“What is Progressive Christianity?  A 4-Sermon Series

Sermon 2:  Progressive Christian Approaches to Understanding Jesus”

Spirit of Peace UCC

June 8, 2008

John 14: 1-14

Rev. Jean Morrow

 

In the first of our 4-sermon series on Progressive Christianity, Pastor Marcia closed by re-telling an historical fable by Rev. James Gertmenian of Plymouth Congregational Church in Minneapolis…the fable recounts a time, at the beginning of time, when communities were isolated from one another around the world…yet the small communities of people would tell their stories around the fire…of how the moon came to be…and why the rains fell…and which spirits visited them in their dreams.  Whole religious cultures and ways of understanding the world grew around those campfires…each encampment developing stories quite different from the others.

 

And one day, members of one clan or another set out on a journey…and met up with another clan…and by this new and different campfire, they began to exchange their stories.   The fable ended by fast-forwarding to today, when, in a single day in many neighborhoods around the world, one might encounter a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Moslem, a Christian, a Jew, a humanist, a traditional Native American and who knows how many others.  The reality today is that no religion, even the most exclusive and separatist of them, can live in complete isolation from other religions.    

 

This leads us to some important questions.  What is the meaning of this bewildering multiplicity of faith traditions?  Does the world face an ultimate struggle in which one religion must overcome or overpower all others?  Or will history see a merger of the great faiths…a blending…a religious stew where all blend together, but distinct flavors can no longer be discerned?  Or should we hope for a world in which the great faiths remain strong and distinct, but in which their engagement with each other takes on a greater depth, a new level of maturity, a new texture of dialogue.  As you might guess, I’m in favor of the last option.  But, to get there, we are going to have to get over a major Christian hurdle: that much of Christendom considers Christianity the one and only true faith.

 

Where does this notion come from?  Well, partly, to Jesus.  It is reflected in several places in the text, but no where more often quoted than John 14, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.  No one comes to the Father but by me…”  By the 3rd century, we find Cyprian writing what is now a classic Christian formulation, “Extra ecclesium nulla salus,” which means “outside the church there is no salvation.”  Very early in its development, the church stopped focusing on the ministry of Jesus…and began to focus on Jesus, particularly the meaning of his death and resurrection and the nature of his divinity. 

 

No place points this out more clearly than a review of the early church creeds.  Many of you grew up saying the Apostles’ Creed, which scholars believe dates to the 2nd century…do you remember what it said about the life of Jesus?  Listen for it, “I believe in Jesus Christ, God’s only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried…”  No mention of his life and teachings.

 

Now listen to this excerpt from the Nicene Creed, dated to the year 325, “For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven, was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became truly human.  For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried.”   Jesus’ ministry was about the kingdom of God…but the church, very early on, made its ministry about the nature and meaning of the risen Christ.  The focus for Christianity was redirected to the saving power of Jesus’ death and his place as the second member of the Trinity, not the teachings from his ministry and his life.

 

This may be a bit of a broad sweeping statement, but when it comes to Jesus, Progressive Christians are interested in rediscovering and reclaiming the ministry of Jesus and his example of a way of life that moves us closer to how God wants us to live.  Progressive Christians are interested in the very human Jesus who live and walked and taught and healed and prayed and ate and laughed and cried and had friends…and had enemies, and struggled and suffered and faced his death courageously, reaffirming his confidence in God and God’s kingdom to the end.

 

Progressive Christians are on a quest to find the historical Jesus, to see him through the lens of his teachings about the inclusive kingdom of God, the way he actually lived his life.  Progressive Christians want to elevate the use of the lens of the life of Jesus for understanding faith, rather than relying solely on the lens of Jesus’ death, resurrection and church teachings about his divinity to understand faith.  Several Progressive Christian scholars say that the study of Jesus’ humanity has led to a deeper, clearer understanding of his divinity and the nature of God.

 

Finding the historical Jesus is kind of like being on an archeological dig site.  At dig sites, archeologists painstakingly sweep and dig, layer by layer through earth that gives evidence to previous cultures.  Every layer…every subtlety…is carefully identified and marked.  Every item is carefully catalogued as the dig team moves back through time.  Items are compared with previously collected items…from the same time period…or perhaps from a similar geographic area…to see what story or new information might emerge the culture being unearthed.

 

So it is with the search for the historical Jesus.  Jesus scholars have been around since the Enlightenment of the 18th century, but in the last 20 years, a group of scholars known as the Jesus Seminar have been hard at work attempting to distinguish what might be at the Jesus level, producing exciting new scholarship on the historical Jesus.  There are names you are familiar with:  Marcus Borg, John Dominic Crossan, Stephen Patterson, Bernard Brandon Scott.  Karen Armstrong and John Shelby Spong are friends of the seminar.

 

Their search and research is fueled by a basic principle of historical study that people and things from the past should be understood in the context of their own time.  This principle is part of what has revolutionized the study of the Bible.  It enables us to understand biblical authors as people of their own time writing for a particular audience rather than channelers of timeless divine revelation.  The search for the historical Jesus would be impossible without this principle, which enables us to understand Jesus as a first-century Jew speaking to his fellow Jews rather than as a divine savior teaching eternal truths to all generations.  This is not to say there weren’t truths in Jesus’ teachings, but to fully understand the teachings, we must look at the historical context and the original audience.

 

And so, the Jesus Seminar scholars, through careful study of textual “artifacts”, have developed a collection of studied impressions of Jesus as a figure of history. 

Like the ancient texts, their impressions share a certain fund of common knowledge about Jesus, but none is an exact carbon copy of another.

 

Generally, though, Jesus Seminar scholars agree that Jesus did not refer to himself as the Messiah, nor did he claim to be a divine being who descended to earth from heaven in order to die as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.  These are claims that other people in the early church made about Jesus, not claims he made about himself.

 

Jesus Seminar scholar, Roy Hoover, in the introduction to Profiles of Jesus writes, “At the heart of Jesus’ teaching and actions was a vision of life under the reign of God in which God’s generosity and goodness is regarded as the model and measure of human life; it is a life marked by a radical inclusiveness where everyone is accepted as a child of God, everyone is valued as a full member of God’s beloved creation and everyone is liberated both from the ethnocentric confines of traditional Judaism and from the secularizing servitude and meagerness of their lives under the oppressive rule of Rome. Although the Jesus Seminar scholars have differing ways of depicting how this vision of Jesus was played out in his public activity, all agree that a vision of life under the reign of God was of great importance to Jesus and is a key, if not the key, to understanding Jesus’ public ministry.”

 

So, what would Jesus think of the Christian claim that Christianity is the one and only true faith?  Let’s finally take a look at that bewildering text from John 14.  First, Jesus speaks of many mansions, “In my Father’s house are many dwelling places.”  This has long been a favorite proof text cited by religious universalists and pluralists, pointing out that Jesus is insisting that there are places for people of all faiths and backgrounds in the divine home of God.

 

Ironically, however, the favorite proof text in the Bible for Christian exclusivists appears only three verses later, when Jesus declares, “I am the way, and the truth and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through me.”  Many Christian conservatives have used these lines to proclaim Jesus Christ as the only way to salvation…accept Jesus or be damned to hell for all eternity. 

 

How can these two texts, one apparently pluralistic and the other thoroughly exclusivist, be found back-to-back in the very same gospel lesson?

 

My view is that the two verses aren’t being read in context.  We need to place the verses back into the historical context in which they were written.  The author of John is telling the story of Jesus’ life, looking back about 70 years.  In chapter 14 of this story, Jesus is very close to the end of his life and he is trying to say goodbye to his disciples.  In the previous chapter, he has predicted that one of his disciples will betray him.  He has also said to them, “Little children, I am with you only a little longer.”  He’s explained that “Where I am going, you cannot follow me now; but you will follow afterward.”  Then, in the gospel lesson we have in today’s lectionary, Jesus tries to reassure his disciples and quiet their anxiety: “Do not let your hearts be troubled…in my Father’s house there are many dwelling places…I go to prepare a place for you…where I am, there you may be also.  And you know the way to the place where I am going.”

 

But his disciple Thomas is not reassured.  His anxiety is not stilled.  If there are many dwelling places in the Father’s house, how’s he going to find Jesus someday among the many mansions?  Jesus may have stated that Thomas knows the way to the place where Jesus is going, but Thomas isn’t at all clear about this himself.  And so he says, “Lord, we do not know where you are going.  How can we know the way?”  I believe Jesus responds pastorally, lovingly, as he responds again, offering reassurance, attempting to calm his disciple’s anxieties, “I am the way, and truth and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through me.” 

 

Jesus was not giving us a dissertation on comparative religion.  I hear Jesus saying, “Thomas, Thomas, don’t be so worried.  When the time comes for you to approach God, I’ll be right there.  Please, don’t worry.  I’ve shown you the way.  I’ve shown you God’s way, God’s truth, God’s life, God’s love of all creation, living and dead.  When you come, I’ll be there, very close to God. You’ll find me.”

 

Again, Jesus was not giving us a dissertation on comparative religion.  He was saying goodbye to his own disciples, he was being pastoral, and he was reassuring them that they’d meet him again…after death…before God.  Yes, there are many mansions or many dwelling places in God’s house…which implies that Jesus was likely a pluralist.  Yet, his own disciples would not lose him in all the pluralism, among the rooms, because there would be no way to come to the Father and not find Jesus there, too.

 

If Jesus was a true exclusivist, thinking that his religious way was the only way, why would he have used the example of a religious outsider to his own tradition, a hated Samaritan, to describe a true neighbor when Jesus had agreed with a challenging lawyer that loving God and loving one’s neighbor were the way to eternal life?  Why would Jesus have invited tax collectors and Roman soldiers, various sinners and other marginal types to eat at his table? 

 

Over and over, when it comes to people of other religious traditions, Jesus moves us from a theoretical to a practical level.  Whoever and whatever else he was, Jesus was a person who dealt openly and concretely with people of other traditions: like the Canaanite woman who spoke of eating the crumbs under the master’s table, the Roman Centurion whose servant he healed, and the Samaritan woman with whom he shares water at the well.  By Jesus own example, we are encouraged, I believe, to treat people of other religious traditions in concrete, personal ways.  Whenever possible, we must sit by their fires and listen to their stories…and when asked, be willing to share our own. 

 

So we find ourselves back where we started, sitting around campfires telling stories.

To share our story, we must know our story.  And for that, I am grateful to years and years of committed biblical scholarship to find and reclaim the historical Jesus…this Jesus who teaches us to expect to find God already present in the other, regardless of how alien and different their religious beliefs and practices may be…this Jesus who teaches that “in my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you”…this Jesus who I believe can show us the way, who can teach us the truth and who can bring us to the fullness of life.  Amen