The Leadership of the Diocese of Pittsburgh regularly use the mantra, The Episcopal Church has walked away from Jesus. The following is an abbreviated description of the path I believe I have been called to walk towards Jesus. I deeply and sadly regret that my chosen path is not welcome in the Diocese of Pittsburgh at this moment of history.
What Did Jesus Do?
About a quarter of a century ago, as I prepared to visit the Holy land, I started to study the cultural background of Holy Scripture. About ten years later, I met the wonderful Kenneth Bailey. A Presbyterian Missionary and son of Missionaries, Ken had lived most of his life in the Middle East and had just become the Canon Theologian of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. He is recognized worldwide for his great gifts in this field. His new book, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes (JTMEE), and his previous works have been instrumental on my pilgrimage towards Jesus.
The Pharisees, Scribes and Teachers of the Law (PSTL) held both secular and sacred power in Jesus’ time. The late Dr. Edward Roche Hardy, brilliant Church historian of the 20th century, taught us that the Pharisees, Scribes, Teachers of the law (PSTL) were committed to living out the Covenant with God in the best way possible. He added, that in addition to the scriptures, they devised more than 600 rules and statutes to define what that meant. He would then chuckle and add: “Of course, many of those rules excluded, banned, forbade, proscribed and exiled groups they believed to be outside God’s kingdom.
These included Samaritans, the ritually “unclean”, gentiles, thieves, tax collectors and usurers and generally anyone who did not follow their strict practices such as fasting two days each week and tithing more than 10% of their wealth. They also had different standards for women, which effectively limited and often isolated them. But when Jesus came, The Messiah, The Christ, The Son of the Living God, he did not embrace their (PSTL) understandings. Instead, he challenged them and defied them.
I ask myself often, not What Would Jesus Do? but rather, What Did Jesus Do?
“A “heathen” approached the famous Rabbi Shammai shortly before the time of Jesus, stood on one foot and said, ‘teach me the whole Law while I stand on one foot.’ Shammai got angry and drove him away. The man then went to rabbi Hillel, the founder of the other famous rabbinic school of the first century, and posed the same challenge. Hillel responded, ‘What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor: that is the whole Torah, while the rest is the commentary thereof; go and learn it.” This is easily recognized as a negative form of the Golden Rule. Jesus apparently took Hillel’s reply and turned it into a positive.” (JTMEE, p.287)
A teacher of the law puts Jesus to the test. “What shall I do to inherit eternal life? Jesus answers the question with his own question: “What is written in the law? How do you read? The lawyer responds: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself.” Jesus replies:” You have answered right; do this and you will live.” But the lawyer, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”
Jesus replies with a story (parable) about a traveler who is beaten and stripped of his clothes and all belongings and left by the side of the road bleeding and probably dying.
In a style familiar to the time, Jesus describes three men coming along on the other side of the road. First is a Priest, a part of the inner circle of PSTL. He is under discipline to remain spiritually clean and chooses to walk on and not assist the victim of the thieves. The second, the Levite, is also welcome in the circle of PSTL as an officer of the Temple. He too walks on by.
The third man is not the usual “Jewish Layman” but a Samaritan. These were neighbors some 40 miles to the north of Jerusalem who looked to Mt. Gerazim not Mt. Zion; believed only in the Torah or Pentateuch and not the rest of the Old or First Testament; and in a Torah which differed at several points from the standard Masoretic Jewish text. They were the hated enemies of the Jews and the outcasts of the outcasts. Yet Jesus makes the Samaritan the hero of the story.
Not only does the Samaritan tend to the wounds of the beaten man, he transports him to an Inn and stays up with him through the night. He leaves funds with the Innkeeper to assist the man’s recovery. This is one of Dr. Bailey’s examples of a “costly demonstration of unexpected love.” since Dr. Bailey goes on to explain why the scene at the Inn would represent a real danger to the Samaritan’s life.
Jesus has challenged the Teacher of the Law and suggests that the true neighbor is the one who chooses mercy and does the will of his father in heaven regardless of being in an unwelcome and unworthy category such as the Samaritans.
The PSTL had good reasons for many of their rules and statutes. When someone became dangerous to the health of the Village, it was necessary to protect the Village. Therefore, any deemed by the elders to be a “leper” would be banished. Removed from home, job, family and friends, they would be sent into a living death. Family and friends were also forbidden to make contact with them. Scholars debate whether “leper” really referred to Hansen’s Disease and some refer to the possibility of psoriasis or ulcerations. Nevertheless, it was understandable yet horrendous and heart breaking for all.
What did Jesus do? He defies the PSTL and heals the ten lepers. The healed lepers race to find their elders and to be readmitted to their former lives. One returns and gives thanks. Luke 17:16 reports that the grateful one was a Samaritan. Jesus says, “get up and go on your way; your faith has made you well.”
Another time, at Jacob’s well, Jesus engages someone in conversation. She is a Samaritan, a woman and the ex wife of five husbands. By all rules of PSTL, Jesus is defying and challenging their understanding of appropriate behavior.
“And talk not much with womankind. They said this of a man’s own wife. How much more of his fellow’s wife! Hence the sages said; He that talks much with womankind brings evil upon himself and neglects the study of the Law and at the last will inherit Gehenna.” Mishnah, ‘Abot 1:4 as quoted in JTMEE p.203
John 4 “So the woman left her water jar, and went away into the city, and said to the people, “Come see a man who told me all that I ever did. Can this be the Christ?” Dr. Bailey refers to the unusual nature of this meeting with a sub chapter title: The Surprise of the Appearance of the First Christian Female Preacher. (JTMEE) Again, Jesus is not hindered by PSTL’s definition of who is acceptable to God or who may do the will of the father in heaven.
The times were harsh and the strategies were as well. Work was scarce, poverty wide spread. Some chose to join the bands of thieves who lived in the caves. To be caught was a guaranteed death penalty. Thieves and crucified criminals were clearly not acceptable in the circle of the PSTL. Yet, even on the cross, Jesus finds someone dying with him worthy of the promise of paradise.
Another forbidden category was that of the Gentiles. The First Commandment reminds us “That shall have no other Gods but me.” Among the Gentiles, the Roman Legions were certainly taboo for the PSTL. The Emperor was God and they had to sacrifice to him as the deity. Yet we see Jesus again defying the inner circle as he connects with the centurion and others who are not Jews.
In Acts 15, Paul and Barnabas were appointed to go up to Jerusalem and meet with the apostles and the elders. When the Pharisees present challenged the idea of Gentiles being accepted without circumcision, first Peter and then Paul and Barnabas witnessed “of all the signs and wonders that God had done through them among the Gentiles.” As Peter is quoted in Acts 15:11 “On the contrary, we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they (gentiles) will.”
One last example from the Gospels is Zaccheus. Publicans, tax collectors and usurers were despised by the leaders of the sacred. One of the charges against Jesus was that he consorted with tax collectors including one of his own group. But the story of Jesus and Zaccheus is another “costly demonstration of unexpected love.”
Jesus enters Jehrico. The most despised man in town is Zaccheus who has grown rich as Chief Tax Collector. The leaders of Jehrico offered Jesus their hospitality but Jesus chose to eat with Zaccheus and to stay overnight in his home. Luke 19:7 “And when they saw it they all murmured, “He has gone in to spend the night with a man who is a sinner.”
In John 21:15ff, Jesus meets with Peter following the resurrection. He asks Simon Peter, son of John, three times, “Do you love me?” Each time Peter responds affirmatively. And Jesus charges Peter, “Feed my sheep, feed my lambs, feed my sheep.” Earlier, on the night before His crucifixion, John 15:12 records Jesus as saying, “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.” Just what Jesus told the teacher of the Law in the parable of the Good Samaritan.
Moses brought all the people to the Promised Land, not just the Commandos. I have believed that was my calling for almost fifty years now. For me to walk toward Jesus means looking among all Jesus sheep and lambs, not just some select few.
I question neither the sincerity or the commitment of those who feel called to other paths on the way to Jesus. After all, “In my Father’s House there are many mansions. As I have
preached for many years, with God there is always more and with scripture there is always more. I believe that we all see through the glass darkly and that we are sinners who need to be saved by grace. Finally, as we yearn for god’s truth, it is better to have all voices at the table, not only those of our own choosing.
George L.W. Werner
Confirmed by Bishop JP DeWolfe 1953
Ordained Deacon by Bishop WH Gray 1962
Ordained Priest 1963
Dean Emeritus, Trinity Cathedral, Pittsburgh 1979-2000
31st President, the House of Deputies, the General Convention of the Episcopal Church
Deputy, elected by the Diocese of Pittsburgh, 1982; Chair of the Deputation; 1985, 1988, 1991, 1994, 1997, 2000, 2003
7 comments:
Unfortunately George's tenure as head of the Pittsburgh delegation ended in 2006 primarily as of result of his choosing to consent to the election of a openly practicing homosexual man as Bishop of New Hampshire. In deference to the large majority of Anglican beleivers in Pittsburgh whom he was elected to serve who felt otherwise, he could have abstained.
I must say, however, George was a always a fair man who did much to encourage me when I was a newbie GenCon deputy even though our theological views greatly differed --- but that was in a much different era before the great polarization in TEO. If only the current TEO leadership were as fairminded and gracious as George.
David
I think George represented well the minority of of the Pittsburgh Diocese. You seem to think that everyone should agree with you and your Bishop and if you don't agree you should be quiet.
I hope that all in your camp do not have that opinion, but that there are some who can be as "fairminded and gracious as George"
One more thing: your TEO is getting old. Stop demeaning TEC with your little formula! It really does not put you and your camp in a good light! I bet your Bishop does not call it TEO!
We are all commanded by Jesus to love one another, with no exceptions (John 15:12). However, this does not mean that we are to love, approve, and bless all types of behavior. For some of the reasons why God sees homosexual behavior as an abomination, see the story posted at http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/sep/08091011.html.
Gramps
I use my real name when posting, who are you and what "camp" are you from?
"In my Father’s House there are many mansions..."
In his use of these words from Jesus George Werner implies that our Father's House has mansions to house all the various paths people like to believe will lead them to the Father, sort of an "open house" approach. Unfortunately, he has totally missed the message of this particular teaching. His study of the culture of the scriptures should have made this clear.
Jesus is referring to the marriage customs of the time, and the disciples would have completely understood the prophetic teaching. In 1st Century Jewish culture, when a young man and woman became betrothed, the son returned to his father's house to build a room for his bride. This custom can be seen in the ruins of such houses seen in Israel today. It was the father who determined when it was time for the son to return for his bride and bring her "to his father's house" where they would live and build their family.
This is a beautiful reference to the time when Jesus will return for his bride, the Church. Note that it will not occur until the Father has determined the time has come. Then He will send His Son to gather the church, his bride, and bring her to his Father's house, the new Jerusalem.
How sad to have this incredible picture of the Second Coming turned into a theology contradictory to the Cross. Loving our neighbors does not mean telling them that Jesus loves them just the way they are and there is no need for redemption, no need for the Cross. Jesus told the women caught in adultery that she was forgiven, but in his great love for her he also told her to "go and sin no more."
Thanks Susan
I thought of that very text too -- the women caught in adultery, "go and sin no more"
It is cruelty to preach a gospel that affirms someone in their sin rather than preach the hope of tranformation and deliverance from sin through the power of the Cross.
Hi David: Sorry to be late in answering you, but I was away most of the weekend.
I will introduce myself to you next time I visit your parish.
My camp is in an evangelical parish/diocese of TEC that is not leaving.
Post a Comment