ottilie.org blog

 

• Jesus gave His apostles (and, presumably, their successors) the power to forgive sins.   The form of this is not specified.
• Our knowledge of the Church’s theology of penance in the earliest years of the Faith is meagre.   Essentially the problem was that of dealing with sins committed after Baptism.
• A powerful current of thought in the 2nd century Church favoured the view that no remission was possible for sins deliberately committed after Baptism.
• This view is in line with the author of Hebrews and the author of 1 John.
• There were more liberal views among some of the earliet Fathers but we are completely in the dark about the practical arrangements.   It is more than likely that there was corporate public confession with the absolution pronounced by the bishop or presbyter.
• With the dawn of the 3rd century the rough outline of a recognised penitential discipline was beginning to emerge, although there are still no signs of a sacrament of private penance (i.e., confession to a presbyter followed by absolution)
• The system which seems to have existed in the Church was wholly public, involving confession, a period of penance and exclusion from communion, then formal absolution and restoration.
• There is plenty of evidence that sinners were encouraged to open their hearts privately to a presbyter but nothing to show that this led up to anything more than counsel.
• Certainly in the last decades of the 2nd century adultery, homicide and idolatry (or apostasy) seem to have been treated in practice, if not in theory, as unforgivable.   This was relaxed over a long period of time and local practice varied.
• In the 4th and 5th centuries there is no hard evidence of one-to-one private confession.  Even St. Augustine is quite positive that the only form of penance known to him is public confession plus private confession of sins at home.
• It is not until much later that the present form of confession to a priest, followed by absolution came into being.
• One to one confession is practised by Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Anglo-Catholicism and Lutheranism.
• One to one confession and absolution is practised within Mormonism,   In Buddhism one confesses to one’s superior,   In Hinduism   there is no formal penance involving another party but holy men have a ready ear

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, projected by John Paul II, confession of everyday sins in this sacrameent is
not strictly necessary.   These may be dealt with in the Mass or in private prayer.   The confession of serious sins is required at least once a year.

It is interesting to note that Jesus did not require confession of sins before He healed and forgave sins.

(With acknowledgements to Dr.JND Kelly)

 

• One of Jesus’ own sayings acknowledges that there were other exorcists at work.   Furthermore, we have stories of rabbis and charismatic teachers in Palestine.
• Jewish miracle-workers cured diseases but there is a notable lack of reports of curing any kind of lamesness or paralysis.
• The most common miracle attributed to holy men of Jesus’ time is the procuring of rain-fall.   Such a miracle is never attributed to Jesus…
• Jesus is credited with three instances of a very notable miracle:  that of raising the dead to life.

The assumption that the ancient world was credulous is not justified.   Herodotus, Thucydides, Polybius, Plutarch, Philostratus and Josephus express reserve towards miracles.

• Even if one disallows some of Jesus’ miracles on the grounds of mis-recollectioon, symbolic act etc. – there remains a substantial body of material which has no close parallel in the ancient world.
• Taking the period of 200 years before to 200 years after the birth of Christ, the number of miracles recorded which are remotely comparable to those of Jesus is astonishingly small.
• Hanina Ben Dosa, when seeking a cure by prayer and Nakdimon, when seeking rain-fall, argue and barter with God, as Abraham had once done.
• The miraclous activity of Jesus conforms to  no known pattern.   At times He has to be persuaded to heal and the range of miracle is astonisshing.
• More miracles are attributed to Jesus than to anyone else in the ancient world,

Walking On The Water

Parallels to Jesus’ walking on the water are to be found in principle in accounts of levitation.   Examples of this are to be found in instances recorded of the lives of some Catholic saints and Eastern holy-men   It is perhaps the most commonly mentioned miracle in yogic and Tibetan Buddhist literature.

Stories of levitation are well accredited in both history and the present-day.

Jesus’ walking on the water may be a more advanced degree of levitation.

Water Into Wine

From the 1930s onwards Dr. J.Rhine in America conducted experiments to demonstrate that the mind can influence matter.   The movement of dice ejected by a mechanism down a shute were apparently effected by acts of willing on the part of observers.

Even more startling were experiments involving a jar of tap water.   Experimenters concentrated on the water and willed it to change its nature.   In some cases the composition of the water  changed.

In the Soviet Union before the fall of Communism an experiment took place in laboratory conditions in which the candidate tried by will-power to separate the yolk from the white of an egg.   It worked.

Almost as amazing as the experiment is the fact that the experiment was reported: in a dialectical materialist society such experiments were not supposed to succeed.

Recently (2008) an artificial arm has been removed from the body and has been controlled by will-power by the owner.

All of these show that in principle the mind controls matter.   This is what underlies but to a very much greater extent the turning of water into wine,

Footnote:  A report on 1/10/08 shows that religious belief can help to relieve pain.

Researchers at Oxford University carried out brain scans on Roman Catholic and atheist/agnostic volunteers.   The volunteers were shown paintings of the Virgin Mary  and Leonardo’s Lady with an Ermine.   After looking at each painting for 30 seconds the volunteers were zapped with electrical pulses for 12 seconds.   Each time they were asked to rank how painful the schocks were on a scale of 0 to 100

The researchers describe how Roman Catholics and non-believers reported similar levels of pain after viewing the Leonardo painting but the two groups responded very differently to the Virgin Mary painting, with Catholics experiencing 12% less pain.

Preliminary studies on lapsed Catholics suggest images of the Virgin Mary lessen their sense of  pain too. the researchers said.

Salvation

• Through Christ’s life, death and resurrection the mystery of God’s love is revealed.   We are saved; all this is pure, unmerited gift,
• We can be assured of salvation but this ought not to lead us to be presumptuous.   The word of Christ and His acraments give us this assurance.
• The word “saved” in the Synoptic gospels means a “healing” by Jesus, often through faith on the part of an individual or another.
• Justification and sanctification are two aspects of the same divine act.   By pronouncing us righteous God also makes us righteous.
• Baptism is the unrepeatable sacrament of justification and incorporation into Christ.
• While we are not saved because of good works we are created in Christ for good works   (For a different emphasis see Mt.25 – the sheep and the goats).
• In Lutheranism a paradox is sometimes stated as  “We are at once just and sinners”.
• Salvation is in Jesus alone.   It is a process rather than a single act.   Faith is identical with the love of truth which saves.   Through hope we are saved.   Faith without works cannot save.   Salvation is attained by those who persevere to the end.
• It cannot be forgotten that Jesus said that the outcasts of society (the tax-gatherers and prostitutes in His day) go into the Kingdom before the religious establisshmeent of His day.

The Church

Jesus never wrote a book; He founded a Church

The early Church was led by the apostles, with Peter at the helm.   Soon we have the emergence of deacons and presbyters(local officers)   Bishops also exist in the New Testament.   In Corinth we have apostles, prophets, teachers,miracle-workers, healers, helpers, administrators

In the earliest years of the Church after the N.T. period the usual pattern was bishops and  deacons plus travelling missionaries – apostles and prophets.   Eventually, these latter officers disappear and bishop, presbyer and deeacon becomes the norm.   It is not until the 4th century that an individual believer is called a priest.

A special place in the early Church is reserved for the Bishop of Rome, taken to be the successor of Peter.   The following Fathers of the Church ascribe a primacy to Rome and to Rome disputes and clear teaching are ascribed.   Thus St. Clement of Rome, St Ignatius, St Irenaeus, St. Polycarp, Bishop Polycrates of Ephesus,Tertullian, St. Cyprian of Carthage, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine…

From these we have such statements as:  “an overseer of love” “If one wishes to know the true faith, then it suffices to ascertain the teaching of this one Church”  “If Italy is in thy neighbourhood then thou hast Rome, from whence for us (in Africa) the teaching authority already exists”"The Roman Church is the mother and the root of the Catholic Church..”.

2

Beginniing in the early 4th century we have the conciliar movement.   Major disputes over doctrine (e.g. the divinity of Christ), after a long period of discussion were settled not by Rome,although Rome’s influence was impressive but by  General  Councils.

In 1054 the Greek Speaking Church of the Eastern Empire and the Latin Speaking Church of the West split.   There had been considerable strain between the two for many years prior to 1054.   Thus we have the Orthodox and Catholic denominations.

An important feature in the dispute – and it remains until to-day – is the standing of the Pope.   The Orthodox believe that a special place belongs to the Pope.   They ascribe to him a primacy of honour, together with the right (under certain circumstances) to hear appeals from all parts of Christendom.      They see Rome’s mistake as being to turn the primacy of love into a supremacy of external power and jurisdiction.   (Sadly this mistake is prevalent to-day)

With regard to the New Testament the content was only finally agreed upon at the end of the 4th century and even then there was some uncertainty in  the East over the inclusion of Hebrews and Revelation.

Prior to that there was a variety of books which were used in worship, alongside books which were eventually placed within the Canon of Scripture.   Thus we have such books as The Gospel of the Hebrews, The Gospel of Philip, The Gospel of Peter, The Book of James, The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Bartholomew,The Acts of John and many, many more.

Prior to the use of these apocryphal books and the authentic books ,the early Church relied on oral transmission of the Gospel.

Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons (130-202 AD), preferred oral transmission to the written word.   He writes: “The distant barbarians on the Rhine cannot read, yet without the external aid of a scripture they are established in a right path, for the Holy Spirit Himself writes the true confession ‘without ink and paper’ on their heart.   Consequently, the preaching of the Church has no need, provided it proclaims Christ as He really was and is, to refer constantly to the books in which the apostolic message is recorded”.

What is to be said about Christian re-union?   With 38,000 churches and sects across the world it is no easy task.   Furthermore, attempts to date have produced only very meagre fruit.

All Christians accept the N.T. as agreed at the end of the 4th century.   Most have sacraments such as Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.  There is a general consensus about right and wrong (the Ten Commandments +).   Most agree on the Social Gospel, although American Fundamentalism is out of line.   Most can agree with the definitions of the Faith in the first millennium.

To be true to the apostolic period and the period of the first four centuries of the Faith, it would seem that any re-union should take in:

A ministry of bishops, presbyters and deacons plus the ministries set out by St Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians.

The Bishop of Rome to have a world-wide ministry, a “presidency of love”.   Jurisdiction to be dropped from the vocabulary.

Academic freedom to be guaranteed.   Controversial findings of scholars to be discussed openly, not suppressed.

The Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit has been the most neglected member of the Trinity in much of the history of Christendom.   What is the role of the Spirit?

• Conceives Jesus,given in Baptism, expels demons, speaks in us when called to witness, Pentecost, Gifts of the Spirit, Wisdom, Faith, Encouragement, Joy, pervades the Church, heals,dwells in individual believer, a foretaste of heaven, love, teaches, principle of prayer, agent of holiness, speaking forth (=prophecy), remains forever,inspires Jesus to speak, reveals mysteries of God, is given in answer to prayer,seat of consciousness and psychic functions, proceeds from Jesus and the Father, witnesses.

Jesus And His Enemies

The gospels record enmity between Jesus’ opponents and himself.   The Sadducees (who provided the priests in the Temple) were mainly instrumental in having him crucified.   The Scribes were religious lawyers.   The Pharisees were far and away his main opponents,

The Talmud, a Jewish compilation of rabbinic traditions and way of life, which is Pharisaic in origin, contains some remarks hostile to the Pharisees which find the same faults in them as appear in the NT.

It would seem that the Pharisees’ hostility to Jesus arose from the threat they thought Jesus held for their position as religious leaders.

In the gospels the Pharisees watch Jesus closely to find fault with him.   They try to trap him.  They propose trick questions.   They are scandalised by Jesus’ conduct : mixing with publicans aand sinners; his laxnesss in Sabbath observance; his healing on the Sabbath, although this was not agaiinst mainstream Judaism, his neglect of ritual ablutions.

Furthermore,they object to Jesus’ claim to be able to forgive sins.   They object when Jesus is triumphantly welcomed by his disciples.

When they ask for a sign, Jesus calls them an adulterous and wicked generation.   He condemns their exclusiveness as harsh and their rigour in the law as intolerable.   They are blind with self-inflicted blindness.   A recurring word in the invective discourses is “hypocrites”.   They are “whited sepulchres”, concerned with looking devout while malicious at heart.   They are “a brood of vipers”.

There are several ways of looking at Jesus’ hard words.

The words were actually uttered by Jesus and they are deserved

They reflect a basic problem with the Pharisees but they were embellished by the early Church which found itself in conflict with the Pharisees.

They reflect oriental exaggeration.   Jesus was not Anglo-Saxon!

The words were uttered by Jesus but they were over-emphasised by the oral tradition underlying the gospels as part of the invective against the Pharisees.

If Jesus had spoken in this way of the Nazis, no-one would have objected to the language used; indeed, he would have been warmly applauded.

In Jesus’ eyes the Pharisees were blocking the way to salvation for the men and women of his time and, therefore, colourful, memorable imagery is needed.

There were seven types of Pharisee and in rabbinic tradition only one of them, the Pharisee who is devoted to the love of God, receives unqualified commendation.   It is likely, therefore, that Jesus did not attack all Pharisees.
The frequent use of the word “hypocrite” might literally refer to those who were appearing to be true Pharisees but, in fact, were only play-acting.   The genuine Pharisee and Scribe were not play-actors, whatever else they might be.
Jesus’ hard sayings, as in Matthew 23, are a lamentation rather than unmitigated denunciation.
It should never be overlooked that Jesus died for his enemies as well as his supporters.   From the cross he utters the words: “Father, forgive them; they know not what they do”.

(With acknowledgements to Professor J.McKenzie)

Heaven

Throughout history Humankind has believed that there is a life after death.   It is a universal belief.
Of the five main religions to-day three (Judaism, Islam and Christianity) believe in a personal after-life; two (Hinduism and Buddhism) believe in re-incarnation  and the achievment of nirvana and absorption into the infinite.

In the New Testament Jesus after His ascension dwells in heaven

The heavens which in the O.T. are unattainable  by humanity (with the exception of Elijah) become in the NT the place of dwelling and reward for the Christian.

The Christian is a citizen of heaven.   He looks forward to a home which God will build for him in heaven.

The Christian’s inheritance, reward and treasure are all in heaven.

The Father and the Son prepare mansions in heaven for the disciples.

The names of the disciples are written in the records of heaven.

Those who rise with Christ are with Him taken into heaven.

The risen, like Christ, are endowed with the qualities of  the heavenly body.

There has been a long-standing tradition in Christendom that at the Second Coming there will be a general resurrection.   The earthly body will be transformed: there will be a new heaven and a new earth.   On this basis heaven as understood and experienced at the moment will not be the final resting-place of Humanity: it is an interim state.
Others interpret the N.T. evidence differently.   The parts which deal with the general resurrection are taken to be vivid apocalyptic language and the whole point of apocalyptic literature is that it is not meant to be taken literally.
Purgatory is seen by Catholics and Orthodox as a state in which the souls of the departed are prepared before being admitted to heaven.   Prayers may be said for them.  This practice stems from the closing chapters of 2 Maccabees.
In traditional Christian thought Hell is the eternal abode of the damned.   Much contemporary Christian thought rejects the idea of vindictive punishment as incompatible with belief in a loving God.   The imagery about Hell in the N.T. and in Jewish thought at the time of Jesus is regarded by contemporary Christian writers as just that.   The emphasis has moved on to Hell as separation from God.

It is possible that the damned, rather than being conscious of their experience of unending hell-fire, are snuffed out.
There is a growing  opinion that at the end of time all will be saved; otherwise God’s plan for Humanity will be thwarted.

Judaism and Islam share with Christianity a belief in  hell,

Spiritualism claims to be able to communicate with the departed.   Such objective investigations as have taken place have not come up with a convincing verdict.   It should be added that the main sweep of world-religions is opposed to Spiritualism.

It is likely that what Spiritualists believe to be a departed spirit talking through a medium is an illustration of telepathy or a tapping into Jung’s collective unconscious

Jesus And The Dead Sea Scrolls

Ever since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Spring of 1947 critics have used them to discredit Christianity.
A general idea has entered the public sub-conscious that, somehow or other, the case for Christianity has been  damaged by the Scrolls.

There are radical differences between Jesus and the Dead Sea Teacher of Righteousness.

There never came a time when it was held that the Messiah had come, whereas the Church proclaimed from its inception that the Messiah had come in the person of Jesus.

The Teacher of Righteousnes looked for the apearance of three figures at the time of the end – a prophet, a priest and a king.   The N.T. writers see these three roles coinciding in Jesus.

The N.T. depicts Jesus as the Son of God.   No such title is given to any figure in the Dea Sea community.
There are verses in the N.T, that predicate the title “theos” (god) of Jesus.   There is nothing remotely similar in the Scrolls.

It is possible that there are similarities between the teachings of Jesus and the Scrolls.   This is not surprising when one allows that both Jesus and Scrolls come from Judaism.

The Teacher of the Scrolls did not claim or possess the authority of Jesus

He was not conscious of being above the Law.

He worked no miracles.

He was not a master of parable or aphorism.

The Scrolls consign publicans and sinners to eternal perdition whereas Jesus mingled with them.

Even in the persecutions to which the Teacher  and Jesus were subjected there are noteworthy differences.   The enemies of the Teacher were anonymous, their identity veiled under the titles “Wicked Priest”, “Prophet of Lying” etc..   They were men of violence, impure, lovers of riches – in a word, violators of the Law.   Jesus’ enemies, on the other hand, are prominent and  known:  the Sadducees, the Pharisees and Scribes.

Departed Souls

In the Catholic and Orthodox Churches the faithful are encouraged to ask their departed relatives and friends to join their prayers to those being offered on earth.   It is a two-way process.

In the Catholic Church, although this is not widely advertised, it is permissible for those in this life to talk to the departed, although the departed cannot reply.   The Church is strongly against anything smacking of Spiritualism.

Jesus – A Mythical Hero?

Certainly one can find ample evidence in the NT to support the idea of Jesus as an idealised hero figure.
Jesus performs healing miracles; He performs nature miracles; He even raises the dead.

In the many disputes with His opponents within Judaism, He never loses.

His teaching and bearing are seen to soar above what His contemporaries and even the Prophets and Moses had to offer.

He refuses to crack at His trial or on the cross.   He makes provision from the cross for His mother, gives hope and comfort to the penitent thief and forgives His enemies.

Death cannot contain Him: He appears to His followers after His death.

The foregoing may be said to have the flavour of the mythical heroes of the ancient world and  one might conclude that the figure of Jesus has been idealised like them.   And yet, and yet…

On one occasion, when on home ground, Jesus did not perform many “mighty works…because of their unbelief”; indeed, the account in Mark may be translated “….He could do no mighty work there…..”
Jesus weeps, e.g., at the death of His friend, Lazarus.

He perspires heavily in Gethsemane and tries to avoid the anguish of what lies before Him.   War heroes did not behave like this.

We read Jesus saying from the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” – hardly the words creative reporters would have written the  for an idealised figure.

In Mk 10:18, Jesus is reported to have said, “There is none good but God”.   Not quite what inventors would have put into the mouth of the supposed Saviour.

Most puzzling of all, Jesus, who is projected as the Messiah in the gospels and elsewhere in the NT, fails to fulfil many of the Messsianic expectations in the native air of Palestine in the years spanning His life-time.
Jesus actually took it upon Himself to amend Tradition in the Sermon on the Mount, for example, where there are several passages in which Jesus says: “You have heard from the past…..but I say to you…..”   Just who does Jesus think He is?!   Again, hardly the sort of approach inventors of a Messiah, fulfilling Jewish expectations, would have devised.

 

• The Centre for Religious Experience Research is housed in the library at the University of Wales at Lampeter.    The Centre was established in 1969 by the marine biologist, Sir Alister Hardy, who was both a Darwinian and a member of the Unitarian Church.   He believed that we do have a spiritual nature and that there is an extra-sensory reality beyond the individual self.   The work of the Centre covers the main religious faiths in the world plus the experiences of those who belong to no faith.   The Centre has some 6,000 accounts which form “evidence” of the “other”.
• To the question: “Have you ever felt as though you were very close to a powerfull spiritual force that seemed to lift you out of yourself?”   the following replies were given:

                                            Great Britain            USA

Once or twice                           17%                  18%

Several times                         9%                     12%

Often                                            5%                      5%

TOTAL                                        31%                    35%

The above are taken from samples of the whole populations

• Features of Religious Experience:

1. Unifying vision, all things are one, part of a whole
2. Timeless and spaceless
3. Sense of reality, not subjective
4. Blessedness, joy, peace and happiness
5. Feeling of the holy, sacred, divine
6. Paradoxical, defies logic
7. Ineffable, can’t be described in words
8. Loss of sense of self

• Several physiological states have been found to be connected with Religious Experiences.   Intense arousal produced by ecstatic dancing and singing is one trigger for Religious Experience, although equally high arousal from sport or exercise has no such effect.
• It is well established that the left hemisphere of the brain is the main locus of language, number and logic.   The right hemisphere is weaker on these but stronger on vision and space, music, emotions and holistic perceptions.   It seems likely that this is where religion belongs.
• Religious Experiences are very rewarding: distress is relieved and personal problems are often resolved.  The good mood produced often lasts for months.   There may be physiological mechanisms for bringing about these effects but it seems that the motivator comes from outside.

On a personal note, I was received into the Catholic Church in 1973.   I accepted Catholic teaching on everything except birth control.

About 20 years ago I developed doubts about parts of the Catholic Church’s teaching on Mary.   To all intents and
purposes  I was an agnostic on this.  

In early November, 2009 I was at Confession and the priest was praying over me when I had an experience of the Virgin Mary.   There were no symbols of Mary in the room and I had not been thinking about her; suddenly I sensed the Virgin Mary within me and had a mental image of her.

When I “came to” my doubts had disappeared; this has continued.   I would never have put money on this happening.
There are excesses of devotion to Mary by those on the right-wing fringes of the Catholic Church; I still fail to be
attracted by these but the mainstream teaching I accept. I feel very relaxed about the whole matter.

Those to whom I have mentioned this experience fall into two groups.   The first group is supportive; the second group (which contains believers) is embarrassed (well, we’re all English) or hostile.

A MIRACLE:  For centuries there was conflict between Religion and Science with regard to miracles.  Under the Newtonian system there was no room for miracles, indeed they were seen as being against the Laws of Nature.  Since Einstein the position has changed.
To-day scientists admit that no-one knows enough about Natural Law to say that any event is necessarily a violation of it.  The universe is no longer a tight closed system. One may, therefore, without being out of step with Science,declare that the Resurrection
is a miracle.  It is unique.

DEATH OF JESUS:  Did Jesus die?  When the soldier pierced His side with a spear,  blood and water came pouring out – a sure sign that Jesus had died, according to Dr. Samuel Houghton, a one-time physiologist from the University of Dublin.  He looks at other possibilities but comes to the conclusion  that the rupture of the heart was the cause of the death of Jesus.

THE BURIAL AND THE STONE:  We know more about the burial of Jesus than we know of any O.T. character, of any king of Babylon, Pharaoh of Egypt, any philosopher of Greece or triumpnant Caesar.  We know who took the body from the cross;  we know something of the body in spices;we know something about the burial clothes

The Gospel records mention  a stone being rolled against the entrance to the tomb.  This was very heavy: when the women came to visit the tomb, they knew that they would not be able to mov it..  The stone was sealed, probably in keeping with Daniel 6:7. The sealing was done in the presence of the Roman guards who were left in charge to protect the seal of Roman authority and power.

THE GUARD:  A watch usually consisted of four soldiers.  We learn from Polybius that Roman discipline was tight:the fear of punishment produced faultless attention to duty, especially on night duty.  Thee penalty for sleeping was death.

THE EMPTY TOMB:   This is just about the most debated matter in the Ancient World. If the tomb was not genuinely empty, what happened to the body of Christ?

If the body was taken by the apostles, how did they get it? We have seen that the entrance to the tomb was blocked by a very large stone. We have seen that there were Roman guards to be overcome and that their lives depended on guarding the body successfully.   If, indeed, the apostles stole the body, how would they have managed to keep it quiet in such a small area as Jerusalem?

If the Jewish authorities had stolen it, what a propaganda coup they would have had: all they had to do was produce the body to falsify the story that the apostles were putting it about that Jesus had risen.

If the Roman authorities had taken the body, they would have displayed it  to disprove the apostles’ claims.

There is a theory that Jesus recovered from His crucifixion ordeal in the cool tomb and escaped.   There are two objections to this:

1. He wouldn’t have been in any shape to roll the stone away, even if the soldiers were taking a nap.   And where would He have gone without being recognissed?
2. We have already seen above that He died on the cross from a broken heart.

It is significant that Jesus’ tomb was not a place of pilgrimage.

HE IS NOT THERE:   One criticism of Christianity is that the Resurrection appearances were quite simply hallucinations.   Part of the answer to this is that hallucinations tend to occur in only two or three locations.   The appearances of Jesus cover a much wider area:

• To Mary Magdalene at the tomb
• To women returning from the tomb
• To Peter later  in the day
• To the Emmaeus disciples
• To the Twelve minus Thomas in the upper room  (The Twelve is a technical term here)
• To the Twelve with Thomas in the upper room
• To the seven by the lake of Galilee
• To a crowd of 500+
• To James
• To the Twelve
• At the ascension
• To Paul
• To Stephen
• To Paul in the Temple
• To John on Patmos

The appearances that Jesus made were not restricted to persons of any particular psychological type

A powerful argument in favour of the validity of the Resurrection is the change in the apostles after the Resurrection.   After the Crucifixion they were demoralised: their dream had turned to dust.   They were not expecting anything after the Burial.   Some of them were unwilling to accept the Good News at first.   After the Resurrection they were trans-formed and went on to preach the Resurrection boldly, despite persecution and martyrdom.

The eminent Jewish scholar, Professor Geza Vermes, has stated: “But in the end, when every argumeent has been considered and weighed, the only conclusion acceptable to the historian must be that the opinions of the orthodox, the liberal sympathiser and the critical agnostic alike – even perhaps the disciples themselves – are simply interpretations of the one disconcerting fact: namely that the women who set out to pay their last respects to Jesus found to their consternation, not the body, but the empty tomb..

(With acknowledgements to Josh McDowell)

In the last 40 years or so there has been iincreasing interest in Near Death Experiences (NDEs).

A man is dying and, as he reaches the point of greatest physical distress, he hears himself pronounced dead by his doctor.   He begins to hear an uncomfortable noise, a loud ringing or buzzing. and at the same time feels himself moving very rapidly through a long,dark tunnel.   After this, he finds himself outside of his own physical body….Soon, other things begin to happen.   Others come to meet him and help him.   He glimpses the spirits of relatives  and friends who have already died, and a loving, warm spirit of a kind he has never encountered before – a being of light – appears before him.

The foregoing account is the standard account of those who have “died” on the operating table.   There are variations, most commonly, the being of light asks the patient if he wants to return to Earth and before him his life flashes past at a rapid rate.

Some report a dark area where there are spirits and the consensus is that they will be there some time.

The following characteristics of these accounts apply:

1. Unifying vision, all things are one, part of a whole
2. Timeless and spaceless
3. Sense of reality, not subjective but a valid source of knowledge
4. Blessedness, joy, peace and happiness
5. Feeling of the holy, sacred, divine
6. Paradoxical, defies logic
7. Ineffable, cannot be described in words
8. Loss of sense of self

There are various criticisms of these experiences:  The Pharmacological, the physiological, the Psychological,Dreams, Hallucinations and Delusions.   There are pros and cons for each of these.

A coalition of British and American scientists has launched an experiment to study more than 1500 heart attack patients over the three years beginning in 2008 to see if people with no heartbeat have h genuine “out of the body” experiences.

About 25 centres will take part.   Pictures in the area of treatment will only be visible from above, thus applying a test to those who “die”.

Recent studies suggest that between 10-20% of people who go through “the veil” report lucid thought processes, reasoning, memories and even detailed recall of events while they were “dead”

Thus one might say that the jury is out but with a slight bias to data of the experiences being valid.

Did the Tower of Babel lead to Humanity’s confusion of tongues?  Did Noah’s Ark save Humanity?   Did the Crossing of the Red Sea happen as it is described?  Did Balaam’s ass speak?   Did Jonah spend three days in “a whale”?   In all probability those born before WW2 were told to believe these stories literally.   To-day the reverse is true.

Why?  Because the effects of biblical scholarship have gradually been felt over the years.

There are high points in the O.T. as in Isaiah, the psalms and the Wisdom literature.   And this should not be ignored.   There are, however, many examples where the O.T. is “below par”.    Things are supported apparently by God which are to-day unacceptable.

For example, grave moral problems, savagery and genocide, the spirit of revenge, polygamy, lack of rights for women etc.proliferate.

Jesus altered part of the O.T.   For example, He changed what Moses had said about divorce and He reverses the O.T. teaching about “an eye for eye”.

There are two  accounts of the Creation which give different and conflicting versions..

There are two accounts of the Flood, which give differing versions of Noah’s Ark and the time that Noah spent at sea.

The upshot of all this is that in the O.T. there is a gradual revelation of God to Israel .

Jesus is the core of the gospels.   Almost always the Good News had to do with God’s work in and through Jesus.

Mark: The portrait of Jesus given in this gospel mentions several very human chacteristics of Jesus.: He gets angry; He suffers physically in a way that might be thought incompatible with His position as the Son of God.

Mark’s theme is given in the first verse of the first chapter: “The good news of Jesus Christ, the Son of God”.   The Kingdom is overwhelmingly eschatological; it is also apocalyptic..

Matthew: The evangelist writes more as a teacher than an historian.   It is a Jewish-Christian gospel.   Special emphasis is given to the O.T..   The Law is treated with reverence but Jesus is superior to it; greater than the Temple.   There is also an interest in the universality of the Gospel.There is a concern with the Church.

Luke: The evangelist tells something of his purpose at the outset.   He is an historian.   There is an importance attached to the link between the life of Jesus and the life of the contemporary Church.

The Gospel is for everyone, Gentiles as well as Jews.   The writer projects Jesus very much as the Savioour of the poor and outcasts

The attitude of Jesus towards wealth and poverty is pronounced in this gospel.

John: The purpose is stated towards the end of the gospel:”These things are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God”.   This is a spiritual gospel.   It is full of symbolism.   Dominant themes treated are Baptism, Eucharist, Faith, Life, Light, Love, Sin, Spirit, Word.   He speaks of Eternal Life rather than the Kingdom in most instances.

It is claimed that there is nothing original in Jesus’ teaching.   What may be said by way of counter-argument?

There are sayings in the gospels which could not conceivably have been created in the early Church: e.g., “Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good?”

Prof. C.H.Dodd wrote: “Any Jewish teacher might have said, ‘If you repent and pledge yourself to the observance of Torah, then you have taken upon yourselves the Kingdom of God’ but Jesus says’ If I by the finger of God cast out demons, then the Kingdom of God has come upon you’.   Something has happened, which has not happened before and which means that the sovereign power of God has come into effective operation….The kingdom is not merely imminent; it is here”.

What is lacking from ancient Judaism is a parallel to Jesus’ attitude to the Law.   Jesus sees Himself as sovereign over it.

Having gone through a long list of points where many theologians regard Jesus as unique and found difficulty in accepting any with enthusiasm, Professor Sanders is nevertheless able to write:  “What is unquestionably unique about Jesus is the result of his life and work”.   Sanders also states that the depth of Jesus’ consciousness of spiritual power is unique.

The prominent Jewish schholar, Prof. Geza Vermes, has stated that a significant feature which is lacking in Jesus’ concept of God is God as a royal figure.   He adds that what lies at the heart of His intuition and gives individuality and freshness to His conviction that the eternal, distant, dominating and tremendous Creator is also and primarily a near and approachable God”.

One might say that Jesus’ unique term for God is “Abba” but this is hotly disputed.

The ministry of Jesus shows that who He was and what He did were closely related to His message of the Kingdom.   In this there is clear blue water between Him and other prophets and charismatic figures in Jewish history.
Unlike everyone else, Jesus forgave sins.   He considered Himself to be greater than Moses.   He claimed divine authority to exorcise demons.The parables found in the gospels contain teaching which is neither the minutiae of the lawyer nor the biblical ethical maxims of the sage.

Jesus’ claim to authority comes independtly of the accepted channels of authority in Jewish circles.

Jesus strikes an unique, indeed subversive note with His call of the disciples and appointment of the Twelve to sit on the twelve thrones of Israel.

In the approach of the Zealots all who were alien or who had dealings with those alien to the nation were to be destroyed.   The Kingdom Jesus preached was to be drawn – in part at least – from those who had failed to live up to the standards of the nation; it was even to include collaborators with the imperial enemy.

The Law might be gracious in its attitude towards strangers and Judaism might believe that it had an important role to play in bringing blessings to the Gentiles but the suggestion that one should love one’s oppressors, that love of neighbour should have no bounds of nation and race, was an unique and radical shock to many of Jesus’ fellow-Jews.   The same dilemma is posed by Jesus’ querying the puriity laws.

Capital Punishment

This is an ancient form of punishment and has been used for crimes ranging from burglary to sheep stealing to murder.   It is little used by the West outside the USA.

Christians are divided on whether biblical teaching supports use of this sanction..   Those who conclude that the OT prescribes this penalty are ranged against those who look to the words and practice of Jesus in the NT.   Still others point to the deterrence of capital punishment and yet others point to the risk of error.

Those who support the death penallty refer to such sections of the OT as the following: “Whoever sheds the blood of man by man, shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man”.(said by God after the Flood).   The principle was reflected in the law of Moses, which ordained execution for eighteen offences.

Opponents argue that OT arguments supporting this sanction are superseded by NT developments.   Christ’s death and resurrection ended the requirements for blood recompence and blood sacrifice.   Christ’s teaching emphasises the need for forgiveness.   His behaviour towards the woman taken in adultery is not consistent with the OT, which mandated death for such an offence.

One must not lose sight of the fact that, whatever other dimensions there are to Jesus’ overall teaching, He did on one occasion say that anyone offending “one of these little ones” would be better off if a mill-stone were hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea!   This may be figurative language but it may be literal.

On a pragmatic basis if violent crime gets out of hand in a country, the citizens of that state would have a right to vote on the subject and, if the verdict was “yes”, they may choose to bring in the death penalty for a period of, say, 20 years to see if that improves the situation.    This is purely pragmatic in a democracy.   This website would vote “No”.

Abortion

This is a very emotive issue.   At root it is a case of whether the right of the mother or the right of the unborn child should prevail.

The principle of the sanctity of life is clearly establishedd in Gen. 9 and in the Ten Commandments.   However, there are clear areas in the OT where life may be taken., e.g., warfare and the death penalty.

In extreme settings the taking of life may be the lesser of two evils.   This may be reflected in Ex.21:22-3, where a distinction is drawn between the loss of a woman’s life and a baby’s as a result of an accident.   In the one case, the legal requirement is a life for a life; in the case of foetal life, a fine is required.    This might be seen as a primitive example where the foetus’ standing is not on all fours with the standing of an independent human being.

The early Church and its successors firmly held to the need to defend the unborn and the inviolabillity of the foetus, once it was ensouled.

The modern debate has moved on and Christians disagree on the matter.

Abortion on demand is widespread.   Often this obscures the requirement that everything possible should be done to preserve the life of the foetus.    After all, we know very much more about the life of the foetus than previously, enough to know that it is a human being, not simply a blob with human potential.

There is a need to counter the idea that people are free to please themselves with regard to their own bodies regardless of the impact on others.

There are instances where abortion may be sanctioned.   For example, when a stark choice has to be made between saving the life of the mother and that of the foetus, priority should be given to the mother, if she wishes.
Dr. Billy Graham has apparently said that abortion may be justified where rape or incest is involved.

Some years ago a prominent tennis star who became pregnant had an abortion on the flimsy pretext that she wanted to go on winning more titles.   This does not stand up.in ethics.

Animal Rights

The traditional concern for animal welfare has largely been superseded by a debate about Animal Rights.   Do animals have rights?  What is meant by rights?  What kind of duties do human beings have towards animals?  Where do

Christians stand in all of this?

For many centuries Christians took the view that Humanity was made in God’s image and was empowered (Gen 1:28) to “subdue” animals.

St. Francis of Assisi tried to substitute the idea of the equality of all creatures for domination.

Humane treatmeent  of animals is illustrated in many parts of the OT.

It is precisely  because God is creator of all that we are to understand “dominion” in terms of stewardship, creative care and responsibility, coupled with accountability to God.

There are different emphases in the modern debate on Animal Rights.   Some would argue that Christians should become vegetarian but then it has been demonstrated that vegetables feel pain.   Others (and the number is increasing) contend that vivisection (surgery and tests on living animals) should be banned, there being meagre benefits, anyway.   Animal acts for entertainment, certain types of horse and dog racing, zoos ,battery farming etc. are clearly against Christian ethics.

The Commanding Heights

There is debate as to when Capitalism began.   As part of this debate there is a clear link between Protestant Christianity and the new forms of  economic organisatiion callled “Capitalism”.   Max Weber argued that the characteristics of  the Protestant work ethic laid the foundation for business and profit-making to show enormous increase in growth and wealth in countries where Catholicism was displaced.

Karl Marx has probably had the most influence on scholars studying this field and provided the bed-rock of Communism.   Lenin first used the phrase “The commanding heights of the economy” to refer to his policy but it can equally be used of Capitalism, as here.

Twentieth-century Capitalism clearly rests on the freedom of individuals to produce and sell and to buy goods and services in markets which are largely cleared by allowing prices to fluctuate.

Those who think this is an ideal system seek to prevent any interference with it, especially State regulation.

Those who seek equality point to the inequalities and inadequacy of Capitalism.   They seek to regulate markets to prevent those with more money oppressing those with less money and less power.

The planned economies of the world have failed, as is widely admitted by those who ran the system.   Capitalism – at least in its laissez-faire incarnation – has also failed.   The most glaring example of this was in the Great Crash of 1929 and the very long aftermath in the Thirties.

At the present time (December, 2008) the whole world is suffering from a  Recession which owes its strength to unregulated Capitalism, introduced by Reagan and Thatcher in the Eighties.   We are reaping the whirl-wind.   Free-wheeling banks, e.g., in the USA and the UK, are turning to governments to save them from bankruptcy and in some cases to nationalise them.

Christians are to be found on either side of the divide.   There is a consensus that  each system historically has produced poverty, which is alien to the Gospel.  Just as it is impossible to envisage Jesus as a Political Commissaire, it is impossible to see Him as a Wall Street Banker.

Wise governments should put back controls rejected  by Reagan and Thatcher and the very wise should nationalise the banks outright.

(With acknowledgements to Professor S.Dex)

Euthanasia

This is an emotive and complex issue.

It was widespread in the ancient world; is practised among primitive peoples; and is gradually being introduced in parts of the West.

It takes several forms.   There is the case of a very sick hospital patient who expresses the wish to die when near death, asks for all medical technology to be withdrawn and refuses to eat.   In this situation doctors ought technically to make the patient eat but not if that would worsen the patient’s condition.   Effectively, the doctors and the patient are condoning euthanasia.

There is the case of a person with a long-standing, severe illness which is worsening who expresses the wish to be put to sleep.   Such cases cannot lawfully be put to death in the U.K. but can receive euthanasia in Switzerland.   If the patient goes to a clinic in Switzerland, the necessary medical drugs will be administered.   Those in the U.K. who have aided and abetted the patient can technically be charged at law.   In very recent years no action is taken.
If a spouse, doctor or friend were to carry out euthanasia in, say, a patient’s home in the U.K., they would be charged.   Depending on circumstances, a court is likely to be lenient.

There is a lingering fear of where euthanasia might lead from the years up to WW2 in Germany.   There State-sponsored euthanasia was practised on disabled children, WW1 amputees and the mentally ill.   Although this was involuntary euthanasia, there is an ancient fear that once the principle has been conceded it may be extended into areas not intended.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that euthanasia is practised extensively in UK hospitals and, provided it is conducted with discretion, nothing happens.   A typical British compromise.

Where is Jesus in all of this?   There are Christians, probably a majority, who say that euthanasia shows a lack of trust in the providence of God.   There are other Christians who see euthanasia as an act of compassion.
The view of this website sides with the latter.   It is very unlikely that Jesus in judgement would castigate those who have sought release from great suffering.

Inspiration

What do we mean when we say the Bible is inspired?    Where does the idea come from?

Between 400 BC and 100 AD there appears in Jerusalem a firm belief in the divine origin of the sacred books.   The rabbis attributed the highest grade of inspiration  to the first five books of the Bible; a lower grade to the Prophets and a still lower grade to the Writings.

The NT idea of inspiration is explicitly contained in 2 Tim3:14-17 and 2 Pet 1:19-21.   The word “inspiration”  used in 2 Tim is not explained nor does it state that it means verbal dictation.   It relates to the OT.

The NT itself does not claim inspiration, other than Revelation.    In any case, with regard to the first three gospels, most scholars agree that behind the the books we have to-day lies a process of oral transmission,cross-referencing. and the mysterious document Q.

The question of inspiration did not become a theological problem until the 19th century, although Luther in the 16th century had demoted the Epistle of James to an appendix of the NT and had difficulty in accepting the whole of a couple of otherNT books.

The rabbinical theory of verbal dictation was accepted by many of the Fathers of the Faith.   This was accepted by both Catholic and Protestant theology.   This is a mechanical concept which takes no account of the wide variety of literature we have in the OT: law codes, historical writings,ethical and moral instruction, collections of sayings of the wise, a copious psalmody, a large corpus of prophetical literature from different ages – and all spread over a thousand years or so.

Inerrancy or infallibility has not been the object of  formal ecclesiastical definition.   How could it when Jesus gave part of His teaching at least to changing the OT diametrically?   And when, as described elsewhere on this website, the OT contains error and inconsistencies?

Most scholars to-day do not look upon the books within the Bible as sacred as Muslim scholars do the Koran.
In the book of Ecclesiasticus (which is regarded as part of the OT by the Catholic and OrthodoxChurches but not by other denominations) the author says in an introduction: “You are urged therefore to read with good-will and attention, and to be indulgent in cases where, despite our diligent labour in translating, we may seem to have rendered some phrases imperfectly.   For what was originally expressed in Hebrew does not have exactly the same sense when translated into another language.   Not only this work but even the law itself, the prophecies, and the rest of the books differ not a little as originally expressed”.

One may speak of parts of Shakespeare and Milton as “inspired” without suggesting that this means that what the poet wrote is infallible.  Similarly, one might say that Bach is the complete composer; that Haydn said that he wrote his “Te Deum” “on his knees”; and that Mozart’s music was “written in heaven” (as he himself said) but no-one pretends that they achieved perfection. This is so with the authors, oral traditions and sources of the Bible.

The Vatican II Council in the early Sixties stated: “The OT books contain matters imperfect and provisional” and “Those who search out the intention of the sacred writers must, among other things, have regard for ‘literary forms’.   For truth is proposed and expressed in a variety of ways, depending on whether its form is that of prophecy, poetry or some other type of speech”.

(With acknowledgements to Professor J. McKenzie)

I’m Confessin’

Jesus gave His apostles (and, presumably, their successors) the power to forgive sins.   The form of this is not specified.

Our knowledge of the Church’s theology of penance in the earliest years of the Faith is meagre.   Essentially the problem was that of dealing with sins committed after Baptism.

A powerful current of thought in the 2nd century Church favoured the view that no remission was possible for sins deliberately committed after Baptism.

This view is in line with the author of Hebrews and the author of 1 John.

There were more liberal views among some of the earliet Fathers but we are completely in the dark about the practical arrangements.   It is more than likely that there was corporate public confession with the absolution pronounced by the bishop or presbyter.

With the dawn of the 3rd century the rough outline of a recognised penitential discipline was beginning to emerge, although there are still no signs of a sacrament of private penance (i.e., confession to a presbyter followed by absolution)

The system which seems to have existed in the Church was wholly public, involving confession, a period of penance and exclusion from communion, then formal absolution and restoration.

There is plenty of evidence that sinners were encouraged to open their hearts privately to a presbyter but nothing to show that this led up to anything more than counsel.

Certainly in the last decades of the 2nd century adultery, homicide and idolatry (or apostasy) seem to have been treated in practice, if not in theory, as unforgivable.   This was relaxed over a long period of time and local practice varied.

In the 4th and 5th centuries there is no hard evidence of one-to-one private confession.  Even St. Augustine is quite positive that the only form of penance known to him is public confession plus private confession of sins at home.
It is not until much later that the present form of confession to a priest, followed by absolution came into being.

One to one confession is practised by Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Anglo-Catholicism and Lutheranism.

One to one confession and absolution is practised within Mormonism,   In Buddhism one confesses to one’s superior,   In Hinduism   there is no formal penance involving another party but holy men have a ready ear

(With acknowledgements to Dr.JND Kelly)

The Old Testament

Written over a period of more than 1,000 years.

There was considerable to-ing and fro-ing within Judaism and the early centuries of the Church as to which books were to be included within the canon of the OT.

At the Council of Jamnia in AD90 Judaism decided on the books to be included    within the canon of  the OT
There were plenty of other candidates, including half-a-dozen or so which the early  Church used as Scripture.
There are some traces of reference of these books in parts of the NT.   For example, Mt 6:14 = Ecclus 28:2; Mt 27:39-40 = Wis 2:12-15; Rom1:20f + Wis 13-14 f.; Heb11:35-39 = 2 Macc 6:18; Jas 1:19 = Ecclus 5:11-13; 1 Pet 1:6 = Wis 3:3f.

When we come to the Apostolic Fathers,there is no  difficulty in finding references to the extra books.
Nothing was defined by the Church until we meet several councils in N.Africa, especially the Council of Hippo (393 AD), which included the extra books in the OT.

The definition produced virtual unanimity in the West. though in the East and in particular in Syria, general agreement was not reached until the 7th century.

At the Reformation the Reformers went back to the Jewish canon of the OT.   The dropped (extra) books were included in the Prayer books of the Church of England under the Apocrypha.

The Orthodox Church throughout most of its history has sided with the Catholic Church.

The New Testament

The infant Church regarded the Old Testament (however defined) as Scripture.   Christ, however, takes precedence over Scripture.

There was no canon of the NT in the early centuries of the Faith.   Thus Christianity was not a “religion of a book” in the strict sense.

Competing  with the NT books as we have them were myriad other books.   These circulaated among Christians and were even used in worship.   Examples are:  The Gospel according to the Hebrews; of the Ebionites; according to the Egyptians; of Philip; of Peter; of Thomas; the Apocalypse of Paul…..

At the beginning of the 2nd century AD Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, was in dispute with some of the people in his diocese.   Both sides appealed to the OT.   Ignatiius’ opponents said they could only accept  what was written (i.e., the OT).   Ignatius quoted from the OT but he also fell back on the “oral Gospel of the Church”:
It was only at the end of thee 4th century that the canon of the NT was closed. in the West and at the end of the 6th century in the East.

Jesus And The Mystery-Religions

When one looks at the Mysteries, one is in a different world from Christianity.

Heracles burns himself and ascends; Dionysus represents the identity of death and life rather than their succession; with Osiris the Mysteries commemorate not his resurrection but the finding of his corpse; the dominant note with Tammuz was one of mourning;the same is true of Adonis; and no bodily ascent of Attis was celebrated.

Various texts from Cicero, Apuleius and Juvenal have been used to link the initiation in the Mysteriess with Christian Baptism.   Nowhere in the Mysteries is the initiate called “child of God”, as a newly-baptised Christian is.

“Lies, Damned Lies And Statistics”

In December,2008 Christian Research, the statistical arm of the Bible Sodiety, claimed that the number of people attending Church of England services will fall by 90% in 2050.   This contrasts with the fact that there are2 billion Christians world-wide and that, according to the last census in the UK, more than 75% said that they belonged to a faith.

In  April, 2009 a Theos poll reported that in the UK 55% believe in heaven, 27% in re-incarnation, 70% in the human soul, 39% in ghosts, 22% in horoscopes and 15% in Tarot cards.

Jesus never wrote a book; He founded a Church

The early Church was led by the apostles, with Peter at the helm.   Soon we have the emergence of deacons and presbyters(local officers)   Bishops also exist in the New Testament.   In Corinth we have apostles, prophets, teachers,miracle-workers, healers, helpers, administrators

In the earliest years of the Church after the N.T. period the usual pattern was bishops and  deacons plus travelling missionaries – apostles and prophets.   Eventually, these latter officers disappear and bishop, presbyer and deeacon becomes the norm.   It is not until the 4th century that an individual believer is called a priest.

A special place in the early Church is reserved for the Bishop of Rome, taken to be the successor of Peter.   The following Fathers of the Church ascribe a primacy to Rome and to Rome disputes and clear teaching are ascribed.   Thus St. Clement of Rome, St Ignatius, St Irenaeus, St. Polycarp, Bishop Polycrates of Ephesus,Tertullian, St. Cyprian of Carthage, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine…

From these we have such statements as:  “an overseer of love” “If one wishes to know the true faith, then it suffices to ascertain the teaching of this one Church”  “If Italy is in thy neighbourhood then thou hast Rome, from whence for us (in Africa) the teaching authority already exists”"The Roman Church is the mother and the root of the Catholic Church..”.

2

Beginniing in the early 4th century we have the conciliar movement.   Major disputes over doctrine (e.g. the divinity of Christ), after a long period of discussion were settled not by Rome,although Rome’s influence was impressive but by  General  Councils.

In 1054 the Greek Speaking Church of the Eastern Empire and the Latin Speaking Church of the West split.   There had been considerable strain between the two for many years prior to 1054.   Thus we have the Orthodox and Catholic denominations.

An important feature in the dispute – and it remains until to-day – is the standing of the Pope.   The Orthodox believe that a special place belongs to the Pope.   They ascribe to him a primacy of honour, together with the right (under certain circumstances) to hear appeals from all parts of Christendom.      They see Rome’s mistake as being to turn the primacy of love into a supremacy of external power and jurisdiction.   (Sadly this mistake is prevalent to-day)

With regard to the New Testament the content was only finally agreed upon at the end of the 4th century and even then there was some uncertainty in  the East over the inclusion of Hebrews and Revelation.

Prior to that there was a variety of books which were used in worship, alongside books which were eventually placed within the Canon of Scripture.   Thus we have such books as The Gospel of the Hebrews, The Gospel of Philip, The Gospel of Peter, The Book of James, The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Bartholomew,The Acts of John and many, many more.

Prior to the use of these apocryphal books and the authentic books ,the early Church relied on oral transmission of the Gospel.

Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons (130-202 AD), preferred oral transmission to the written word.   He writes: “The distant barbarians on the Rhine cannot read, yet without the external aid of a scripture they are established in a right path, for the Holy Spirit Himself writes the true confession ‘without ink and paper’ on their heart.   Consequently, the preaching of the Church has no need, provided it proclaims Christ as He really was and is, to refer constantly to the books in which the apostolic message is recorded”.

What is to be said about Christian re-union?   With 38,000 churches and sects across the world it is no easy task.   Furthermore, attempts to date have produced only very meagre fruit.

All Christians accept the N.T. as agreed at the end of the 4th century.   Most have sacraments such as Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.  There is a general consensus about right and wrong (the Ten Commandments +).   Most agree on the Social Gospel, although American Fundamentalism is out of line.   Most can agree with the definitions of the Faith in the first millennium.

To be true to the apostolic period and the period of the first four centuries of the Faith, it would seem that any re-union should take in:

• A ministry of bishops, presbyters and deacons plus the ministries set out by St Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians.
• The Bishop of Rome to have a world-wide ministry, a “presidency of love”.   Jurisdiction to be dropped from the vocabulary.
• Academic freedom to be guaranteed.   Controversial findings of scholars to be discussed openly, not suppressed.

The Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit has been the most neglected member of the Trinity in much of the history of Christendom.   What is the role of the Spirit?

• Conceives Jesus,given in Baptism, expels demons, speaks in us when called to witness, Pentecost, Gifts of the Spirit, Wisdom, Faith, Encouragement, Joy, pervades the Church, heals,dwells in individual believer, a foretaste of heaven, love, teaches, principle of prayer, agent of holiness, speaking forth (=prophecy), remains forever,inspires Jesus to speak, reveals mysteries of God, is given in answer to prayer,seat of consciousness and psychic functions, proceeds from Jesus and the Father, witnesses.

Jesus And His Enemies

The gospels record enmity between Jesus’ opponents and himself.   The Sadducees (who provided the priests in the Temple) were mainly instrumental in having him crucified.   The Scribes were religious lawyers.   The Pharisees were far and away his main opponents,

• The Talmud, a Jewish compilation of rabbinic traditions and way of life, which is Pharisaic in origin, contains some remarks hostile to the Pharisees which find the same faults in them as appear in the NT.
• It would seem that the Pharisees’ hostility to Jesus arose from the threat they thought Jesus held for their position as religious leaders.
• In the gospels the Pharisees watch Jesus closely to find fault with him.   They try to trap him.  They propose trick questions.   They are scandalised by Jesus’ conduct : mixing with publicans aand sinners; his laxnesss in Sabbath observance; his healing on the Sabbath, although this was not agaiinst mainstream Judaism, his neglect of ritual ablutions.
• Furthermore,they object to Jesus’ claim to be able to forgive sins.   They object when Jesus is triumphantly welcomed by his disciples.
• When they ask for a sign, Jesus calls them an adulterous and wicked generation.   He condemns their exclusiveness as harsh and their rigour in the law as intolerable.   They are blind with self-inflicted blindness.   A recurring word in the invective discourses is “hypocrites”.   They are “whited sepulchres”, concerned with looking devout while malicious at heart.   They are “a brood of vipers”.
• There are several ways of looking at Jesus’ hard words.

1. The words were actually uttered by Jesus and they are deserved
2. They reflect a basic problem with the Pharisees but they were embellished by the early Church which found itself in conflict with the Pharisees.
3. They reflect oriental exaggeration.   Jesus was not Anglo-Saxon!
4. The words were uttered by Jesus but they were over-emphasised by the oral tradition underlying the gospels as part of the invective against the Pharisees.

• If Jesus had spoken in this way of the Nazis, no-one would have objected to the language used; indeed, he would have been warmly applauded.
• In Jesus’ eyes the Pharisees were blocking the way to salvation for the men and women of his time and, therefore, colourful, memorable imagery is needed.
• There were seven types of Pharisee and in rabbinic tradition only one of them, the Pharisee who is devoted to the love of God, receives unqualified commendation.   It is likely, therefore, that Jesus did not attack all Pharisees.
• The frequent use of the word “hypocrite” might literally refer to those who were appearing to be true Pharisees but, in fact, were only play-acting.   The genuine Pharisee and Scribe were not play-actors, whatever else they might be.
• Jesus’ hard sayings, as in Matthew 23, are a lamentation rather than unmitigated denunciation.
• It should never be overlooked that Jesus died for his enemies as well as his supporters.   From the cross he utters the words: “Father, forgive them; they know not what they do”.

(With acknowledgements to Professor J.McKenzie)