In my limited experience, the real tension in Unitarian Universalism isn’t between theists and non-theists. It’s between those who find meaning and value in traditional religious language, stories, forms and practices and those who are so offended by their association with conservative religions that they don’t want anything to do with them. http://johnfranc.blogspot.com/ , September 5th.
I wouldn’t go as far as the author on this matter, but it got me to thinking about how The Bible Workbench group is perceived at the UUCC. Apparently, some people think we are doing a Christian Bible study program. I've heard that some people are "shocked" that there is a Bible study group meeting at a Unitarian Universalist church. If we were doing a Tao Te Ching Workbench between services I doubt if anyone would raise an eyebrow.
Walter Brueggemann, in a Washington National Cathedral pod cast titled How to Read The Bible , says that in his liberal Christian denomination, the United Church of Christ, they would rather read any scripture other than the Bible. I’ve also heard that UU ministers get a lot of negative feedback if they use a reading from the Bible, but readings from other religious scriptures aren’t nearly as controversial. Why is this so?
The genesis of this attitude is, I believe, that most people think that the Bible is to be read as literally true. After all, this is what many of us we learned growing up. If you make that assumption, you have two choices: accept the Bible as literally true, or reject it outright. For most UUs, and other religious progressives, the first choice isn’t an option, sadly too many take the second option believing it is the only one available.
Why should we on a liberal religious path make the mistake of cultural tunnel vision, believing that “our” scriptures should be read literally and other culture’s sacred writings and stories not? Why do some of us “believe” that the Genesis creation story should be either taken as literally true or rejected as nonsense? Consider for a moment a quote attributed to Tim O’Brian, “Just because it didn’t happen doesn’t mean it isn’t true.” Or this from an anonymous Native American story teller, “I don’t know if it actually happened this way or not, but I know this story is true.” If you can accept either of those statements, than you should have no problem accepting that the Bible is true in the same sense that Mary Oliver’s poetry, or Kurt Vonnegut’s novels, or George Washington’s biographies are true. If you can get past a literal reading of the Bible than its literary, historical, ethical, and spiritual fruits are in easy reach.
There are several ways to approach the Bible that eschew a literal reading. We can read it as history, keeping in mind that like all histories it has a self-serving agenda. Actually, there are two conflicting histories in the Hebrew Bible (aka Old Testament). Chronicles is a retelling of the books of Genesis through Kings with a different agenda. Much of the Hebrew Bible is closer akin to what we would call myth, especially Genesis, or legend. In any case, these two histories give us alternative views of a time impossibly far away.
Many Christians read the Bible as a pre-scientific scared scripture. They pardon the ancient writers for using language and metaphors of their time and place. After all, how could they have done otherwise? Of course, they thought that the Creator of the universe was male and his domain was like a kingdom; that was the norm of societal organization at that time and place. They see no conflict between the Genesis story of creation and Darwinian Theory. One makes a religious statement the other a scientific statement. Many of their “Thou shall nots” reflect the social and political reality of their world not ours. Michael Dowd, who spoke at our church last year, is an Evangelical Christian and a proponent of this understanding of the Bible. I recommend his book Thank God for Evolution; it is available on CD as well print.
The Gospels, of course, are biographies of Jesus. When reading them it is best to keep in mind that they were pinned decades after his death by people who never knew him. The Gospels present four very different portraits of Jesus, each with its own peculiar image of him. To understand the Gospels you must take each one on its own terms and not read into one the characters and events of another. The Jesus of Mark is a very different person from the Jesus of John.
The Bible is literature. Bible stories have a cultural, historical, and literary significance that lie at the foundation of Western civilization. The Bible informs our novels, plays, short stories, essays, visual arts, and even our newspaper and magazine articles, biographies and histories. Biblical teachings enter into the debate on the great social issues of our time: abortion, the death penalty, gay marriage, health care, war, civil rights, women’s rights, immigration, taxes, and on and on.
Harry Emerson Fosdick, a liberal Presbyterian minister, wrote:
An intelligent understanding of the Bible is indispensable to anybody in the Western World who wishes to think wisely about religion. By no possibility can any one of us be independent of the Bible’s influence. Our intellectual heritage is full of its words and phrases, ideas and formulas. Ignorance of it constitutes a hopeless handicap in the endeavor to understand any Great Western literature.
Not only our great literature but our everyday language is infused with biblical references: the patience of Job, the blind leading the blind, writing on the wall, kiss of death, thirty pieces of silver, prodigal son, written in stone, and the good Samaritan for example. Pop culture too is full of with allusions to the Bible. For example, many movies have biblical references. Yahoo Answers lists more than sixty movies with Biblical allusions. I’m sure they missed many more than that, notably On The Waterfront (more about that in a moment). It doesn't matter whether you believe the Bible to be fact or a fable, it remains an important reference source in the study of literature and art.
The Bible is chuck full of story. Anyone brought up in the Jewish or Christian religions remembers the stories of Adam and Eve, Cain and Able, Noah, the tower of Babel, the Exodus from Egypt, the walls of Jericho, Samson, David and Goliath, Jonah and many others. Christians also have the stories of Jesus’ birth, teachings, healings, passion, his parables, and many other stories from Acts and the epistles. Are these stories relevant to twenty-first century UUs? I think they are. Without knowing these core stories, we cannot fully participate in, or fully appreciate, the popular, political, and above all spiritual worlds that surround us.
In Bible Workbench, we remember that these stories are as much about us right now as it they are about them back then. We are not concerned about if or how the story took place, or what it might have meant back then. Rather than ask if the story really happened we inquire into how the story is true today, for people like us. We use these stories as an opportunity to ponder how they are happening in our world, our community, and our inner life right now.
I’ll end with an illustration of how this works. One Sunday our reading was about the Crucifixion, possibly from Mark 15. I had recently watched the Elia Kazan film On the Waterfront and remembered a great line delivered by Karl Malden’s character, Father Berry:
Some people think the Crucifixion only took place on Calvary. They better wise up! Taking Joey Doyle's life to stop him from testifying is a crucifixion. And dropping a sling on Kayo Dugan because he was ready to spill his guts tomorrow, that's a crucifixion. And every time the Mob puts the pressure on a good man, tries to stop him from doing his duty as a citizen, it's a crucifixion.Father Berry’s insight quickly led us to slain civil rights leaders, corporate whistle blowers, labor organizers, and other business, educational, and political crucifixions. I’m sure you can come up with your own examples. This line of discussion had some real momentum and was easy for the group. Then I steered the discussion to how the Crucifixion might be our story. Had we ever participated in or witnessed a crucifixion? If so, what role had we played: Jesus, Judas, Pilate, Peter, a disciple, or a high priest? This part of the discussion was slower and more thoughtful with long silences. I expect this when we go deeper and into the personal. Sometimes there is more silence than discussion. This is okay with me; I know people are thinking and feeling and perhaps are a little uncomfortable. I also know that I can count on someone trying to bring us back to the earlier, easier discussion. Occasionally, I am that person.
That Sunday we ended by asking how the characters in the story are part of our inner lives. What do you know of an inner Jesus who sees injustice and wants to correct it? What do you know of an inner Judas who betrays your ideals and aspirations for thirty pieces of silver? Or perhaps an inner Peter who in a pinch will deny ever having known your inner Jesus. These were take home questions and not discussed in the group.
Sundays between services about a dozen people gather in the library for Bible Workbench. The theological makeup of the group varies from week to week and may include Christian, Moslem, Jew, Pagan, Agnostic, Atheist, Theist, Deist, Humanist, or those who don’t know quite where they fit on the theological landscape. We have a lively discussion and occasionally we are able to get into deep spiritual waters. Every week Bible Workbench enriches my spiritual life. Rarely do I have to remind the group that “just because it didn’t happen doesn’t mean it isn’t true.”
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment