episcopal and Revised Common Lectionary strikes me as a bit ironic. In the liturgical traditions that practice lenten abstinence and the placing of the ash upon the brow do these words not seem to challenge these very practices?

Matthew 6:1-6,16-21

Jesus said, “Beware of practicing your piety before others in order to be seen by them; for then you have no reward from your Father in heaven.

“So whenever you give alms, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be praised by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your alms may be done in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

“And whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

“And whenever you fast, do not look dismal, like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces so as to show others that they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, so that your fasting may be seen not by others but by your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal; but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”

Now I entered the Episcopal Church because I came to feel the power of the liturgy, lectionary, and formal worship. But every time I read this passage on Ash Wednesday I hear the charges of Pharisaism all over again. Upon reflection I can think of a couple of good reasons for this apparent contradiction. One is, of course, that practice has developed in a different manner than that intended by the liturgists who chose the lectionary. Not all practices are the same, however since I know of other churches that have towels in the narthex so that worshippers can wipe the ashes off their foreheads before heading out into the world.

On the other hand, perhaps this tension between our practice of imposing ashes before everyone and the meaning and intent of Jesus’ message in this passage is intentional. Intended to bring to our mind the very conscious act of mourning and repentance that is the wearing of ashes (I notice we do not rend clothes any more) while also warning us against the hypocrisy of feeling justified by these actions.

Certainly I can think of no better Gospel passage to begin this period of repentance and reflection. While living in New Orleans, a very Catholic city, it was extremely common not only to see many ashen foreheads on this day but to also have discussions throughout Lent about what you might have given up. Heck, even Mike and Mike of ESPN talk about what Golic is giving up for Lent. The very fact that I have made public on this blog that I am attempting to write these reflections as part of my discipline could be seen (and probably is) in conflict with Jesus’ words. But like so many things I think it is about attitude.

If others know of what we do, whether charity or fasting, prayer or preaching, why do they know? Have we told them so that we can receive congratulations or commiseration? Or have we asked some who are close to us to help us remain accountable to our commitments?

This is at the core of the last passage cited above. “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth … for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” Where are our priorities, where is our focus? If we take up the challenge of Lent do we do it because others have urged us to and expect it from us (and we don’t want to feel left out or considered a heathen now do we?) or because we seek to be formed by God so as to better receive the pardon and forgiveness that Jesus offers?

 

This year I have decided that I need accountability to aid me in this so I will attempt to post each day a small devotional reading and reflection. I hope that others may find it edifying in their own Lenten practice, but I admit this is rather selfish; I know that unless others are keeping an eye on my I am less likely to be as disciplined as I ought to be. So later today look for the first post in that series. In the meantime below I offer the opening prayer of the Ash Wednesday service from the US BCP.

Dear People of God: The first Christians observed with great
devotion the days of our Lord’s passion and resurrection, and
it became the custom of the Church to prepare for them by a
season of penitence and fasting. This season of Lent provided a time in which converts to the faith were prepared for Holy Baptism. It was also a time when those who, because of notorious sins, had been separated from the body of the faithful were reconciled by penitence and forgiveness, and restored to the fellowship of the Church. Thereby, the whole congregation was put in mind of the message of pardon and absolution set forth in the Gospel of our Savior, and of the need which all Christians continually have to renew their repentance and faith.

I invite you, therefore, in the name of the Church, to the
observance of a holy Lent, by self-examination and repentance;
by prayer, fasting, and self-denial; and by reading and
meditating on God’s holy Word. And, to make a right beginning of repentance, and as a mark of our mortal nature, let us now kneel before the Lord, our maker and redeemer.

BTW Sundays are feast days so during Lent if, for example, you give up red meat you may have it on “the Lord’s Day.” Took me several years to find that out… So I will not likely post a Lenten devotion on Sundays.

 

The title of the post also refers to a tendency among many mainline ministers to run away from the theology of Jesus’ death as an atoning sacrifice.

The weekend was treated as if it were Easter with Friday being Good Friday, etc. The other priest spoke last night about the crucifixion. She is a great speaker, but she began with the “I cannot accept a God who requires the death of anyone, let alone his own son.” She then proceeded to offer various stories of people, fictional and real (e.g., Harry Potter in Book 7) as examples of sacrificial love. And this is what the crucifixion is about, she said, the example of Jesus that we offer ourselves for others.

The problem is, of course, that none of this takes into account the universal assertion of the New Testament that Jesus’ death was as an atoning (or Paschal) sacrifice. The problem for folks like the priest last night is that they are so overwhelmed by their own repulsion at the notion of the sacrificial system and the idea of God requiring his own son’s death that they are unable to conceive of any purpose of such a system. In the ancient world, as most if not all readers of this blog know, the use of sacrifices was the primary language for communicating with God. So, when the Law established a means of communication between Israel and God it is by sacrifices. Jesus also “spoke” this language, while at the same time bringing an end to the literal language of sacrifice.

Jesus’ death certainly teaches us that Christ’s love for us and the love he expects us to have for others is self-sacriicing. But his sacrifice was far more valuable than as just an example. In sacrificing his life he brought us eternal life. He made us “at one” with God.

From this morning.