translation – Salvaged Faith

Mary the Tower?

Posted on September 5, 2022Leave a comment

Text: Luke 8:1-3, 24:1-11, John 11

As summer draws to a close, we have spent time learning more about some bold characters from our Holy Bible.

They weren’t perfect and in many cases there was nothing all that special about them.

And yet, they were called to stand up, to lead, and to act in ways that were only possible because God was with them.

Today, we get to dive into the story of a woman that maybe we all think we know.

I’m curious… when you hear the name Mary Magdelene… what is the first thing that comes to your mind…

Go ahead and shout out your answers…

In my dictionary of women in scripture, Mary Magdelene is identified as “Mary #3” and the author of her entry, Carolyn Osiek describes her as: “the most famous of Jesus’ women disciples and the one who has been most misinterpreted in Christian history.” (p. 120)

What does scripture actually say about her?

In the passages we heard from this morning, we find Mary Magdalene listed among the women who traveled with Jesus and the twelve disciples.

She is specifically named as someone, “from whom seven demons had gone out,” (Luke 8:2), but also as someone who had her own wealth.

These women were not groupies or even paid to travel and support the men, but it mentions that they ministered out of their own resources.

We also heard from Luke that Mary Magdalene went to the tomb to care for the body of Jesus and was a first witness to the resurrection along with a couple of other women.

Her presence that morning is repeated by Matthew, Mark, and John.

John, however, has a slight adaptation. He places those women standing at the cross, but only Mary goes to the tomb that morning.

She has an encounter with Jesus where she mistakes him at first for the gardener and that lovely hymn, “In the Garden” recounts how much she wanted to tarry there in the presence of the resurrected Christ.

Now… How many of you remember Mary Magdalene as the woman who washed Jesus feet?

All four gospels recount this incident and she is often depicted with a vessel of ointment… but is she in the actual bible as doing so?

In Matthew 26 and Mark 14, an unnamed woman comes to him at a man named Simon’s house in the town of Bethany and this anointing is connected to the transition to his trial and execution… preparing him for burial.

Luke places the story in a different context and place, near the beginning of his ministry in chapter 7. He doesn’t name her either, although Luke adds the detail that she was a sinner. What kind of sinner? It doesn’t say, but we tend to assume that she was a prostitute even though the text does not indicate that.

Only John’s gospel includes a name… Mary, the sister of Lazarus and Martha. Note, this IS in Bethany again, which seems to be in line with Matthew and Marks accounts, although it is Lazarus’ home (John 12). And, this encounter follows chapter 11, where Jesus comes to Bethany to raise Lazarus from the dead and interacts with Mary and her sister Martha.

And yet, over and over in art, this woman is connected with Mary Magdalene.

And part of that is because in medieval times, some religious leaders like Pope Gregory the Great conflated several women in scriptures all together… including the women caught in adultery, the sinner who anointed Jesus feet, and the Mary we know is from Bethany.

Scholars like Hugh Pope, however, actually agree with this identification of Mary in John 11 with Mary Magdalene because of the central role that she plays in the gospel of John and the praise that Jesus bestows upon her.

What throws a wrench in all of this is when we assume that Mary Magdalene means Mary from a place named Magdalene… like we might think of Jospeh of Arimathea.

However, Luke actually helps us here.

In the Greek passage of Luke, it makes clear that this Mary is called Magdalene.

Not that she is from a place named Magdala or Migdal, but she is named and regarded in this way.

Much like others in this day have nicknames… like Simon who is called Peter, the Rock.

Or Thomas, who is called Didymus, the Twin.

We aren’t actually sure where a village named Magdala or Migdal might even have existed in this time… but magdala in Aramaic means tower or great.

So is Mary of Bethany simply called, Mary Magdelene? Mary the Tower?

To throw a deeper wrench into the conversation, I want to share with you some recent scholarship on John’s gospel and this woman, Mary of Bethany.

I am just learning about this myself, so I am drawing on an account that religious historian and author Diana Butler Bass shared at the end of July at the Wild Goose Festival. (https://dianabutlerbass.substack.com/p/mary-the-tower)

She tells the story of Elizabeth Schrader, who is a doctoral student of the New Testament at Duke University.

Schrader was an active person of faith, but didn’t set out to be a scholar.

However, “one day Libbie walked into a church garden in the city of New York seeking refuge from the city, and sat down to pray. And as she prayed, she heard a voice and the voice said, ‘Follow Mary Magdalene.’”

She thought this was a bit strange, but she listened.

She wrote a song about Mary Magdalene.

She decided to learn more.

And eventually she found her way to seminary and started a master’s program in New Testament studies.

Her final thesis was on John 11 and Mary Magdalene and her professor invited her to look at some of the earliest texts we have.

That is how Elizabeth Schrader found herself sitting with a digital copy of Papyrus 66. Butler Bass describes it as “the oldest and most complete text we have of the gospel of John… dated around the year 200,” and that it “had been sitting in a library for a very, very, very, very long time.”

She uses her newfound knowledge of Greek and reads the first sentence.

Now… here is what my New Revised Standard Version says:

Now a certain man was ill, Lazarus of Bethany, the village of Mary and her sister Martha. (11:1)

But that’s not what Schrader saw on this very, very, very, old page.

It read… translated to English:

Now a certain man was ill, Lazarus of Bethany, the village of Mary and his sister Mary.

What is more, Schrader could see on the manuscript markings of how someone had gone in and tried to change it. His was changed to her. The second Mary in that line (Maria in the Greek) was changed to Martha… as one letter was written over.

At some point, someone had altered the oldest version we have of the gospel of John and split the character of Mary into two.

As Schrader kept reading, in John 11 and 12, in other places where it reads Martha, it originally said Mary.

Where it reads “sisters” it read “sister.”

Pronouns are changed.

And it isn’t just in Papyrus 66. She has discovered evidence of this in other ancient documents as well. (https://today.duke.edu/2019/06/mary-or-martha-duke-scholars-research-finds-mary-magdalene-downplayed-new-testament-scribes)

The repetition of actions and statements might not indicate actions by two different sisters, but a textual reiteration or duplication.

Schrader’s research as a master’s student has proven that the version of John’s gospel we have in our Bible’s today is different from earlier translations which have been altered.

Harvard Theological Review asked to publish her thesis as an article.

And what is more, the Nestle-Aland Translation Committee of the Greek New Testament asked her to come and present her findings to them.

Butler Bass describes this group as “a whole bunch of very old German men who have spent their entire lives making sure the Bibles that we have in English and all the other languages around the world are the closest and most precise Bibles that we can get to the original manuscripts.”

And right now, they are deciding whether or not Schrader’s research should become a new footnote or if we need to actually change John 11 and John 12 and take Martha out.

Now, Luke’s gospel has a Mary and Martha who are sisters. This is the story where Martha is ministering and busy and her sister, Mary, sits at Jesus feet. No mention of a brother, nor being in Bethany.

We aren’t talking about this family.

But in John’s gospel, we are discovering might never have been a Martha.

Why does this matter?

It matter’s because there are only two people in the gospels who confess Jesus is the Messiah.

The first is from Peter… Simon Peter… the Rock.

In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Peter says: “You are the Messiah, the son of the Living God.”

And Jesus replies, “You are Peter, upon this rock I will build my church.”

In John’s gospel, this happens right before the resurrection of Lazarus.

And the person who says it in our Bible’s today is this sister, Martha.

“Yes, Lord, I believe that you are the Christ, God’s Son, the one who is coming into the world.” (11:27, CEB).

However, manscripts by Tertullian – a Christian author from the second century, about the time Papyrus 66 is from… indicate this confession was by Mary.

In her paper, Schrader concludes with some important questions:

“Who exactly added Martha to this story, and why? Is it possible that one very important figure in the Fourth Gospel has been deliberately split into three?” (p. 52, “Was Martha of Bethany Added to the Fourth Gospel in the Second Century?” https://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/18592/Schrader%2018.May.2016.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y)

Later traditions and writings around Mary Magdalene describe her as an important disciple, a leader, a spokeswoman.

The kind of woman that we see in Luke 8 who is traveling as an important figure alongside the disciples.

The research that is being done today is leading us to see her as more of a central figure within the gospel of John as well.

I want to close with how Diana Butler Bass understands these implications:

Is it really true that the other Christological confession of the New Testament comes from of the voice of Mary Magdalene? That the Gospel of John gives the most important statement in the entirety of the New Testament, not to a man, but to a woman, and to a really important woman who will show up later as the first witness to the resurrection.

You see how these two stories work together. In John 11, Lazarus is raised from the dead, and who is there but Mary Magdalene? And at that resurrection, she confesses that Jesus is indeed the son of God. And then you go just 10 chapters later and who is the person at the grave? She mistakes him, at first, thinks he’s the gardener. She turns around and he says, ‘Mary,’ and she goes, ‘Lord.’ It’s Mary Magdalene.

…Mary is indeed the tower of faith. That our faith is the faith of that woman who would become the first person to announce the resurrection. Mary the Witness, Mary the Tower, Mary the Great, and she has been obscured from us… This is not a Dan Brown novel. This is the Nestle-Aland Translation Committee of the Greek New Testament. This is the Harvard Theological Review. This is some of the best, most cutting edge historical research in the world.

Who was Mary Magdalene?

At one time, she had been possessed by demons, but they were cast out.

She was wealthy enough to support herself and the ministry of others.

She was a disciple of Jesus.

She knew him to be her Lord.

She was the first witness to the resurrection.

And more and more we are coming to understand that she might have been that sister of Lazarus, who sent word for Jesus to come and heal her brother, and who confessed that he was the Messiah.

The woman who in John 12 hosted a dinner and anointed his feet with nard.

We are starting to discover that she might be a central figure in the Gospel of John and not merely one among many minor female characters.

And for anyone who struggles to see themselves among the followers of Jesus depicted there…

For anyone who doubts the role of women in the church, especially in leadership…

Well, this is a big deal.

Bible 101: Art, Science, History of Interpretation

Posted on February 10, 2019Leave a comment

Text: Luke 11: 27-28

Over these last few weeks in Bible 101, we have explored how our scriptures were put together, translated, and some of the creative tension that was baked into the text itself.
Today, our focus is on interpretation. Once we understand what a scripture meant in the time and place it was written, how do we then live and apply it today.
After all, Jesus said that blessed are those who hear God’s word and obey it, who put it into practice, who allow it to shape how they think and live.

There is part of me that wants to offer you six simple rules for interpretation.
To give you a set of guidelines to follow.
To say this is the United Methodist way of approaching scripture.
But the reality is, interpretation is messier than a list of how-to instructions.
It is as much an art as it is a science.
It is as much about the mystery of the Holy Spirit as it is about the rigid teachings of our ancestors.
And because of that, faithful United Methodists today disagree about how to read and apply scripture.

That was the struggle lifted up by our friend, Al Lockin, near the beginning of our Bible 101 series. What are we to make of our differences? How can we read the same text and come to such different conclusions?
When we hear the word, but our interpretation of scripture leads us to obey, to practice, to live out the teaching of Jesus in different ways, what do we do about it?
This particular question is so important for this moment in the life of our church, because in just two weeks, our denomination will hold a four-day conference in St. Louis. The reason we need to have this big meeting is because we don’t agree on how to interpret and live out the scriptures as they relate to LGBTQ+ persons. As I shared with you last summer during our series on A Way Forward, faithful Christians read the same six scriptures and come to different conclusions about what they mean for us today.
And while in some ways what we are debating in St. Louis is that interpretation, the deeper question, the bigger question is actually this: are we willing to continue to be a part of a church, of a community, of a denomination with people who disagree with us?

So today, I want to step back from the rules and guidelines of interpretation. I want to offer a reminder that confronting differences in how we live and apply scriptures is not something new.
In fact, scripture itself lifts up the reality that faithful people interpret things differently.
As we have shared these past few weeks, even the Torah itself, those first five books of scripture, hold within them contradictions and tensions and different interpretations of events.
Were there two of every kind of animal, or for some animals on Noah’s ark were there actually seven pairs? Well… it depends on if you are reading the interpretation of the priests or of the other oral traditions.
Our biblical canon even contains different historical accounts – in the books of Kings and Chronicles, we find different takes on the same events, told from different perspectives. It would be like holding in your hands two different histories on George Washington – one told from a military expert writing in the 1800s and the other from a modern day expert in leadership… you are going to get different stories… but its all about the same set of events.

When we get to the time of Jesus, the recognized and agreed upon texts of the Jewish faith were fairly established… but there were different schools of thoughts and ways of understanding what those texts meant and how we were called to live them out.
Earlier this week, I posted in our facebook group a video from Rob Bell that talks about what it meant to be a disciple in the time of Jesus.
While all children would have learned and would have memorized the torah… the first five books of scripture… after the age of ten, most children would finish their education and would go and learn their family trade.
But what Bell describes as “the best of the best of the best” would embark on a new phase of education.
They would go and apply to become a disciple of a particular rabbi whose teaching that student wanted to embody. One rabbi might look at a verse and say that this is what it means…. But a different rabbi from a different town might look at it slightly differently. And they would commit their life to learning from that rabbi.

One of the things that tends to happen, however, when you have different ways of interpreting God’s message is those differences can become institutionalized.
In the gospels, we see a number of schools of thought present… kind of like different denominations today.
The Pharisees held together the written law of the scriptures with an oral tradition of interpretation called the Talmud. They believed in an after life and that a messiah was coming to usher in a new age. Much of their practice was shaped not around the temple, but around gatherings in synagogues.
The Sadducees rejected that oral teaching and focused only on what was written in the law. And since there is no mention of an afterlife in the Torah, they didn’t believe in one. They also focused their practice around the Temple. A unique feature for a group that held close to a literal interpretation of their texts is that they were open to much of Greek thought and incorporated it into their teaching.
You’ll also find descriptions of the Essenes in this time. This was a sort of monastic movement with strict dietary laws and a commitment to celibacy. Their relationship to the written and oral law was often more spiritualized and we have discovered writings like the Dead Sea Scrolls from communities like the Essenes that show us very different ways of approaching the life of faith.

Much of our New Testament, aside from the gospels, was written by Paul – a Pharisee, taught by the Rabbi Gamaliel, who was a student of Hillel. One of the more fascinating things that I found as I was doing research for this message is that Hillel was known for his seven rules of interpretation… and many have worked to draw parallels between those seven rules and the writings of Paul and how Paul himself worked to interpret Jewish scriptures into early Christian teaching.

As the church began to be established, one of the things that the early Christian leaders did was to try to form a standard, a core set of beliefs that we all hold in common together. We call these creeds. For example, the apostle’s creed was not written by the apostles, but summarizes the core of that teaching. Let’s turn to page 881 and read aloud the traditional version together.

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth;
And in Jesus Christ his only Son, our Lord;
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, dead, and buried;*
the third day he rose from the dead;
he ascended into heaven,
and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty;
from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic** church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.

But as time has moved on from this time of creedal confessions, we have watched as time after time, our different ways of understanding God and the scriptures have created new schools of thought, and fractures and splinters and new denominations and movements… including the United Methodist Church.

In our core scripture for today, Jesus has been teaching the disciples and was casting out demons. Even in the midst of that miracle – there were different interpretations happening in the crowd around what was happening.
One woman finally shouts out – Blessed is the woman who gave birth to you!
I find this a really thing to shout out in this moment, but perhaps one of the reasons she felt the need to raise her voice is that in the midst of all of the conflict and chaos of interpretation, she wanted to affirm where Jesus was coming from.
She wanted to celebrate his particular brand… his line of thinking… the people who formed and taught and shaped the way he was approaching scripture.

What I find really fascinating here is that Jesus challenges her words… It’s those who hear God’s word and live it, obey it, put it into practice that are blessed.

Our work is not to focus on the people who formed us, or the rabbis we follow or the perspectives we belong to. Our job is not to get so stuck in one school of thought or to be focused on the past.
Our job is to take God’s word and live it out.
Our responsibility is to take ownership ourselves for how we put into practice the faith that has been handed down to us.
In fact, one of the core teachings of the United Methodist Church is that we believe it is the theological task of each and every single person not to regurgitate the work of others, but to engage with the scriptures and to wrestle with what they mean today.

In the past, we have talked about some of general framework in the United Methodist tradition for approaching scripture and applying it to faith today.
You’ve heard about the quadrilateral – scripture, tradition, reason, and experience.
But guess what… even faithful United Methodists don’t agree on THAT as a general framework… or how to apply it… or what to do when faced with disagreement between tradition and something like experience.

When we go back farther to the writings of John Wesley, I find some very helpful advice as we encounter our differences today.
One… he talked about being a man of one book… but he always had a number of other books in his hands…. Other translations of scripture… writings and teachings from history and tradition… wisdom from the natural sciences of his day… even a manual for how to heal people who were sick.
But over and over, he also reminded us that as we each engage in our work of interpretation, that personal responsibility, we are not called to do it alone. He formed people into groups of accountability. He reminded people of their call to be the church. And in various ways he reminded us that we are called to embrace humility and love and compassion when we are confronted with conflict in our interpretations.
As he wrote in his sermon on the Catholic Spirit “If your heart is as my heart, take my hand.”
In essentials unity, in non-essentials, liberty, in all things love.

Bible 101: From the Septuagint to the Message

Posted on January 27, 2019Leave a comment

Text: John 1:1-14, 2 Timothy 3:16-17

First question I have for all of you… how many of you felt like last week’s discussion of quantum mechanics and elephants was a tiny bit over your head?
That’s okay!
Each week we are going to explore a different way of approaching the bible and a different part of its history, so to make up for all of the science last week, I thought we might start this morning by playing a little game.

NAME THAT TRANSLATION!
I do not promise that you will get all of the answers right… but I do promise you will learn something in the process!!!

John 1:6-8 The Message (MSG)
6-8 There once was a man, his name John, sent by God to point out the way to the Life-Light. He came to show everyone where to look, who to believe in. John was not himself the Light; he was there to show the way to the Light.

This bible was created and translated by Eugene Peterson between 1993 and 2002. He went back to the original languages and his goal was not to translate word for word, but to get the sense of the phrases in the original text and convey the idea. This is an idiomatic translation – or translating phrases rather than words.

John 1:6-8 Wycliffe Bible (WYC)
6 A man was sent from God, to whom the name was John.
7 This man came into witnessing, that he should bear witnessing of the light, that all men should believe by him.
8 He was not that light, but that he should bear witnessing of the light.

The Wycliffe bible is a whole group of translations that were made in the 14th century into Middle English. Most Christians at this time only had access to scriptures through hearing them orally or through seeing verses in Latin. In some ways, his goal was the same as Peterson’s – to translate the bible into the common vernacular. They worked not from the original languages, but from the Latin version of scripture – the Vulgate.

John 1:6-8 Mounce Reverse-Interlinear New Testament (MOUNCE)
There came on the scene a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness to bear testimony about he light so that everyone might believe through him. He was not the light, but came to bear testimony about the light.

This version of the bible was created for people who wanted to study the bible and explore the original languages… but who didn’t actually know Greek! The purpose is to help teach a little bit of Greek at a time. A traditional “interlinear” bible would use the Greek word order and then show the English word for word correlary – but that makes the sentence structure hard to understand. So the Mounce version starts with the English sentence structure and then adds in the Greek words.

I will often use a version like this to discover what the Greek was and then I can go back and consult a Greek dictionary to see if there are other meanings or how it is used elsewhere in scripture.

John 1:6-8 King James Version (KJV)

6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.

The King James Version is a translation into English that took seven years from 1604-1611. King James oversaw the translation himself – giving instructions to make sure that this translation would capture the structure and polity of the Church of England. 47 scholars were used in the translation and they went back to the original languages for their translation, adapting them slightly with known Septuagint and Vulgate texts.

Fun fact: The English alphabet at the time had no J! So it was King Iames Bible which talked about Iesus Christ.

John 1:6-8 Common English Bible (CEB)
6 A man named John was sent from God. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning the light, so that through him everyone would believe in the light. 8 He himself wasn’t the light, but his mission was to testify concerning the light.

This is a very new translation of the bible which is distributed by Abingdon Press, the United Methodist denominational publisher. The goal was to make the bible accessible for people today and easy to read, aiming for a seventh-grade reading level. They also wanted it to appeal broadly to many cultural contexts over 120 scholars from a variety of ethnic and cultural backgrounds. More than twenty-four denominations were involved in its work. The key feature is that instead of churchy and traditionally biblical words, you will find more seeker-friendly words.

In various letters,Paul writes to the young man, Timothy, whom he is mentoring in the faith. Along with advice and doctrine, one of the things he reminds him is that the scriptures help him to be wise and give him the words he needs to help others grow. He includes that famous line “every scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for showing mistakes, for correcting, and for training character, so that the person who belongs to God can be equipped to do everything that is good.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
We read that passage within our own biblical texts and we automatically apply that sentiment to the whole of scripture. This entire text has been inspired by God and it is useful for helping us understand who we are and whose we are.
One thing that often fails to cross our minds is that the Bible that Paul and Timothy were reading was very different than the ones we have in our hands today.
Early Christians spoke Greek – the language of the empire – and the scriptures that they would have been basing their teaching and writing from would have been a Greek version of the Hebrew scriptures known as the Septuagint.

When Alexander the Great conquered the Persian empire (which would have included Jerusalem and the people of Israel), Greek became the common tongue. He was known not only for conquering vast swaths of land, but he also collected books and scrolls for his library at Alexandria.
Seventy-two scholars were employed to translate the Torah, two hundred years before Christ, and it took them only seventy two days to recreate those first five books of the Hebrew Bible. The very name, Septuagint (LXX) comes from the seventy days and seventy people.
Tradition has it six scholars from each of the twelve tribes (or seventy two people) were each asked to do so independently… and independently recreated identical versions of the Torah.

Talk about inspired!
The authors of the New Testament frequently relied upon this Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures in their own writing, so it is likely that Paul and Timothy were referring to the Septuagint in their own discourse and as they were teaching others about the faith.
Christian father, Jerome, however, working around 400 years after Christ, instead turned back to the original Hebrew. His translation of the scriptures into Latin is known as the Vulgate and was used by others in their further translations into English.

But something I think we often don’t think about is how we got from there to here… how that inspiration of God works… and what it means when we open up our bibles and read vastly different things.
A couple of weeks ago, one of the passages that we were all invited to read as part of the Bible 101 challenge was a selection from Job 38.
In some of the final chapters, as God kind of puts Job in his place by rattling off a whole series of ways that God is superior and cosmic and knows everything from the time when eggs will hatch to the course of stars in the skies… some of us read about a gigantic hippopotamus… and others read about the behemoth. Some of us read about a huge alligator and others read about the Leviathan.
There is a world of difference between a hippopotamus and a mythic beast.
So what gives?

As we went through some of those various translations, one of the things that you may have heard is that the purpose of each of our translators is different.
Some are trying to give us a word for word exact replica into a new language… and if there isn’t an equivalent word, sometimes they just use the word from the original text.
Some are trying to merely get the sentiment of a phrase, with idiomatic translations and so they might try to say the same thing or explain the original phrase with more words in the process.
Others are trying to make the bible as accessible as possible… and to use words or concepts that are foreign to our ears like behemoth don’t help. They find the closest equivalent in English, in this case, and simply allow the meaning to change slightly.

It is always good to understand what the motivations might have been behind the translation of the bible YOU are using, because it might help you get a sense of how to approach that text. And when you read from a variety of translations, you get a fuller sense of how God has been speaking to people throughout time and place.
Because in the end, each author and translator began their work, inspired by God, in order to help bring to a new generation in a new time and place the messages of God.
While the exact words might differ and the phrases might not match, they are inspired to share what is “useful one way or another – showing us truth, exposing our rebellion, correcting our mistakes, training us to live God’s way. Through the Word we are put together and shaped up for the tasks God has for us.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17 MSG) Thanks be to God. Amen.

A Way Forward? 25-cent words

Posted on August 19, 2018Leave a comment

Texts: Philippians 4:8-9, Matthew 22:34-40

This past year as I taught confirmation, one of our lessons focused on how we are all theologians.
I wrote that word up on the board and one of our students exclaimed – WOW! That’s a 25-cent word!
There was an old idiom that you shouldn’t use a 50-cent word when a 5-cent word will do.
But just because a word is complicated doesn’t mean you shouldn’t use it.
So we unpacked it. We defined it. And suddenly, that 25-cent word wasn’t so scary anymore.

Today, we need to talk about some 25-cent words.
These are words are important and form the background of both the conflict within our denomination and in how we might move beyond this tension.
So… will you pray with me?
Compassionate God, all creation delights in the presence of your Word.
May the authority of your Spirit bring understanding into our confused minds, and truth into our troubled hearts, that we may praise and serve Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen (from the Worship@North website. https://northchurchindy.wordpress.com/ )

We are going to start in the same place as our confirmands. Our first 25-cent word is… theologian.
I am a theologian.
I have a Master of Divinity from Vanderbilt University and I spent three and a half years studying divine things like scripture and ancient texts and history and the thoughts of other theologians.

But you know what?
You are a theologian, too.
You see, a theologian is simply anyone who reflects upon God’s action in the world today and as United Methodists we believe that every single one of us is called to this task.
Every generation must wrestle with our faith in a changing world.
The church needs to see problems and challenges like sexual abuse or global migration so we can provide a faithful response.
But, we also need to be able to figure out how to communicate the truth of our faith to a world that increasingly can’t understand us.
Theology helps us to do both.
Whether or not you knew it before worship today, you are a theologian.
I want you to claim that! Say out loud and proud: I am a theologian!

And as a theologian, your job is to answer a simple question: What can I say that is faithful to scripture as it has been passed down through tradition, and that makes sense in light of human experience and reason? (paraphrase of Book of Discipline p. 81)
As Paul told the Philippians, we are to focus our thoughts on what is excellent and true, holy and just. We are to practice what we have learned and received and heard from our mentors and teachers of the faith.
That is theology!
And as United Methodist theologians, you have four sources in discovering God at work in the world.
Scripture. Tradition. Experience. Reason.

These four sources make up our next 25-cent word: quadrilateral.
“[John] Wesley believed that the living core of the Christian faith was revealed in scripture, illumined by tradition, vivified in personal experience, and confirmed by reason.” (p. 82)
All four are important. All four are necessary. All four help us to see where God is working in the world.
We start with scripture.
We end with scripture.
Scripture is the absolute foundation of all of our theology… so as theologians, we had better be reading and pouring over scripture in our lives.
But… and… scripture is always being interpreted.

First, scripture is interpreted by other scripture.
You cannot take a single verse out of context but need to look at the fullness of the entire passage and story.
And, we come to see as we read the bible that there is an overarching story within the scripture itself… a story of creation and redemption, a story of mistakes and forgiveness, a story that ends in the restoration of all things.
In our gospel, religious leaders ask Jesus to interpret and prioritize scripture for them. His response is one that provides us guidance when we in turn interpret scripture today – how does this verse lead us to love God and love our neighbor? (Matthew 22:34-40)

Next, we have the witness of how people have interpreted that scripture through time. Tradition shows us the “consensus of faith” that has grown out of a particular community’s experience. (p. 85-86)
Not all contexts and communities are the same. The experience of Czech immigrants in the Midwest was very different than that of African slaves in the Deep South. Each community passed on the gospel and created practices of faith that show us how the scripture made sense in their lives. We also connect tradition with the theology of previous generations that have been passed down to us in creeds and writings.

Tradition shows us how communities have understood God, but we also each have or own unique experiences.
Who you are and what you have been through is always with you when you open up the Bible – your pain, joy, anger, gender, economic reality…
It is why you can read the same passage of scripture repeatedly over time and discover something new with each reading.
But Wesley also talked about how God continues to reveal through our experiences and the fruit that we are bearing in our lives. When he saw the call in the lives of women around him, he began to license them as preachers.

Our final source of theology is reason. As the Book of Proverbs reminds us, each person is called to “turn your ear toward wisdom, and stretch your mind toward understanding. Call out for insight, and cry aloud for understanding. ” (Proverbs 2:2-3)
We believe that God reveals truth in many places, not only in scripture, and that we should pursue such knowledge and truth with our whole selves. Science, philosophy, nature: these are all places that help us to gain understanding.
Where we find contradictions within scripture itself or between a passage and wisdom of the world, reason asks what greater truths a verse might be speaking or how to prioritize and discern which is truer.

Our Book of Discipline reminds us that

“United Methodists as a diverse people continue to strive for consensus in understanding the gospel… while exercising patience and forbearance with one another. Such patience stems neither from indifference toward truth nor from an indulgent tolerance of error but from an awareness that we know only in part and that none of us is able to search the mysteries of God except by the Spirit of God. We proceed with our theological task, trusting that the Spirit will grant us wisdom…” (Book of Discipline p. 89)

The simple truth which lies at the heart of our conflict today is that people of faith, United Methodists who care about the scriptures and who come from diverse backgrounds, cannot come to a place of consensus in how we approach matters of human sexuality and in particular how we understand homosexuality.
We might use the quadrilateral differently or prioritize some aspects more than others.
But I think part of the difficulty is that we don’t even have a common understanding of the question we are seeking to answer within the scriptures.
And that means a couple more 25-cent words:

First, homosexuality. This word was initially coined in the 1880s in German and made its way into English usage in the 1890s. The word itself simply refers to sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex. Some modern translations of scripture use this word, but it didn’t even exist at the time the King James Bible was translated.

Many who seek to answer the question of what we should do today start from this definition. Their concern is largely with the physical acts associated with any given sexual orientation. Many prohibitions in our Book of Discipline focus on this as well, using the phrase “self-avowed, practicing homosexual.” The question being raised by this group is largely about how we use our bodies and whether or not such use is good and holy.

Others focus on a more expansive understanding of the complexity of human sexuality, referring to a wider group of people through the term LGBTQ+.

Science and sociology have helped us to see in the last fifty years that our identity is complicated.
This graphic talks about four different aspects of our identity – all of which are placed on a spectrum. Our biological sex, how we identify our gender and how we express it, who we are attracted to… all of these factors play a role… which is why the terminology we use keeps expanding as well. There is a handout at the back that has this graphic as well as some common definitions within LGBTQ+ if you are interested. The question being raised by this group is also about how bodies, but tends to focus more on embodiment and identity as a whole person.

As a denomination, when we bring these questions to General Conference, we seem to have reached our limits of patience and forbearance with one another.
But as people of a local faith community, my prayer is that we can still remember with humility that now we see through a glass darkly and that we still might extend patience and forbearance towards one another as we explore a few scriptures together.

When we open the scriptures, there are six verses that our tradition has used to condemn homosexuality.
Genesis 19: Sodom & Gomorrah
Leviticus 18 & 20: Abomination
Romans 1: Exchanging Natural Relations for Unnatural
1 Corinthians 6 & 1 Timothy 1: “malakoi and arsenokoitai”
As United Methodist theologians, we start with scripture, and we end with scripture so we need to wrestle with these passages as background for our theology today.

Before they went to bed, the men of the city of Sodom—everyone from the youngest to the oldest—surrounded the house and called to Lot, “Where are the men who arrived tonight? Bring them out to us so that we may have sex with them.”

First – Genesis 19: 4-5, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. Angels from God arrive in order to determine if there are any righteous people in the town. The men of the city knock on the door of the house they are staying and seek to force themselves upon the visitors.
However, this is a great place to start using scripture to interpret scripture. While later Christian tradition adopted sodomy as a term for sinful, non-procreative sex, within the scriptures itself, the sin of Sodom was not sexual in nature. In Ezekiel 16, the prophet names the sin of Sodom as being proud and not helping the poor and needy. This was a culture that relied upon hospitality – when guests arrived the duty of the community was to welcome them and provide for their needs. To violently force yourself upon these visitors, attacking them, raping them, was against every hospitality code of the time. This is a clear violation of the command to love your neighbor.

The question we wrestle with theologically is whether or not our experience of LGBT persons today is reflected in this text.

You must not have sexual intercourse with a man as you would with a woman; it is a detestable practice.

If a man has sexual intercourse with a man as he would with a woman, the two of them have done something detestable. They must be executed; their blood is on their own heads.

The next two scriptures come from the Holiness Code in the book of Leviticus (18:22, 20:13). In many translations, sex between two men is named as an abomination, or detestable. Both of these chapters are concerned with sexual practices that were forbidden to the people of God as they were entering the Promised Land. It is a rejection of practices both in the land of Egypt and practices that may have been common among others in the land of Canaan.
The Hebrew word that we have translated as abomination or detestible is probably not a fair translation of the word. “Toevah” is understood by many today to instead mean ritually unclean or culturally taboo. The Israelites are called to be holy and set-apart and to adopt cultural practices that are different from their neighbors. In the larger context of Leviticus, these include commands about food, clothing, bodily fluids, and how you treat the stranger among you.
Today, our tradition still considers many of the practices within these two chapters of Leviticus to be culturally taboo, but not all of them. And we have moved away from many of the other prohibitions within these texts that we consider to be culturally bound – like eating shellfish or the cutting of hair. And that’s because we hold a different understanding of what makes us unclean in the eyes of the Lord. Peter’s vision in Acts 10 shifts the conversation within the Christian faith and his encounter with the gentile Cornelius leads him to proclaim, “God has shown me that I should never call a person impure or unclean.” (Actus 10:28)

Theologically, we ask today what scripture, tradition, reason, and experience lead us to claim as taboo sexual acts, framed by our understanding of what forms us as a Christian community that loves God and our neighbor.

That’s why God abandoned them to degrading lust. Their females traded natural sexual relations for unnatural sexual relations. Also, in the same way, the males traded natural sexual relations with females, and burned with lust for each other. Males performed shameful actions with males, and they were paid back with the penalty they deserved for their mistake in their own bodies.

Our next scripture comes from Paul’s letter to the Romans. His argument here in the first chapter is that Gentiles and Jews alike are without excuse and full of sin. The Jews have been given the law and claim to follow it but don’t. The Gentiles don’t have the law… instead they should have seen God revealed through nature itself. Augustine and Aquinas and others have carried this concept through our tradition and our use of reason: we can know God through the world around us.
Here in this chapter, Paul argues that the Gentiles should have known God. However, they rejected God and turned instead to idols. As he describes cultic practices of worship, he claims that their idolatry led God to abandon them to their desires. As a consequence, natural sexual relations were exchanged for unnatural ones and these people were filled with jealousy, murder, fighting, deception, gossip, and disobedience to their parents. (Romans 1:29-31)
Theologically, the questions we wrestle with today start with asking what is natural. If one understands homosexuality to be a choice then it would lead you to think that such acts are unnatural. However, for others who believe that persons who are LGBT were created that way, it might be unnatural for them to act against how God has made them.
This is another place where we might ask where our experience shows fruit in the lives of LGBT persons. Paul’s argument here is that same-sex acts are the result of idolatry and cultic worship and these people are filled with other bad behaviors. What are the fruits we see in the lives of people we know who are LBGT? What are the fruits of people who are not LGBT? Do they love God? Do they love their neighbor?

Don’t you know that people who are unjust won’t inherit God’s kingdom? Don’t be deceived. Those who are sexually immoral, those who worship false gods, adulterers, both participants in same-sex intercourse,^[a] thieves, the greedy, drunks, abusive people, and swindlers won’t inherit God’s kingdom.

We understand this: the Law isn’t established for a righteous person but for people who live without laws and without obeying any authority. They are the ungodly and the sinners. They are people who are not spiritual, and nothing is sacred to them. They kill their fathers and mothers, and murder others. They are people who are sexually unfaithful, and people who have intercourse with the same sex. They are kidnappers, liars, individuals who give false testimonies in court, and those who do anything else that is opposed to sound teaching.

The final pairing of scripture is from 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10. We group them together because they refer to the same two words – malakoi and arsenokoitai. These words have been translated in multiple ways through our history of bible translation.
Malakoi literally means soft and has been translated as effeminate, as the passive homosexual partner, or as a male prostitute.
Arsenokoitai is a word that appears only two times in all of Greek literature – right here in the Bible. It is a word that Paul appears to have made up from two other words: Men and Bed. How tradition understands this word has changed drastically over time. Some think it refers to the dominant homosexual partner. Others think it refers to pimps – men who sell sex. Others think it is connected with temple prostitution, or the practice of older men taking young men (soft men) as sexual partners within the culture of the time.
In the context of the litany of other acts included in this list however, perhaps the Message translation most accurately captures the spirit of this passage. “those who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex, use and abuse the earth and everything in it, don’t qualify as citizens in God’s kingdom.”
The truth is, we have all done these things. But the grace of God is present in our lives and has redeemed us and so our call now is to honor God, creation, and our neighbors… and that includes honoring our bodies.

What can we say theologically about sex, sexuality, and our identity that rejects the way people use and abuse one another and helps all people to honor their bodies?

As I faithfully wrestle with a theological response to the presence and promise of LGBT persons in the life of the church, I am fully aware that I might end up coming to a different conclusion than you. We are all theologians after all, all tasked with using scripture, tradition, reason, and experience to weigh what we believe to be faithful responses in the world today.
The very conflict within our denomination is the result of this very tension and next week we’ll explore how people of faith have found themselves aligned with various positions today.
But my prayer, above all else, is that we would continue to lift up as our number one priority the love of God and the love of one another – and that includes those who don’t agree with us.
Our call as people of faith after all is to provide a welcome so vast and so radical that all might come to know and experience the saving grace of God lives. May it be so. Amen.

Advent Blog Tour: Day 14

Posted on December 14, 20107 Comments

“Las Posadas” by Maria Laughlin

As Christmas approaches, we are reminded that a very pregnant young woman and her patient fiancé were once left out in the cold. They made their way to the town of Bethlehem hoping and praying that someone would have a place for them to stay… but there was no room.

As Luke tells us:

Joseph went to be enrolled together with Mary, who was promised to him in marriage and who was pregnant. While they were there, the time came for Mary to have her baby. She gave birth to her firstborn son, wrapped him snugly, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the guestroom.

There was no place for them in the guestroom.

That translation from the Common English Bible got me thinking about what it means to be included.

Notice… it doesn’t say that they were full. It doesn’t say that there wasn’t room. It says that there was no place for them.

The first weekend of December, I made my way to Cherokee, Iowa and our yearly Christmas gathering. My mom is one of seven children and almost the whole family was there. Along with significant others and kids and grandkids. Four generations gathered under one roof.

On Sunday afternoon, thirty-seven of us all crowded into the living room around the Christmas tree to exchange gifts. And with each warm little body pressed into that space there really isn’t very much room.

But no matter how little room there is, no matter how many people there are, there is always a place for each one. There is a place on someone’s lap, or squeezed together on a couch, or at the foot of someone else. There is always a place for you. And it just wouldn’t be the same without you.

It warms my heart to see all of those people in that room. Even those who are not able to be there have a place… they are in our hearts. They are present in our spirits. There is always a place.

Luke reminds us that the Lord of Lords crept into this world on a quiet evening and that there was no place for him. There was no place for his unmarried mother. There was no place for the man who would be his earthly father. There was no place.

I hear in that statement that there was no welcome for them.

Who wants to take in a pregnant girl in the middle of the night?

Who wants to deal with these strangers who didn’t have enough sense to plan ahead?

Who wants to give up their spot?

In some Mexican and Latin American communities, the tradition of Las Posadas reminds folks of the absence of hospitality Mary and Joseph recieved. In the days before Christmas, processions go from house to house and request lodging. The host for each evening turns the people away… until the final night, Christmas Eve, when Mary and Joseph are finally allowed to enter and the people gather around the nativity to pray.

I wonder, however, how many times we enact Las Posadas in our communities and our churches without realizing it?

How many times have we turned our backs to someone in need who came to our doorstep?

How many times have we been angry at folks who came late to an event?

How many times have we looked in judgment at an unwed mother?

How many times have we moved away from the homeless man who sat next to us in the pew?

How many times have we told people through our words or our actions: There is no place for you here.

Our God crept into this world to make sure that we all had a place. He came as a child to make us children of God. He came and was rejected so that we might never be rejected again. He died so that we might live.

Before he left, Christ reminded his disciples and reminded us:

Don’t be troubled. Trust in God. Trust also in me. My Father’s house has room to spare. If that weren’t the case, would I have told you that I’m going to prepare a place for you? When I go to prepare a place for you, I will return and take you to be with me so that where I am you will be too.

There is a place for you. That is what Christ tells us. That is what Christ shows us. That is what Christ gives us.

May our churches and our homes and our hearts be transformed by Christ so that might always be true.

Continue this journey with us towards Christmas at www.AdventBlogTour.Com –