Óscar Romero as Mentor 4: Salvation as Transfiguration and Liberation


EP.  - ROMERO - SALVATION AS TRANSFIGURATION & LIBERATION

There's a saying, I'm sure you've heard it: "It always looks impossible until someone does it." We understand this truth, and greatly value it, when it comes to something like innovation.

Electricity, indoor plumbing, and flying machines all looked impossible to most of our ancestors. And we're glad someone did things that proved them to be realistic.

100 years ago every single standing athletic world record looked impossible.

When I was a kid, touch interfaces and video calls were the stuff of science fiction.

Then someone did it. So now we all do it, and think nothing of how wondrous what we are doing actually is.

The greatest things always look impossible ... Until someone does it.

In this series, we just want to help you notice how strange it is, then, that we tend to fail to appreciate this same principle when it comes to other things our age does not tend to value a much. Like ancient and religious things.

Why does the gospel seem so impossible to us, when history if full of saints who have done it? Who have lived in ways that show us what is really possible when we trust God's presence and help.

This time we look at how St. Oscar Romero can help us better understand what it means to be saved and what true salvation has to do with works.

[TRANSITION TO ALL THINGS INTRO]

STORY:

[MUSIC BEGINS/CONTINUES]

[4:15-5:44]

Translation: "This is what I want to tell you to sum up: there are works without faith and without love. Just as there is faith without works, there are works without faith. There may be much activism, much coming and going, but the works are not done out of love, nor is there faith. Saint Paul says, «If I give my possessions to others, if I speak in human and angelic tongues, if I do marvelous deeds so all the world applauds me, but I do not have love, I am nothing» (1 Cor 13:1-3).

Works without love, works without faith are dead. So also the reverse: «Faith without works is dead», says Saint James (Jas 2:17,26). Saint James in his day, the first age of Christianity, could already envision the exaggerated proposal of Luther in the sixteenth century that «faith is sufficient». Luther's problem was that he put one little word in his translation: faith alone is enough. He held that faith alone, without works, is what saves us, and that is very dangerous."

[7:18-8:10]

Translation: "That's why I'm happy to read that recommendation of the Seminar for Educational Reform requesting the religious sects not to preach an alienating type of Christianity or a religion that does not engage with history15. And I'm also happy that we are preaching this commitment to history in light of the Gospel. Salvadorans of today, you will not be saved if you don't work intensely for a better world, beginning with your own homes and radiating grace through your daily labors, as humble as they may be. You may be making bread, working from dawn to dusk with a machete, or hoeing, but do it all with love. Show by works of honesty and faith that we truly love and fear God."

At a key point in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke, Jesus took a few of his disciples up a mountain and ... Something changed. It's an odd story, as stories of God encountering us should be. The english word translators use for what happened is "Transfiguration." The Greek word Matthew and Mark use is "metemorphothe", which sounds and looks a lot like the English word: "Metamorphosis." So, let that lead you to think of what you will. The Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, or probably my favorite, Franz Kafka's allegorical story, the Metamorphosis, about a man waking up one morning to find himself transformed into a giant insect. 

We get some no less fantastic examples in biology. A caterpillar  cocoons and then emerges as a beautiful butterfly. A tadpole, in its aquatic larval stage, turns into a land-dwelling frog; a starfish starts out looking like something somebody stepped on before transforming into the adult form we all know. Crabs, lobsters, and other crustaceans; snails, and other mollusks all participate in this mystery of metamorphosis. 

Its a widespread principle of life that initial biological structures are eventually broken down to make way for the newer and stronger adult structures. A larva's form is best suited for growth and development, when when it comes time for things like flying and reproduction, the structures of the adult insect body are needed. A human baby can bend and flex just about any way it wants, and this allows it to grow at a rate that would burst an adult body, but when it comes time to feed yourself you need to be able to stand straight with a rigid backbone so you can walk through an often hostile world. The old makes way for the new.

I said all of that so that I would have the opportunity to say words like: pupa and larva.

But fun as that was, what we're really talking about is salvation. So to bring it back to Jesus: it's fascinating that Scripture uses this word, metemorphothe, transfiguration, to describe what happened to Jesus on that holy mountain in front of Peter, James, and John.

In that story Jesus' face shone like the sun. His clothes became dazzling white. Dead people congregated and started talking to him. A bright cloud overshadowed them as a voice from heaven said: "This is my Son, the Beloved; Listen to him!" But just what did Peter, James, and John see?

In one of his later letters, Peter insists what they saw was Jesus' true majesty. So, on the one hand, Jesus did not transfigure into something he wasn't before. No, he revealed that which he has always been: The Eternal Son of the Father. The disciples were simply given the ability to see Jesus more fully.

But on the other hand, we can truly say that Jesus' humanity did grow and change as every human does. He was at the egg stage in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary, he became that larva crying in the manger. He was in that tadpole stage when he walked around the Temple as a boy. He was that caterpillar that roamed around the Earth. He was cocooned on the cross and in the grave. And He became that butterfly freed from the gravity of sin, death, and hell when he resurrected. Then, he flew back into the Father's embrace in the ascension. Jesus became more and more what he has always been: The Eternal Son of the Father. He was transfigured. It's all a beautiful mystery. 

Fascinating, but what's this have to do with our salvation? Well, that union between Christ's eternal glory and Jesus' genuine humanity is the key to our salvation.

See, Jesus did all that not only to transfigure his humanity, but do make the same possible for all humanity. In him, we are initiated into transformation from an egg into a butterfly. Invited to travel through death and into resurrection. Why: To become more and more what we most truly are: Children of the Father. 

In the conversation that follows, we will discuss further just what salvation is. We'll explore what it means to be saved and how this is tied to the relationship between faith and works. And we'll find that, as Romero tipped us off, transfiguration is the key that unlocks these mysteries.

[MUSIC  TRANSITION TO:]


Julius: Thanks for listening to all things. We're excited this series. It's um, it's really cool to be able to hear directly from the words of Oscar Romero as we take, um, these few episodes to kind of dive in deeper to some of the theology that it can be found in the way that Romero preaches. And today we're talking about salvation, which.

I mean really the major concept and word in Christianity, especially for those of us who like here in Western Christianity and evangelicalism like salvation is like. Kind of the thing to talk about. Um, and here Romero brings up a very compelling point about salvation by connecting it to that passage in James about faith without works being dead.

And a lot of us from, especially from a Protestant background, might find ourselves resistant to the idea of emphasizing works as necessary to save us. And um, Rome does a really good job at kind of addressing that and. By connecting, I, I think in the story that follows, uh, you start to connect salvation to something like metamorphosis or I guess the Christian word would be like transfiguration as we see it in Christ, which is, uh, becoming more fully our transformed into more full versions of who we are in Christ.

And as you kind of start to make that link, it, it, we can start to see why faith and works need each other. In order to like form a fully like living new person, right? And so especially through those terms, um, and especially for people who might primarily understand salvation as, um, pertaining to what happens after death as to whether or not we go to hell or heaven, how can we begin to understand the word, even just beginning with that word salvation through this lens of kind of transfiguration and new life.

Kevin: where we need to. Reframe the conversation on salvation is precisely what you said, Julius, is a lot of times we frame salvation as first and foremost. What do you believe? Um, so salvation is primarily. I guess at best, at worst, the only, um, cognitive ascent of belief like I believe you know Jesus is Lord, and then that's good enough.

Um, and nothing else has required me, or I believe that, you know, I'm forgiven. Christ died for my sins. Start from going to heaven. And that's good. And salvation is primarily kind of framed that way and that's included and, but it's such a small part of it. And so, and there's, I mean, we can bounce these ideas back and forth, but like salvation being like a judicial and kind of having this kind of framework, but configuration is a better framework for understanding salvation.

And a Romero sees. . Um, he, he loves the, the Feast of Transfiguration and because in his context in El Salvador, August 6th, which is the date for the Feast of Transfiguration, is like a big deal in El Salvador. It's like a. There's a parade, there's a festival. There's like, It also has become a very kind of nationalistic kind of holiday in El Salvador, which I mean, think of like Christmas here, or I guess Easter or I guess other big holidays in.

The us um, the transfiguration August 6th is August 6th is not really a big deal. I mean, who many of, how many of us knew August 6th was the

No, it's coming transfiguration day that we celebrate. But ELs Salvador is a huge deal. Um, and that's actually where ELs Salvador got its name is cuz it means it's the savior, but it's the the savior seen as the transfigured Christ.

So, so it's in the context of El Salvador. So obviously Romero has just been growing up with this idea of transfiguration and he loves this. Um, but he's not the only one who loves it. A bunch of the fathers love the transfiguration, so, It's a story where Peter, James and John are on Mountain Tabor and they see Jesus, uh, transfigured, his face shown like the sun and his clothes became dazzling white.

And I love icons on the Transfiguration cuz

Julius: it

Kevin: shows like, uh, James and John kind of looking away and they're covering their

Julius: eyes

Kevin: and they're like, What is going on? And then Peter's kind of covering his eyes, but then also talking to Jesus like, Hey, can we set up three, three, uh, tent dwellings? Um, and.

It's, And then I, they hear the voice from heaven. They see dead people, Moses and Elijah talking to Jesus. And then afterwards Jesus says, Don't tell anyone the vision you just saw. And then the question is, what in the world did Peter, James and John just see in that moment? And there's such, this is such a rich Christology, but they saw something spectacular.

Um, and Romero highlights that they saw. , obviously Divinity in Christ. Christ revealed that his sonship with the Father, the voice from heaven, the Father says, This is my son, who I'm well pleased. Um, so he sees, they see a vision of God, but Romero highlights this also. They see hum humanity. True human nature, glorified and dignified like the flesh, his face shown like the sun.

If we were agnostic and believe that flesh is evil, then Jesus' face wouldn't be shining

Right.

It would just be something else. But Remember says, no His, his brown body was shown like the sun and his, his human flesh was dignified and glorified in this moment.

Wilson: it's not Raiders. The lost arc where the spirit God shows up in the flesh melts because it, Because it has to burn away for, Yeah, it, it lights up.

Kevin: Yeah. Um, and, and if you, if you, we can imagine this, the father sees this as well, Divinity revealed, human nature revealed as it should be, and the father is happy. And then the question is, why is the father happy? Why is the father well pleased? It's because this is the kind of people that Adam and Eve from the beginning were supposed to be.

This is human nature as God imagined it. And this is glorified humanity and. The transfiguration is a big deal cuz it shows like who this person is and this is an aspir. Romero Go, uh, a quote from Romero is the transfigure. Christ is the hope of all human beings in sense. Like, this is the direction we're going.

This is where we're, uh, who we're becoming and uses language like this, like demonization of becoming like, like God, because our human, human nature is carried up into Christ and even glorified in Christ. And so transfiguration. Um, metamorphosis. Transformation is the goal of Christianity. It is being transformed by this new life, being filled with new life.

And so if we understand salvation, to tie it back into it as being transformed. More and more into Christ. That that is what it means to be saved. That the original project that God envisioned from, for human beings at the beginning of time from Adam and Eve is to be these kinds of people. Then Christ brings us back, restores us to that original project, and gives us, uh, the possibility to be transfigured by his, um, life.

Wilson: That. So our podcast is called All Things because , I'm just trying here, there's a mosquito loose in this room, and I've, I've been bit four times.

Julius: I was about that.

Wilson: saw it flying over toward JU and now I've seen both Julius and Kevin are scratching. It is a heyday right now. What? Let, we'll find some way to bring that mosquito back into salvation what, But,

Julius: something there. Blood

Wilson: um, but.

That the gospel of Jesus Christ matters for everything. And when you, when you root salvation concretely in the New Testament. Um, and, and especially like rooted in the gospels and then growing out of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus and the continuation through the life of the church.

Spirit that the New Testament talks about. Like, again, sorry. I was trying to like not get all like theological jargony. I would get more so pushing it back to where I was trying to be, which is way more concrete. Like look at, look at what Jesus does and says in the gospels. And the whole of the Gospel of John is structured as a recreation of the world.

It's structured after like seven signs that correspond to the seven days, and then on the eighth day, which is the first day, right, Another first day, like all this happens in a garden. I mean, it's really. It's if it's fun, like when you read it and you start to catch it, it's poetic and beautifully woven.

If I just extract it and just start listing it bullet points, it starts to sound like, Okay, John, that's kind of heavy handed the

Kevin: new creation stuff,

Wilson: which is why I don't wanna do it though. But I mean, it's, it's woven in such an like, and when you start to see it, it, it's like the lifeblood flowing through the veins of the gospel that Christ is recreating

Julius: There's the mosquito tie in.

Wilson: Okay. Nice. or that's a parasitic, right? there's, I, I feel like in my head it's, we're going to vampires point there's, a reason that vampires as a, as a parasitic parody of, uh, Okay. No, no. I like, I like classic horror too, I gotta stay on focus. Um, the recreation of everything, right?

And so, So salvation is everything being what God intends it to be in the glory and goodness of it. And so, and that means taking on divine qualities and characteristics because of the gift of grace. It's, it's, there is no, when it's right and good, there is no division. Or I mean, you could say like a conceptual division.

It's helpful to think about. A distinction, but really how it actually works. Just like, I mean, just like you can conceptually make a distinction between your brain and your heart, but if you sever the things, neither is all the way alive. Right? And grace is like the love of God that makes it all possible.

But even creation itself is coming from the grace of God. And so there's no real division or separation between grace and everything coming alive. Right. And that's why we take on. That's why Christ. Grows, glows, . It grew too, but I mean, but glows. And why? When the disciples really do like get caught up in him and what he's doing, then the church in acts starts to do the kinds of things that Jesus did.

And I know it. It freaks people out to think like deification. People are like, Ugh. But that's because we're so, I mean, it's almost like, yeah, that's because you didn't sit there on table.

Kevin: you

Wilson: know, But if we, if we'd been, if we'd had an experience like that, you see, and those that had experienced it, the saints that testified to it, one of their favorite images to help this, this does help us, is like the coal and the fire, the coal's, just coal.

You know, just like we're just dust, but we're dust that God has breathed into. And when you take the coal and you put it in the fire, it's just coal. It's not the fire. But when it's in the fire, it begins to take on the properties of the. Heats up, glows. It gives off warmth and light. Yeah. And in that kind of place, we are the, we are the channel for God's grace in the world.

We, we light up and we

Kevin: are, we

Wilson: give the heat and the light in a cold and dark

Kevin: and, and the coal can only stay, can only, uh, the properties of the fire can only be sustained in the coal. If the coal is in the

Wilson: fire. Yep.

Julius: Yeah.

Kevin: Once it leaves the fire It becomes more coal like

Wilson: And that's when, when you are unbelieving, Yeah. He could work. No miracles there because they had no

Kevin: faith.

Julius: Right.

Wilson: When we are unbelieving, when our, when there is no faith, we are not the, and again, this is, you can make a conceptual, distinct distinction, but salvation is when these things really come together.

Just like, the body is properly ordered and the blood is flowing. Yeah.

Julius: Yeah, so you, you were starting to talk about salvation there as that we can understand salvation as God kind of, um, making things right about like restoring humanity to like be, to properly and fully reflect God. Um, and so the word salvation always makes me think that like, it, it's always in relation to being saved from.

Something. Um, and if we're trying to push back against, it's just like being saved from like, it, something like eternal punishment or something and maybe being, and being saved from something even kind of greater than that. Um, uh, I wanna start to take our conversation to the word, like, we've made the connection here, or I don't know if you made it in the story or if this is something that Rome has made in sermons, but connection, connecting the word salvation to the word like liberation, that those two things are linked.

Salvation's, not just linked to transfiguration, but like in this episode we're talking about liberation. Um, and I'd love for us to dive more into that word and ask kind of like what it looks like for. What does it mean for salvation to have to do with liberation? Especially kind of given the context that Romes preaching from, like that word conjured up like it, it made kind of his detractors.

Um, connect him with like movements like communism and that was kind of something very threatening and to the, to the people of his time. And if you understand it kind of in that context, liberation is always understood as a liberation of a people that it's like communal beyond just an individual kind of transformation of like a single person, but liberation.

Understood. As for a community, how can, how can we kind of begin to understand. Salvation as liberation and as liberation, um, of a like community of people.

Kevin: Yeah. Um, I have two big quotes here, so I'm trying to decide whether, which one to read from Romero? Uh, Romero uses liberation a lot. Um, and like you said, there are. People, his hearers at his time, and even now that when they hear that word, there's like, Okay, what are you saying? It's one of those words, I mean, Christian theology is filled with all these words.

One of these words that kind of like, There's either like, Ooh, that is really good, or like, ooh, that's really concerning. Um, but Romero, he has a very specific use for it. And so, and he says that this word liberation, he wants to explain it clearly. And many, he says, Many are fearful of this word and many also abuse this word.

Um, but there should be neither cause for fear or abuse. And so here's a, a big quote. I'm gonna kind of quote it here. That way it can serve as the foundation of our conversation, but he says, The word liberation bothers many people, but it is the reality of Christ redemption. Liberation does not mean only redemption after death, so that people should just conform to the system while they are alive.

No liberation is redemption that is already beginning on this earth. Liberation means that the exploitation of one human being by another no longer exists in the world. Liberation means redemption that seeks to free people from every form of slavery. Slavery is I. Slavery is hunger. Not having money to buy food.

Slavery is being homeless, Not having a place to live slavery is mis. They go together. Christ does not want slaves. He wants all people to be redeemed. He wants us all rich and poor to love one another as sisters and brothers. No person should be the slave of another, nor a slave of misery, nor a slave of anything that suppose a sin in the world.

This is the content of this revelation, this doctrine, this evangelization, and. So he ties liberation. First of all, uh, he says this in another place. True liberation is when we, ourselves are freed from, from ourselves, from would it be sin from our desires, from, you know, whatever, like we said. So configuration is being transformed to be freely.

To be freed from ourselves, to not be self centered, to open ourselves, to now be God centered. Um, and he says that this is the beginning of true liberation, but it doesn't stop there. And then he says, after that, the person who has been truly liberated from themselves, Then becomes this agent of liberation for others, that he says, Now this person will seek to end all forms of, uh, self indulge, self-indulgence, all slavery, to the self slavery, to systems slavery, to all this stuff.

And he says that this is, So, and he, he critiques both sides. He says that there are liberators and he say like the revolutionaries who just love the idea of frame people, but yet that they themselves are still addicted. To their own devices and sins. It's like you are. Kind of like being, uh, duplicitous or you're being, you're not being, uh, you're not true liberators.

And then there's on this side it's like, oh, salvation, just, uh, salvation from sin and forgiveness, sin, but they're not working for, uh, liberation. And Romero critiques both sides that this is not the, this is not what salvation means and looks like, and liberation is tied up to. So there's a both end here.

A salvation from sin. Yes. And then also salvation for the sake of others. Yes. And so Romero does a I, I believe a great job of holding both of those things together.

Wilson: So I would like to kinda trace some things through on two different levels. I mean, it's the same thing that I'm, I'm, that I'm tracing here, but, On two different levels. One on the level of ideas because it is important for understanding Romero and his time and place, but also ours as we're gonna, if we're gonna learn from him and his witness for our day and time there, there are certain things that are varied.

I mean, it takes some parts, it takes some help in translation, you know, like Kevin's expertise. And stuff like that. But other places there's some like close connections. Like we're super frustrated with some things. Who or what do we look to for guidance in our thinking and in in our action? Right? So on the first one on that part, I wanna like go through the idea part and look at Marks.

Kevin: And, and

Wilson: where Yes, he uses and I, I really, I really admire the courage, uh, to use the word and reclaim it. Cuz one of the things that we're tempted to do is be like, Oh, that word, if I use it, I might get lumped in with so and so or, and we let so and so or whatever have that and. Or so we either just give that or we just avoid the potential, like kickback because I mean, it might be that we're just afraid of the conflict and it might be that we're just don't feel equipped to know like, No, I'm gonna use this word and here's why and So just to help with that part of it on the idea side, talk about, um, one of the ideas or the schools of thought that was influencing El Salvador, that Romero had a good read. , but there's also, you know, still alive in our day and one of the things out on option for how do we respond to our time, which is Marx.

So I think key for understanding what would be like a Christian and through Romero way of understanding what Marx is doing is to see. Like Marx was highly influenced by Haal, but uh, Haal split into like three different camps and there's like the idealistic, kind of like quasi theistic or theistic religious haal.

And there were the materialistic atheistic haal. And Marks was a haal understood. And Hale's idea is kind of like this whole all of reality and in Hael, like even God gets worked out through the violence and the bloodshed of history. This is, how even God realizes God's self and al the absolute ultimate reality worked out through the violent give and take and ebb and flow of, of history.

And so Marks takes that but does away with anything. Anything idealistic. And that doesn't just mean like, ooh, that's a great ideal. He means like intangible,

Kevin: right?

Wilson: And so that would be God and any other sort of intangible idea and squarely puts it in like the material. And so he attempts to, to read this through a materialistic, atheistic view.

But here's exactly where I would say and where CR. Christian Catholic Romar, Is that a word Romar,

it.

Uh, read on It would understand. That's precisely where hael fails to truly be atheistic. Um, and that's one, that's a consistent thing. Like if I would offer anything in trying to help people navigate thoughts and ideas, you watch for that.

And really, if you understand that what is bigger than us? Cause again, it's one, it's one thing to put as your ideal to do away with ideals, but nobody can do. Impossible and whatever you put, And again, nobody in the history, the best thinkers throughout history, nobody's done it, . Um, and uh, and that's exactly where Mark fails.

And it's whatever, whatever is bigger than you. that in any way transcends you or us, that you chase, that you put as the, the thing that's worth, whatever, that's worth sacrifice, that's worth worship. And in some places it becomes, it's what justifies violence. That's God. And so for, for, uh, marks, he's not truly atheistic, but just what plays the place of the Theos, the God is the material, the stuff, the, the control of manufacture, the control of the goods and all of that.

And so in Marks, this is where it becomes heat. I mean, not just justifiable, it's baked into a system as violence. And Marx's approach to it is even, and look, it's necessary to incite violence. so that becomes the thing that on one side, in, in this Marxist. That's a place where Romero sees people stay not liberated, still enslaved.

Do something that on on one end would be for the rich and the powerful would be worth hurting other people even to the point of bloodshed killing death squads.

Um,

warfare on the other side, it's, Well, let's

ROMERO (Salvation) - Speaking Audio (V1) - WIL SPEAKING (Starting Gate and Comp): stick

Wilson: with the wealthy and powerful. The material becomes the thing so worth protecting that we would do violence to ourselves and others.

And on the other side, the material is the God that it's so worth getting, that it's worth doing violence, not just to others that have what we don't, but even doing violence to ourselves in our own communities. And this is what Romero is warning. He's not just calling side. You know, just to repent because I'm right and you're wrong.

He's warning them and inviting both to liberation, to be free from chasing this God through bloodshed and this is his critique. Right? That's just quickly, and we, again, that was even longer than I thought, but this this is part

Kevin: so many

It's

Julius: a lot

Kevin: to

Wilson: unpack.

so talking through the level of ideas, but not taking that to the personal level

Julius: of

Wilson: salvation and, and seeing.

So this is the kind of liberation that Marks offers. That Romeros and our read would be like, okay, you might, and this is true, you gotta, one of the things, an engaging idea. Sorry, I'm not outta the idea thing yet,

Kevin: but

Wilson: one of the things for Christians and engaging the world of ideas, we have to be courageous and honest enough to be able to give, do where it's due.

And Marx was smart and there were things about capitalism, especially the capitalism of his day. Like I, I just, I'm doing my PhD at the University of Manchester. I just spent three weeks in Manchester and there's a Marx and uh, um, marks and. Ingles, uh, a museum there because that, there's a spot in Manchester where they used to sit and write because that was the place where on this side of the river they would sit.

And this is where the people that owned all the Manchester was the first, like fully industrialized city. In the uk and this is the side of the river where you would sit. And these are the people that own the manufacturing. And on the other side were just the labor camps. And it was, it, it resembled like a really, really bad refugee camp, but that's where people lived all the time because of how they worked and they sit there.

Right? And so in this, in his day with what he's seeing, he's really, really good at pointing out some of the evils of capitalism. Some of the greed that's inherent in that and the need to do something to put up some sort of guard restriction barrier on this so that it's not undisciplined and Right. And so his read on it's there.

But then this would be the critique. Do you really offer liberation now? Especially if we're not just talking about moving on up. Yeah. Right. To get a better house. But if we're talking about salvation, do you really offer that? Right. But we can't be afraid to give people their due where it is. This next bit I can do more quickly. And that's the more personal pastoral thing, right? So the idea and what we're tracing through, Sure. But if we're looking at it like history and, and philosophy marks and economics and all that kind of stuff, But now on our own salvation and liberation. What Romero's calling us to really is a, is a much

I mean, it's better. I don't think there's any, nobody, nobody's at this point going, so like, what do you guys really think? And where are you? So, but, but here's why. Better if we're thinking about liberation, you know, so much of a, we can easily and often in certain circles reduce salvation to just not going to.

Julius: Right, Right.

Wilson: But now, now like flip and it's, that's where, uh, I think Kevin was talking about maybe it was ju a judicial,

Julius: um,

Wilson: picture of salvation where, Oh, shoot, we're condemned, we're guilty. going to jail. Oh no. Yeah. Am I going to hell? There's, there's a, there's a certain layer of liberation that, I mean, so put it in to just.

Let's say like you've done something like you've manslaughter or, or serious theft or some, you've done something serious. You might be really going to jail for a long time a bad jail. Right? Not, not the cushy, like it's a, it's, it's just like a motel six, like bad

Julius: jail.

Wilson: Not just a mediocre hotel.

This is not where you want to be. right? So you're, you're in the court and the judge says there's not enough evidence or not guilt. We proclaim you're not guilty, okay? you're set free. So there's a layer of liberation there. You're not going to jail. But if you're still a super angry person and you don't have the dis, let's, oh, I guess I've stuck with manslaughter.

Not, uh, , uh, not, not theft. So

Kevin: you.

Wilson: You're a super angry person who cannot discipline do, and you have no tools, nothing to help you know what to do with your anger. You could go back out and you might commit the same crime because you are the same person. Why? Because you haven't fully been liberated. There are parts of you that don't know and trust God, and your head might be going like, It's wrong.

I don't need to. God's there, da da. But if there's another part of you that's like, Uhuh, I'm so pissed and this guy got to. Or at least be unconscious for a couple hours. Right. You're not liberated. There are things inside of you, and this is part of what, uh, no, flipping back to like Marxism.

This is part of what, um, Romero saw as the continued danger. Is you're just gonna shift it, but you're not, this is not gonna actually free our world from g.

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: Um, we have to have a better God to worship, better thing to sacrifice for and to work for, and, there is in Jesus Christ, one that we could sacrifice and work for, that would lead us to sacrifice and work for each other together, not against each other.

So, alright, I'm flip flipping back to the personal salvation. You've gotta be liberated from being someone who would want to steal or kill or hurt mame in these kind of situations. That's another bigger personal and then, And this, So that one sounds great. Yeah. I think a lot of evangelicals would be like, Okay, I can, I'll at least entertain

Julius: that.

I'll track

Wilson: that far on the personal level. But here's where Romero would really challenge. Even there Like, we're still not done. Because this is God's.

world.

Right. And so great. Right? Great to, okay. You're not going to jail. Pardon? Mercy. Awesome. Now like sanctification transformation in your soul, right?

So that you can be in the middle of the, even these. Terribly trying circumstances. And you are not the ki, You are the kind of person that even there you are free to love. Even there, you're free to not strike, to not steal, to not whatever he's like, but still, Christ is not king of the whole world. And salvation and liberation has not come everywhere.

Now, the next, now we as people who are being transformed and liberated, let's. It won't fully come until Christ comes. Sure. But that does not stop us from recognizing, but that's part of what it is to become saved, liberated, free persons is to work together for God's kingdom. so let's remove, let's do what we can to change the situations that would make someone feel like I have to strike out and hurt you, or because it's you or me, or I have to steal.

Yeah.

Or my family's not gonna eat. Let's do something about these circumstances too, because that's where, Now think about it on the people that are on the underside when you're calling for this, if it's, oh, if the message is mixed, if it's, Oh, it's just faith. As long as you believe the right things, things will eternally be good, what's gonna give them hope?

That the people that have more than they need are gonna be generous people and actually share with you as long. That breeds fear and mistrust. And fear and mistrust is what makes the temptation stronger and stronger for us to choose to believe and to act the things that keep us locked in the prison of sin.

Julius: Well that's great cuz I think this very last point as we start to wrap this up was I was gonna. To draw our attention to that part in Oscar Romero's sermon where he says, You will not be saved if you don't work intensely for a better world. And I think maybe at the start of this conversation, that could have been it.

It's easy to receive that as such a harsh thing, especially if we're thinking in terms of like, you're gonna go to hell if you don't work for a better world or whatever. Um, but if we start to.

Wilson: Just let's just sweet. You already are That's.

Julius: exactly it. Yeah. Of like that, of places of hell.

Wilson: I, Sorry, I just, I, That was one of those, having done a podcast for as we have, I now realize, Ooh, that was one of those moments where it was clear in the room.

Julius: Yeah,

yeah, yeah, yeah.

Wilson: you already are in, Hell not, you already are going to, like, you're already experiencing a certain degree of hell now.

And do you want to extend that right.

So,

Julius: and that needs to be worked out of, like, so what you're starting to talk about here, if we start to see liberation and salvation more, I, I don't even wanna say broadly, but like more deeply as that, like, to be truly free is also to be freed from the impulse and like the sin nature to want to, It's kind of, it makes me think of like in, um, pedagogy of the oppressed where like in the kind of first chapter,

Wilson: I think that's the first time we talk about that. Right? So that's Pablo

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: Plo.

Julius: Plo.

Wilson: Shoot. Did I just mess you up on that? How do

Kevin: no, no. I

Julius: don't remember. Anyway,

Kevin: I can look it up.

Wilson: Yeah, we gotta find

Julius: It's plo.

Wilson: I just thought the listener it would hear that might

Kevin: How low for,

Wilson: Right. If they wanted to check it out. And, and I figured if the name wasn't given, people would assume it was Romero.

Julius: Totally. So

Wilson: say it one more time, Kevin, for us.

Kevin: How low for Irie.

Julius: Yeah. But, uh, I, one of the, one of the key things, even in the first chapter is talking about like, the nature of true freedom and true liberation is that if the, if the oppressed becomes liberated and like the mind, the mentality of like oppressed and oppressor, that if they're not freed from that, They're not truly free because like once they're liberated, who's to say that they won't?

Like, if you don't work that out, then you just end up running the same cycle and become the oppressor yourself. So a, a liberation earned through violence and bloodshed, like doesn't work out that internal stuff.

Wilson: For support C history.

Julius: Yeah.

Kevin: You have kind of this like switch of classes where the bottom class and then becomes upper

Julius: class. Yeah.

Kevin: And then the upper class then becomes bottom class, but then

Julius: just

Kevin: kind of back and forth throughout history.

Julius: Right. Yeah. Cuz if violence is at the root of it, Like this cycle just kind of plays out all over again. And so when he, when he calls us to intensely working for a better world and like the kind of salvation that he's talking about is like us being saved from that nature, being saved from, and truly liberated from this kind of system of violence and oppression and, um, Kind of bringing it back, like that's why I think the transfiguration in metamorphosis image is so pertinent because that, I mean, I guess in metamorphosis it happens kind of on a more passive level, like your cells or whatever are working, they're changing.

But even in just thinking of like transforming like your body, right? If you're like working out, you don't just expect to like, you have to work towards that and that takes time and. In the way that our bodies are shaped and informed. That takes time and work in order to be shaped and informed into a new people who are free from these impulses to destroy and to oppress others.

We need to work that out. And that needs to be worked out on an individual, a communal, and like, um, uh, I don't know, systemic level. And so I think, I think that's what, hopefully that's how we can receive

Kevin: yeah, there's uh, um, I love that you brought up the passive element. Mm-hmm. . Um, so yeah, salvation is passive. It's, it's done to me from the outside of me, I e God. Uh, so that's the passive element, but then, Romero said there's the active element As well. And these two, um, need to be in balance with each other and right here, or like Romero.

Um, I, I wanna bring up, um, a video watch that of Dallas Willard and he about like how evangelicals he grew up. Evangelical with a capital e . But he says, this is something hard for Protestants to kind of even just imagine there that salvation has both a passive level and an active level. Like, okay, God's initiative, God's work in salvation.

Yes, we, that's no, not really hard and difficult for us to understand, but then what's our part like by grace, what can we do now? Um, and so this is, um, essentially talk about sanctification transformation. Participation responsibility, um, that grace requires us, something of us that we are now receive grace.

We have been saved, but now we have to be responsible with it. And so we kind of have to grow into. Who we already are in Christ, if that makes sense.

Julius: Yeah. ,

Kevin: like you said that the, the passive, uh, nature is like our cells begin to change, And then what the image that came to mind was like, and then we have to catch up to those cells that being changed in some like, weird way.

Yeah. That, um, another image that came to mind was Paul says, like, your. Your life is hidden in Christ, the heavenly places. And then when Christ is revealed, you will be revealed as well. And I remember, I think I was, I read that this past week and I was like, What in the world is he saying? It's like the, the true nature of Cam Petit will be revealed in Christ is revealed.

And so there's this, this interesting like true self in Christ that's hidden in the heavenly places. And then is my job here on earth to become. That. To kind of journey more and more towards that, to walk more in alignment with that. To become who my true hidden self is found in

Julius: yeah,

Kevin: kinda.

So that's the kind of passive and active elements to mind as you were kind of talking.

Wilson: It's like even, even the revelation, and that's why that would be the passive or from outside is the revelation that there is a true or Kevin. Even because who would, who would sit there and

say

and, and that it's promised? It, is. It's not like, like in God who's eternal, it's not like God's going, like, maybe somebody will figure this out.

Kevin: God's No,

Julius: no,

Kevin: no.

Wilson: I've got Like you, the truest Kevin is in me, exists in me. And in hearing that, receiving that and then responding is what allows you to be able to begin to like actually see and know that, Right. Just like. The coal in the fire. If you don't get in the fire, the coal doesn't light up.

If Kevin Portillo or Will Ryland doesn't get in. Christ, the true will, true Kevin doesn't light up and show to ourselves or to the world.

Julius: Yeah. Well it sounds like we, we've, we've covered like a lot of ground and given, I mean, you've given me a lot to think about in terms of like understanding how Romero invites us to look at salvation. So Will and Kevin, thanks for leading us in this conversation. Uh, we look forward to talking more about what Rome has to offer us in the, I guess, last couple episodes here.

So thanks for tuning in.


Óscar Romero as Mentor 3: Transfigured People of God


EP.  - ROMERO - CHRIST OF THE POOR

There's a saying, I'm sure you've heard it: "It always looks impossible until someone does it." We understand this truth, and greatly value it, when it comes to something like innovation.

Electricity, indoor plumbing, and flying machines all looked impossible to most of our ancestors. And we're glad someone did things that proved them to be realistic.

100 years ago every single standing athletic world record looked impossible.

When I was a kid, touch interfaces and video calls were the stuff of science fiction.

Then someone did it. So now we all do it, and think nothing of how wondrous what we are doing actually is.

The greatest things always look impossible ... Until someone does it.

In this series, we just want to help you notice how strange it is, then, that we tend to fail to appreciate this same principle when it comes to other things our age does not tend to value a much. Like ancient and religious things.

Why does the gospel seem so impossible to us, when history if full of saints who have done it? Who have lived in ways that show us what is really possible when we trust God's presence and help.

This time we look at how St. Oscar Romero can help us understand what it means to be the people of God.

[TRANSITION TO ALL THINGS INTRO]

STORY:

[MUSIC BEGINS/CONTINUES]

Intro: Romero Recording "What is the Church?" Pentecost Sunday 1977 [4:13-6:05]

Translation: This is the day, then, when the church was inaugurated. This is important, sisters and brothers. If people want to know something about any institution, then they have to examine its constitutions, its rules, and the reason why it came into being. Today is therefore an opportunity to know what the church is, so that we can all know and understand our own identity--not only we priests and bishops who preach about the church, but also the seminarians who are being prepared in their seminaries, the men and women religious who work and reveal the face of the church in the world, and all of you, dear lay folk, who are the life and the mission of the church. This has been my desire ever since my arrival as archbishop. Since my arrival the church has had to deal with very difficult situations, but at no time have I wanted to confront force with force. That is a disaster! [calumny!] What I have tried to do is define what the church is, because the more defined and known the church is and the more truly she lives what she is, the stronger the church will be. The church has no enemies, except those who voluntarily want to declare themselves her enemies.

To kick this off, let's reverse the classic word association game. Instead of me giving you one word and you stringing out a litany of other words that connect for you with the one I gave, I'll give you a motley litany, and see if you can name one word that could hold them all together.

Ready? Here we go:

Hurt, home, betrayal, love, abandonment, companionship, mother, whore, truth, deception, division, unity. And let's just stop there.

In our time, and given the bit of the Romero sermon we opened with, can you guess the one word that can hold together this list of opposites?

Church.

There is no way for me to know what every single one of you  experiences when you hear that word, but, if you're willing to stick around for the rest of the episode, I hope you'd be open to letting St. Oscar Romero help you define, or possibly re-define, just what the church is.

[MUSIC]

In theology, we have a word, "ecclesiology." That big word is made up of two smaller Greek words: ecclesia, which originally meant, simply, "gathering," but came to be the term used to describe the Church - those who move from being a mass of separate individuals to becoming one thing because they gather in Christ. The second component word is logos, which means the rationale or reasoning for something. So, if you're exploring the rationale of the church, if you're asking questions like, "What is the Church? What's it's nature or essence? What is the mission or purpose of the Church," then you are doing ecclesiology.

Which is exactly what Romero was about in the recording you just heard. The sermon that clip was taken from was given on Pentecost Sunday, May 29th, 1977. Just 10 days before Romero gave this homily, the Salvadorian Armed Forces and National Guard used an ax to break open the Tabernacle in a Church in Aguilares (awe-gi-lar-es). Once inside they threw the sacred elements of the Eucharist on the ground, then trampled them with their boots. Now look, this is a really childish and dumb thing to do - sweat and strain to bust into a secured room just to stomp on some bread - unless other people consider those things to be sacred, and your only real intention is to insult those people.

Another time, a troop of government soldiers commandeered a church, forcing the priests and people out because they wanted to use the sanctuary as a barracks. Romero worked to remove the soldiers from the building, but when they refused, Romero asked if he could simply take the cups and plates, and the bread and wine used for the Eucharist somewhere else so they wouldn't be defiled. In response, a commanding officer turned and riddled the altar and Eucharistic elements with machine gun fire.

[MUSIC BEGINS]

Now please note, it is one thing to hear someone who has only ever experienced church as something they sometimes attend as an entertaining luxury talk about what they think the church is and could be. It is another thing to hear someone who learned to love, participate in, and think about the church in the kind of environment Romero did, talk to us about ecclesiology.

And in the sermon we sampled a moment ago, Romero tells us three things he recognized as essential characteristics of the church.

First, Romero says, quote, "the church is an experience of human openness to divine power" endquote. That means the church happens, the church exists in, prayer. Therefore, one of the primary missions of the church, is to pray.

Now, some today might be tempted to see prayer as otherworldly and ... well ... unproductive or useless. But Romero saw prayer as a central means for the people of the church to resist some of the most pervasive and deadly forces of our time. Like the selfishness and materialism that show up in both Marxism and Liberal Capitalism. The key here is to become people who recognize that when self, or material wealt become Lord of our lives, everything suffers, and so instead to let Jesus be Lord. And this is where prayer comes in. Romero says we can understand the depth of the phrase, "Jesus is Lord" only if we commune with God in prayer. Quote, "Those who do not pray because they kneel down before the god of materialism–be it money or politics or anything else–have not understood the true greatness of being a human person. To pray is to understand that this mystery of my existence as a man or a woman has limits." Endquote. And when prayer leads us to experience the limits of money and power and even our own lives and desires, we become a church that can learn to submit our time and energy and resources to divine things. And a church that can do that, might be quite useful.

[MUSIC]

Second, Romero says the church is a people of truth. But the Church is not guaranteed the truth because we're better or smarter than other people who might think differently or hold contrary opinions. The Church is given the assurance of the truth through the descent of the Holy Spirit, which is a gift of God, not something we attain by effort or birthright.

And the mark of whether or not the church has received the Spirit of truth is not off-the-charts IQs or Christians being appointed to head up academic departments or run corporations or nations, but, according to Romero, if we speak out for the oppressed in our preaching and writing, and actively stand against injustice and abuse.

The model Romero gives here is John the Baptist, who in the Gospels confronted King Herod for living with his brother's wife. And if this is the kind of ministry the Church carries out, the church is then also a people who will inevitably get in trouble. Because serpents don't like being told the truth.

It is at this point in the sermon that Romero spoke against those who profaned the Church in Aguilares (awe-gi-lar-es), asking why they needed to desecrate the symbol of the faith. But more importantly, he called the church to be the church by standing against such injustice in a Christian way. Namely, by condemning the actions, but not those who carried them out. To resist as Christians also meant that instead of offering condemnation, the church must be the place that opens doors for the perpetrators to change and experience forgiveness and healing.

[MUSIC BEGINS]

Third, Romero said the Church is a place of unity. Remember, Romero gave this sermon on Pentecost, and in the New Testament Pentecost is when the Holy Spirit enabled Jesus' disciples to speak in their own language, and yet for people from all over the world to hear what was said in their own tongues. From this, Romero named the key theme of unity in diversity.

Romero himself preached through the radio, and thousands listened. And the one message he gave all of those people was that the same Spirit of Pentecost had given every one of them a diversity of gifts and graces, so that they could use those gifts to help the Church become one. Quote, "No two leaves on a tree are the same. Unity means diversity and respect for what others think."

Pulling together his three points of unity in diversity, truth telling combined with healing and reconciliation, and all this being made possible and held together by communion with God's infinite goodness in prayer, Romero called his people to become the Church as they became like Christ and responded to the injustice of their world like Jesus responded to the injustice of his own. Quote, "In the face of this wave of defamation against the church, sisters and brothers, let us not forget that the church is beautiful. She is like those rocks of the ocean: when they are battered by waves, they are beautified with pearl-like streams; the waves polish the rocks and make them more gorgeous. This is the church at the present time. Let us experience her to the full!"

[MUSIC]

Now that all sounds like the kind of Church I want to be a part of. But where is it? The kind of church that Romero preached about doesn't seem attainable to most of us. But then I wonder, "Do I think it looked attainable to Romero or the people of El Salvador? When Jesus' disciples faced the same leaders and soldiers that crucified their Lord, do I think being this kind of church looked attainable before the Spirit was poured out at Pentecost?"

The truth is, it's not attainable, unless God is still involved.

This is the kind of thing that always looks impossible, until someone does it. And the Apostles, the Early Church, and St. Oscar Romero make us wonder, how much more is there to the church that we have yet to experience?

So in the conversation that follows, Kevin, Julius, and I talk through Romero's points to see how we might move from just talking ecclesiology and wanting to be part this kind of church, to becoming people who could help make our religious communities into this kind of church.

[MUSIC  TRANSITION TO:]


You ever wonder how some people from Jesus' own day missed it so badly when it came to recognizing and understanding who he was? According to the Gospels, this even happened with some of Jesus' own disciples. I'm thinking now of Luke chapter 9, when two disciples named James and John asked Jesus if he wanted them to call fire down from heaven to destroy a certain tribe of people who would not welcome Jesus because he didn't just want to visit them, but was also committed to ministering to another group that they hated.

Today, while many may not like institutional or traditional religion, its assumed everyone likes Jesus. But in Jesus' own day, he was a very controversial figure. I mean, the day he was crucified was not the first time people tried to kill him. Many loved him, yes, but there were others who tried to throw him off a cliff.

And the old adage that hindsight is twenty-twenty is a lie, one that makes it a little too easy to look back and assume that we would have recognized Jesus for who he really was, and that of course we would also be about the things Jesus would be about.

Think of it this way, Mary was an unwed peasant. So if the Incarnation were to have happened in our time, what would Mary look like to you? And so how would you, on first impressions alone, see her Son?

It's important for our growth in Christian formation too ask, in light of this, would you and I have paid them any attention, or would we have written them off? And if someone like that were to start challenging the way we think and live, what would our visceral reaction be?

It's important to ask, because he still shows up in similar ways to do these very things.

[MUSIC]

In theology, "Christology" means the way we think and talk about the truth and significance of Jesus, and the Christian faith is what it is because we balance the convictions that Jesus was truly God and truly human. So when looking specifically at the Incarnation, we cannot just talk about "the God that became human in Jesus," we also have to explore "what sort of human being God became".

But during the late-nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, theological reflection on the person of Christ tended to focus a little one-sidedly on Jesus' divinity. So it created some scandal when in the 1970's, and against this sort of theological backdrop, Óscar Romero published a pastoral letter which developed his understanding of the church's responsibility to the poor. Because in this letter Romero didn't just insist that people should be generous to the poor, but rather "identifies the reality of those who are poor and marginalized as both the way to understanding our world and the way to discern the presence of God and God's will in and for the world." Why the scandal? Because that means the kind of human being God became is a poor human being, and the way to understand our world properly is to become the kind of person who can see God's presence in the midst of those who are poor and suffering.

You can't make a claim much bigger than that. So how would Romero defend it?

In his teachings, Romero paid particular attention to the biblical portraits of Jesus's life, especially to those moments that happen between the Incarnation and Jesus' crucifixion. And after paying attention to Jesus' public life and ministry, Romero concluded that the face of Jesus Christ was to be found in the faces of the poor. In Romero's time and place, these were the campesinos, the poor and oppressed peasant farmers of El Salvador. 

Romero states that

"We now have a better understanding of what the incarnation means, what it means to say that Jesus really took human flesh and made himself one with his brothers and sisters in suffering, in tears and laments, in surrender. I am not speaking of universal incarnation. This is impossible. I am speaking of an incarnation that is preferential and partial: incarnation in the world of the poor." (129)

Now, just in case you might start to feel defensive or wary that Romero is laying the foundation for something like a class conflict, let's balance this with another part of his teaching. Romero was capable or incredible nuance, and elsewhere he argued, "When we say 'For the Poor', we do not take sides with one social class, ... What we do ... is invite all social classes, rich and poor without distinction, saying to everyone: Let us take seriously the cause of the poor as though it were our own -– indeed, as what it really is, the cause of Jesus Christ, who on the final judgment day will call to salvation those who treated the poor with faith in him," then Romero quotes Jesus' own words from Matthew 25, "'Whatever you did to one of these poor ones–the neglected, the blind, the lame, the deaf, the mute–you did to me.'"

[MUSIC BEGINS]

So let's return for a moment to one of our introductory questions -- if the Incarnation were to have happened in our time, who would Jesus be, and would we have responded in recognition, acceptance, and love? 

Romero puts it bluntly: "Look at the poor. How much do you love them? That will tell you how much you love Jesus."

In the conversation that follows, Julius, Kevin and I dive deeper into how Romero might help us name and deal with some of the things that block us from being able to hear Christ's voice and recognize his presence in our own time and place.

[MUSIC  TRANSITION TO:]


Julius: If you're listening to all things , trying, Sounds like a radio show.

Wilson: I always funny whenever you start, I always put myself in like the contrarian listener. Like how do you know I'm actually listening.

Julius: know. That's good.

Wilson: You might be coming through my car speakers, but I don't have to listen. That's . Maybe

Julius: hearing, but are you

Kevin: you, you two, four is over here trying to reflect your rebellious heart. Yeah,

Julius: Precisely.

Wilson: know me.

Kevin: don't know me,

Wilson: You don't know what I'm about.

Julius: But anyway, we are, uh, this is Julius and I'm joined by Kevin and Will, and as Will joked in the last take, we are joined by Oscar Romero as well. His

Wilson: I was not joking. See, I can't, Now I'm in the contrarian mood and That's right.

Julius: Half

Wilson: But also it's true. I wasn't joking.

Julius: Yeah, mostly true. Absolutely true, but we're picking up today on, um, the series on Romero.

And, um, today we're talking about ecclesiology, which is basically, um, the theology of what, um, the church is and what it means to be the church. And it's, um, it's, I think it's particularly, Important for us to talk about this as, um, we've mentioned before that Romero's theology stem, like his approach to theology was not primarily as like an academic or a scholar, but as a, a pastor, a priest, an archbishop.

And so that, um, all of his work and his writings and theology and ministry is tied up with the church. And so we just heard, uh, the beginning of that story, um, a quote where Rome talks about, um, what the church is. And so today we wanna unpack that. So Kevin, um, We'll start, we'll start here. You mentioned that Romero's characterization of the church rejects, uh, materialism in both ways.

And um, and like we'd mentioned, Rome's ministry demonstrates us a sort of theology that is embodied and very material in a sense. It's concerned with the material, concrete needs of the people of God in his community is particular congregation in church, especially as it comes to like feeding and caring for the poor and the oppressed.

And so keeping that in mind, what does Romero have to say about what it looks like for the church to be open to God and prayer? To be open to transcendence in an embodied, but not in a materialistic way.

Kevin: Yeah, I mean, I feel like you just answered that right. There is, um, the, the mission and the life of the church for Romero, as he would say, is to cultivate a people of prayer. And not to focus on materialism. And so the quote there is, he, he rejects both the materialism. I mean, here we're getting socioeconomical and political, um, with rejecting both the materialism of Marxist, um, communism and also, uh, the materialism of, of capitalism.

Mm-hmm. . So here's another. Quote from another sermon that Romero talks about, but he says essentially that both of these kind of materialisms have an atheistic core. And he says that, um, the type of atheism logically includes the systemic rejection of the transcendental values that nourish the Christian's hope.

And so he said he pretty much defines materialism as anything that tr uh, denies or rejects any transcendental values of God, of the Christian, and especially of the. And then also in this sermon that we just heard, he talks about that the church should, should cultivate a life of prayer, in essence, looking to God and worshiping God, which means you reject and the, the kneeling and bowing down and worship of the God of materialism and the God of, uh, these two other, uh, systems.

And so he goes on to say even more. He says, The church knows this all too well, both in theory and from experience. It is therefore absurd to say that the church has become Marxist since Marxist materialism destroys the church's transcendent. Transcendent meaning a Marxist church, when that would be not only self-destructive, but senseless.

but there is an atheism that is closer at hand and more dangerous to our church. It is the atheism of capitalism in which material possessions are set up as idols and take God's place. And then he goes on to, uh, quote Vatican two. And then he says here, in a capitalism that idolizes money in human goods is as danger for us, as serious as the other, and perhaps more than the other, which gets the blame for all evil.

And so he says, essentially goes on to say both our atheism and that the church should embrace and remember her own origin and that's can only be cultivated in the life of prayer. Mm-hmm. is when you're constantly face to face in prayer with God and communion with Christ and with the communion of the saints.

Um, and prayer is a way to do that. Now when I say that, I know, I know prayer, uh, how do I say this? Um, I know prayer. And actions and like distribution of goods somehow have become competitive with each other or like against each other in recent

Wilson: we're materialistic

Kevin: Yes. Uh, but for Romero, that is, that is not the case.

That is not the case for Romero at all. Prayer and like distributing goods, uh, he would say like, Why are you dividing those two? Mm-hmm. , why are like prayers? Prayers and actions. Like, what, what, what the, what is that? And so he also like, so that's, You just heard him saying that. So it sounds like, Oh, the church only cares about spirituality.

Right? Spiritual things like prayer, um, therefore is not, they're not concerned with giving. But then he have Romero who also says this, He says that we should not feel it's superior when we help anyone. Those who give materially receive spiritually. There's an exchange of property that is understood only in a true spirit of poverty, which makes the rich field.

They are close brothers and sisters of the poor and makes the poor feel there are equal givers and not inferior to the rich. The giving is mutual, that there may be qua equality as St. Paul says. And so you have even Romero saying like, Yes, the church would be about about prayer, but then he also exhorts and commands and, and, um, orders and Christians to give materially Yeah.

And to give goods and all. And as a way of also shedding off this materialism that is in all of us. Um, and so that we're not, And so there's a connection that that prayer keeps us grounded in God. And also from prayer we. give. The reason we can give materially, materially is because we're not succumbed to the God of materialism.

We're not infected with that disease. You know, if that makes. To.

Wilson: So I just think now to jump in and help the listener and other people like receive some of the wisdom, uh, and move towards more faithful practice living from Romero. I think, um, Unpacking some of that stuff, um, where Romero would say, Or maybe even just like starting with the question, so why do we need something transcendent and why do we need God Yeah.

For these things to hold together well, Right. Well, um, on the like Marxist materialism side, you take something that's good, that Romero, that the church, that scripture that the Christian tradition would say is good, and that's equality. That's justice. That's everyone having. Yeah. That is something that's good, but when you make something that is good, the ultimate good, the only possible end, then just watch what happens when, Right.

You try to make that happen. Yeah. And watch what other evils you justify in order to, for us in our power right now. Because that's the only ultimate goal. That's the only right thing that does matter. Look at, look at the kind of violence that we would justify in order to bring this in goal around. Right.

Kevin: And that in Romero, in his time, there was a liberation is movements around him that. Would, um, use violence as a means to, you know, a good end. Right. And Romero completely opposed that. And even stay to like the, the, the people who were being oppressed, who took up arms as revolutionaries.

He even said like, You cannot use violence. Yeah.

Wilson: And points out that yes, that and . Here's where like, anyway, whatever. it's Will shama sd.org

Kevin: I thought you gonna put my name in there?

Julius: Yeah, it's

Wilson: No, man. It's the. That you gotta No, that'd be exactly what Romero would call it. Like, yeah, I wouldn't, you know, if I'm gonna do this, I'm not gonna pawn the violence off on you like you have to. But the um, I think what, and this is what I'd say like, yes, Romero points us out for us, but as a saint, like he shows us what the church and what Christian thought and revelation points out for us. Is that when you do that, like the one step that you know, I've heard people, and you could even empathize, right? Again, that's not saying I agree, but you can empathize with people when they would say something like, Well, this is justifiable because they're the oppressors, they brought the violence upon themselves, whatever.

But you're not just doing violence to them.

Kevin: Mm-hmm.

Wilson: But when you engage in it, you're doing violence to yourself and you're doing violence to the people that care about you. And inevitably you do violence to the very people you're trying to save because this is this, when he said, like in the quote there, when you just brutally meet force with force, it just keeps the same thing going.

It. Feeds the monster, right? So that's on the material, the, uh, Marxist materialist side. But then on the capital, which this is one thing that I love, like good thinking, helps you realize, Oh, shoot, I thought capitalism and Marxism were polar opposites. , no, they're polar opposites in being about the same thing, right?

But that's where there's, they have that same commonality as the materialism because it's just a different way to treat material goods as the ultimate final end.

Kevin: mm-hmm. . Mm-hmm.

Wilson: then when you do that, you do violence to your own soul. You do violence to those around you, right? So if he points out and in his witness and in other places, he explicitly says like, Hey, this is the shortcoming of this school of thought.

This is the shortcoming of this school of thought and the economics that like go hand in hand with it. So why something transcendent. Well, and that, right what it fails to do. You have to have something beyond that good. Right? That, that allows you to even treat it as good. Right? But that's the thing. Like for, for material things to be good.

In their full potential. They have to play part in a larger wholeness, a larger goodness, like they in and of themselves can't hold it all together. There's gotta be something beyond them, a larger goodness that that gives them their place and within that framework, within within that larger flourishing, then material goods really can be good.

And so you have to have those transcendent values and really you just. Unpacking this, keep pulling on the threads. There has to be something genuinely transcendent of us, of anything created to hold it all together in harmony or like without that, it inevitably devolves into some kind of violence for the same reasons.

You know, you, you, we just kind of talked through how it happens in materialist Marxism and materialist capitalism, but you just place any other finite good in an ultimate place, and you just walk it through and let it play. Like in, in the arena of history, and you see the same process unfold over and over and over again.

And so prayer and worship is that place where Christians come together. And this is, it's not anti material, right? Right. That's the thing is it's materialist I or material is, um, that ick. And the, um,

Kevin: self exist. Yeah.

Wilson: come from that move of putting something good, you know, a finite good in the place of a transcendent.

Right. And that's, that's the irony of it, is you can be, uh, an atheistic Marxist, but you are implicit implicitly treating something as an infinite, finite godlike thing. You know? Um, there's, there's really no atheism, but atheism is just putting something that's not God in the place of God. There, there's really no way around it.

And so what Christian prayer and the church is the body of people that engage, that learns to understand ourselves and our world through things like prayer and worship, and prayer. And worship uses stuff. It uses words, it uses incense, it uses movement. It uses song, it uses sound, it uses bread, food, you know, all this stuff.

It uses the stuff. But to teach us in a way where, where here's Ramirez's thing in a. To teach us to be open to God. Yeah. To see that the material world and this stuff is a way to open up and that makes us into the kind of people, right? That that's how, that's how our material goods, these finite things could open up on this transcendent goodness, because we've learned to see it in that framework.

So now when we're out there in the world and we're feeling the pinch because, well, I'm scared that I'm not. Be able to pay rent or whatever it is, but to, instead of seeing it as this is the good thing, it's a tool to open up to good. And I find God and generosity, right? And so in that practice of worship and prayer, we can be the people that would use that stuff in a, in a way that opens us to transcendence.

Kevin: There's a question here in the same that, uh, that Ro Romero says, uh, this play, this is what I love. Cuz you get into politics, when you start talking about it. Uh, but this, these two systems of, uh, Marxism and capitalism, um, Romero has this fascinating quote or a question. He says, quote, which is more serious.

So think like Marxist first, capitalism second, which is more serious on the one hand to deny God out of a false idea of human liberation, or to deny him out of selfishness. Raise the level of idolatry.

Wilson: There it is.

Kevin: And more questions. Who are the greater hypocrites? Those who believe in this world, to the point of denying openly what is transcendent, or those who use what is transcendent and religious as a tool and justification for their idolatry of the earth.

Both are atheism with where Meryl says,

Julius: So if you were to summarize kind of like, uh, so we're talking about like Romero's ecclesiology, which is like, what is to be said about like what the church is. What would you kind of like sum up that point? Is that the church is. Something like the church is a body of people, but that, um, and that is like an embodied material reality, but it's not purely materialistic.

Kevin: Yeah. It's, it's focused on something more, something transcended like Will said something deeper. Yeah. Um, uh, I think Romero will say better than I can. Um, here's another quote. I'm just sharing quotes left and right here. That's perfect. And so,

Julius: Uh,

Kevin: the church quote, The church cannot seek only liberation of a temporal nature.

The church does not want to liberate poor people so that they can have more, but rather wants them to be more.

Julius: Mm

Kevin: She promotes people so that they are more, The church is hardly concerned with having more or having less. She is interested in making sure that all persons, whether they have many possessions or not, make progress and become true human beings and children of.

Julius: Hmm.

Wilson: Should I, could I take a stab and, uh, as the Rome expert, I'll defer if you don't.

Kevin: for

Wilson: but I'll take a shot at from our conversations and what, what you've told me and what I'm hearing here. Like, it's like, what is the church? I mean, I don't think, I'm sure I am certain on this point, uh, having done a fractional amount of the reading and study that Kevin has on, on Romero, but I'm pretty, pretty certain on this point that Romero would say the church is the body of Christ in the world.

Right. And that's, and that's where like, through that, you know, it just, it just kind of goes to show. Um, Well, I guess this as far as not, not defining it in like a, an ideal way or what really what the church really is, but just descriptive of the church in North America. The church is a people who have forgotten their own identity.

Yeah. . So, and that just goes, when I say something like the church is the body of Christ, how much work? How we, how hard it is to do this in a 30 minute

Julius: yeah, I know, I know

Wilson: Because, because of that forgetfulness where people would say, Oh yeah, sure, the body of Christ. But what does that have to do with blank?

Yeah. What does that have to do with, you know, generosity? What does that have to do with politics, economics? It feels like you're kind of sneaking some stuff in here. No, no, no. Like it comes through the body of Christ. Right. Uh, so the ways I put it here, The word ecclesiology, right, is the eia and then logs.

So the rationality, the study, the talk about the eia and the EIA was not a word that Christians invented. That was a word that was round for a while. That just meant, uh, a, a people that had been called together for a purpose. Right. Been called out of everyday life together for a certain purpose. And it was a political term because the most, like, well known common, like the most common usage of the word EIA, was a group of rulers who had been called out of daily business to get together to do politics, to talk about the state of the city and how we're gonna run this stuff

Julius: Mm-hmm.

Wilson: And so now, The Christian reworking of that term is people who have been called out of our everyday business in life to come together as the body of Christ and as the body of Christ through him. Through that kind of, which this implies all the stuff we talk about, that openness to God, Christ is the one.

With flesh and blood that met us here and opened the doors to transcendence for us and invited us to partake in his life. And as we continue to do that, we become the kind of people who learn to deal with the world the way Jesus did. So we learn first to, to use, to understand everything in a way that leads to overall flourishing and goodness that would honor and, and let the glory of the Creator show through it.

Right? Um, and then in that the people who train. Through prayer, through worship, through virtue to be the kinds of people who could even imperfectly go out in the world and do it as if Jesus were still walking around today.

Kevin: yeah,

Wilson: Ecclesiology?

Kevin: yeah. I hear, Oh. Like we become who we're always meant to be. We become our true selves. We become

Wilson: Mm-hmm.

Kevin: truly human. Who? Human beings.

Wilson: Oh, you were, You didn't, didn't you just say, When Romero would give the Eucharist out, he would tell the person, become who you.

Kevin: Augustine.

Wilson: Oh, was Augustine. That's all right. Okay, so there we go. So now I'll hand it to you. You, I butchered it. You, you,

Kevin: say when, when, uh, when Saint Augustine of Hippo would, uh, give the Eucharist to the church, he would say, As he's holding the consecrated, uh, body and blood, um, become who you are as people will receive it. And so like, I mean, that's a picture of the church as well.

The church should be the place is the place. Yes, we fail, but is the place that God created where we become truly human. Like where Rome says become true human beings and children of God. It's, it's more about becoming and.

Julius: So I, I think that that summary of Romero's ecclesiology, especially as you, um, talk about being like the, the body of Christ, Were to take that, understand that in a very real way, that the church embodies Christ's presence here on Earth. Uh, it makes me think about, um, What the gospels say about Jesus And how so?

Um, so much of that is tied up with like the, the activity and the work of the Holy Spirit. I think about like the, the spirit drives like Christ into the wilderness and like the spirit compels, um, Christ to he, like when he's at the synagogue. Like, um, reading that, um, the scripture, uh, about like, uh, the, the spirit kind of descending on.

Um, to, to preach a good news to the captive. Um, that if we are to, to take that seriously, that we are the body of Christ, that we are to embody Christ's true presence here and now. Like we can't divorce that from the activity and the enlivening of the Holy Spirit. And so as we kind of move towards the latter half, um, I think talking about like, um, The church, not just as a body, as we might understand it in purely materialistic terms like this, as we've kind of established, like the church is open to transcendence, as open to God.

And so we, we've gotta talk about, um, the presence and the work of the Holy Spirit in both, um, I guess holding together and unifying the body of Christ. And also, um, you. Through, like these ramer quotes have mentioned that, um, the church is led by the spirit of truth. Can you talk first, um, before we kinda move into the unity portion of it, can you talk more about how the church is led by the Holy Spirit and specifically like the spirit of truth in how we eat?

Kevin: Yeah, so Romero here quotes, uh, John 1426 where Jesus says to the, the disciples, the church. , I will send you the spirit of truth. Um, and so the spirit of truth and the, the day that Romero is preaching, the sermon is on Pentecost Sunday. And so he is, that's why he's talking about the church. I mean, what a perfect day to talk about the nature of the church and the mission of the church on Pentecost.

And so he talks about the spirit descending upon the disciples and creating the church and the spirit is the spirit of truth. And so we kind of flesh out what is the church, the body of Christ, and what is a mission? The mission of the church here, Romero, Um, in the context of El Salvador, he's, he highlights the spirit of the truth.

So here is, uh, One of the missions of the church is to be a a people of truth. Yeah, a truthful people. Um, and he writes this because in the newspapers and in the, um, uh, radio stations and El Salvador, the church, her priests, her people are being defamed, uh, slandered. Um, there's half truths, there's ambiguity, ambi, uh, ambiguities, um, and all things like that.

I mean, there's nothing that in America, but, um, Um, but there's, there's all this stuff about the church. And so where Romero is calling the church's, like, We need to be a people who speak truth. We need to preach truth, right? Truth speak, uh, against the lies. Clarify ambiguities, dispel half truths, and he says, Which are worst in lies?

and the church would be like her prophets who spoke against lies and justices and abuses. Um, and so he, he c he calls forth and he says, even like the humble farmer can, even by being filled with the spirit of truth, can also detect these lies. Um, and so even they have an oblig, uh, a calling to speak against lies.

And so, um, So the, a ministry of the church is to be a people who speak truth and which is like, I mean, this is not easy stuff at all because when you speak truth to power, um, it tends to buy back When you poke the bear, it tends to like mall. You

Julius: he stew.

Kevin: tends to, um, but for Romero is like, we're, we're, we're, we're called to be a people who are not.

All about lies. We're not built on lies, we're not built on has truth. Half truth. We, we we're built on truth and we we're built on telling the truth about each other and also the truth about society, the truth about our world. Um, and this is a ministry, uh, that the, that God has called the church. And so, and to do it obviously in this posture of humility and love, but nevertheless to speak out against, you know, lies.

Uh, one of the things in the sermon that I love is that he says like, Say, like, speak the truth. Say this is alive. You see something that's wrong about the church, uh, in the newspaper and it, but he, then he says, If you have doubts, go to someone who can enlighten you, an expert in ecclesiastical history or theology.

And he says The truth of the church is not some hidden treasure. It's out there. And so he says, like, even educate yourself to train yourself in detecting lies and speaking the truth. Um, even though you may have self doubt or insecurities about.

Wilson: It's so pull in part one about the political dimension, nature of the body and how we use things and material and out this, the spirit of truth, like. And, uh, you know, El Salvador is a as tense as things are in North America in 2022.

Julius: Mm-hmm.

Wilson: You know, still Romero would be like, kidding me, That's like a beach vacation.

People, like, I got shot in the, in the middle of mass, you know, like, um, So well, Well, okay, so now, shoot, that's the, for, for many people, you know, and I've had, I have lost family, you know, I have family that have lost people in church services Yeah. Because of gun violence, you know, so it, it's, it's not as, uh, we'd say what would.

there are differences, right? So I'm not the expert, you know, and so taking don't really have the time now to, to flesh out particularities of the differences, right? But while there are differences, thinking about what it is in our place, you know, in North America in 2022, most, so those of you listeners who aren't in North America would.

Julius: Right.

Wilson: You know, we'll leave it to you too. You know, I won't pretend to be the expert

Kevin: Who are you and

Wilson: your

Kevin: reach out to us.

Wilson: uh, it's will shama sd.org. But,

Julius: with one L,

Wilson: but dang it, that was on purpose. I had not told that. I had not made that clear.

Kevin: Anyway, um,

Wilson: what am I talking about? Oh, so. So let's just say like you're, you're a typical ish person sitting on your computer looking at what's going on, and there's things inside of you that are just like, No, no, no, Not that.

Oh, not that either, right? Um, and then you hear or you see something that just flat out attacks your faith. Right. And your spirit inside is like, But that's not my faith. That's not the God. I know that's not, But I could understand why people would think that. Right? Where I go with that is like the spirit of truth is the spirit of truth.

And if there's been a place in your life where you have, have. Just had this spirit minister to you internally, spiritually, like give you the grace that you need to carry you on. Like that's a, that's great. And we can, we can make the mistake, just like with materialist material and material, different ways of.

Turning from the material world to materialism and being materialistic, we can make the mistake of over spiritualizing things for sure. We can over spiritualize it. So where it's like, you know what I, I do have some extra money. I do have time, but you know, I think it's enough that I feel sad for that person over there that's hungry

You know? And you can over spiritualize it for and miss out on the opportunity to really be the body to participate. Being the church, right? But it can go the other way where you can under spiritualize it too. the spirit has given you that, pay attention to the truth that God has given you that right, But then also as the spirit of truth.

I mean, think about all the dimensions of that confession. It's the spirit of truth. If God has met you that way in your inner being in your life, that is who God is. all the time in all the dimensions. And so that God of generosity is the same God of generosity. If you switch it from the spiritual internal dimension to the external material, one, God is the God of grace and generosity.

And if you know that truth, witness to that truth, right? So when we speak out the truth, it doesn't just mean, you know, clap back on Reddit. It means show people the truth. Give them tangible experiences of that grace flowing through you. Right? So then it's not just an abstract argument, it's it's genuine existential cognitive dissonance where it's like, Man, I thought these Christians, but then that day, Right. And, and you, you share, you give, And that's a, that's, you know, knowing the spirit of truth and witnessing being, being moved to communicate that in words. Sure. But also there are many, many, think of all the ways God communicates, can communicate. Yeah. God's generosity and goodness to us. You know, even just the generosity of it.

There is a world and there's. And so I might live today, right? And all the ways God can communicate generosity, that becomes our language too, as the body of Christ.

Julius: Yeah. Uh, to kind of wrap up this, this portion on truth and how, um, this, the Holy Spirit leads the church into truth, we've talked a bit about kind of, and it's given me a lot to sit with myself to, to think about how, um, we're empowered and called by the Holy Spirit to represent the truth about Christ and the body of Christ.

Um, and, and I'm thinking about like, um, Why Romero kind of focuses on this aspect of where the spirit leads the church and why he talks about truth. And I think about kind of his, his cultural context and background, and we've talked about kind of some of the socioeconomic and political stuff, um, is an aspect of, of the truth that he's kind of speaking about, like representing the truth of.

Like reality as it is of just like when, when I think about, um, the call for the church to kind of address injustices and to speak truth to power and to kind of, um, call out like oppression and things that aren't working, that it feels like that work of truth is also about like, representing the truth of the, of reality as God has intended it to be.

Would you say that that's like an aspect. What Romero talks about as well in connecting the church's mission to the spirit of truth.

Kevin: Oh, for sure. It's to, uh, the, the phrase that came to mind is to the church should remind, um, or yeah, remind the world like what the world is, right? And the church should be the church and be the, be the kind of world that God. wants the world to be like, the whole, the whole purpose, the whole destiny is that the world becomes the church.

Right. In the sense of like, that's, that's where it is all going. You read, you read the book of Revelation. It's like the whole new heaven and new Earth, like the church should be a preview of that. Yeah. And the church is like the end game.

Wilson: And there, and there is no temple

Kevin: and there. Yeah. Yeah. Mm mm. Yeah. Exactly.

Um, and so the church should be the kind of world that it's gonna exist at the end. Um, and so for Romero, Yeah, that's that truth. It's essentially that. And so wherever, so you have that view of the future, I mean, this is getting into Romero's, uh, Es eschatology, which is another episode, But you have that view of what the church is at the end and what the church is now, and then all the dissonances along the way.

The lies. Yeah. All, all the, all the, you know, divergence, all the, the contradictions between what the church is at the end of ages and what the world is, is what the church can speak out towards and name those, um, you know, uh, contradictions or, uh, things that are opposing, uh, against each other. And so this is, That's why I love Romero.

It's cuz he says things like, Yeah, uh, you know, liberal capitalism and Marxist communism is not the way of the church and not gonna be there at the end anyways. And so the church should reject that cuz the church is transcended, um, is another way of saying that the church is eschatological. Um, and so yeah, it's, so all these things is, is trying to.

It's for all speaking this truth and revealing what the church is in relation to the world is not this sense of like, I'm gonna speak the truth because you guys are all wrong and therefore like you need to be, you know, corrected. It's more like I'm doing, We're revealing this truth for the sake of the

Julius: Yeah.

Kevin: For the sake, for the world can be like, oh, that's what reality is. Let's join that. Yeah. You know, and so it's always, as a sense of ministry, it's always has a sense of like, um, yeah.

Julius: Yeah. Well I love that that that highlights kind of the missional aspect of Romero's ecclesiology that in, in the church, uh, being like what it is, like what we were talking about with like the Augustine thing, right? Be, become like who you are or like you truly are. That, that, um, in doing so, that, that is for the sake of inviting the world into like, God has intended reality to be.

So if that's like, if that's part of what the church's vocation is, then um, this last, this last part, I'd love to kind of explore that, like in order to embody that, like a kind of reality that we want to invite people into as like full communion with God in one another that we need. To be like united in a very real sense.

And that you've talked in, in the script, and based on the Romero quotes, you've talked about how the Holy Spirit is the guaranteed unity for the church. Can you talk more about, um, What, uh, yeah, just kind of expand on what Romero means by that, especially kind of given his background where there's lots of tension and disunity and lots of just like animosity between different groups.

Like, um, what does the guarantee of unity in the spirit look like for the church, and how can we move towards that?

Kevin: Yeah, I mean, this connects pretty well with what I said last time, is that, um, so here's a difference between the church and the world in terms of like the, the things that are are contradictory. Opposed to each other is that the world cannot help but be divisive. Mm-hmm. , um, you cannot, you can look for unity in the world, but there's, it's only because of God's spirit that there is like resemblance of it.

And the church is called to be that place where, uh, unity happens. And so for Romero, he says that church is the places where all languages are come together. Uh, all peoples, all nations of the whole world come together and worship in love to the one God in prayer. And this is, I mean, you have the notion of revelation.

You have the notion of Pentecost, where the church is actually a people who are united cross boundaries, cross cultures, cross ethnicities, cross you know, socioeconomic status. Um, and this is one aspect of unity. He highlights. Another thing he highlights is that, uh, he uses an analogy that al a tree, that new, no two leaves on the tree are alike.

And he says, like the church, the spirit has given diverse gifts to a diverse people. And so he says, Some of you're called to be priests. Some of you're called to be bishops. Uh, you know, religious monks, nuns, laborers, farmers. But you all contribute to the body. Yeah. You know, all of you, all of us contribute cuz those are spiritual gifts.

And the spirit gives always for the purpose of unity and always for the purpose of building the body. And so the spirit is this,

Wilson: we'll see how these things flow in and

Kevin: unites us in the

Wilson: is, I mean, this is the trinity, right? There's unity and distinction. And anytime you try to like, uh, overemphasize one part, you lose the other part. That's just very, as much a part of the trinity, right?

If you overemphasize the unity, you lose the distinction of the persons. Mm-hmm. , right? You over emphasize the distinction. You lose the unity. So just like, if this is the reality, That really is the transcendent reality of the world that we're being called into, and the spirit's witnessing to that. You'll see this kind of thing flowing in and out of the issues and the distinct things that we, we focus on.

So how I'm seeing that happen, I mean, I'm sure it's happening in lots of ways. How I'm seeing it happen is through talking about the spirit witnessing in our inner being. Right? And that's dispositionally. That's where I tend to start. It's like inside, because that's where I tend to spend most of my time. But from there, But that spirit meets me there. Yes, but that also doesn't let me stay there. So help me see, okay, if this, But I'm showing you here who God is. God is the same God there, right? So engage in the world that way. That's the source of our unity. And so the church is gonna experience everything that the world experiences.

Julius: We

Wilson: We, I was just talking with the pastor yesterday who was sitting with person, somebody who's been very hurt by the church, which is, I mean, that's just general details, but also who doesn't know someone who's in that kind of place? The church is gonna experience that, but if it's the spirit giving our unity, right, It's the spirit of reconciliation, the spirit of God that gives our unity, not the fact that the church isn't gonna. Right. Or be hurt, right? So this leads to like the unity flowing out into the world. We, we learn to become together. And even towards the world, like Romero says, even those who, like we, you're not our enemies on our end, but only if you set yourself as our enemy. This is why he keeps to define what the church is.

That's what I love so much about that quote is we don't just come in here and play the same games, meet force by force, but what I've tried to do as your bishop is just define what the church is. And, and give you the theological resources and to be the kind of leader that would lead you into being the church, right?

Um, and so when that happens, we learn that it's, it's the spirit that gives our unity. Not that we're all perfect people or even good people, not common interest. You know, it's not a special interest group. It's not, it's not a club that likes this board game or whatever it is, right? It's the spirit. So when it happens, we tell the truth.

Do that really hurt. That was wrong. You can't keep doing that. And as my brother and sister in Christ, when I was hurting, I expected more. You tell the truth, but you can tell that truth and remain together because the ultimate truth is the God that can heal and reconcile. And so we become people of forgiveness to the world.

That is our politics, is we become people of reconciliation and forgiveness. Right now, we don't jump to it because then you're not actually reconciling and healing. You're ignoring and you're telling you're lying. Right? You're creating a fantasy. But the kind of people that can face head on, live through the worst of the world and still move to a transcendent end, that is good.

That is peace. So, concrete examples of that, I think of, and I wanted to do this too partially because earlier I, my mouth got going fast and I talked myself into a corner and then like I was on the fly, right? So I mentioned church shootings and that I had fam, So to clarify, I think it, it'd be more accurate to say I have family that I love and I'm close with who has lost

Julius: Mm-hmm.

Wilson: So like I, I met the people that lost their lives that lost, or I met some of the people through family that, uh, lost their lives in, uh, church shooting in southeast Texas, um, or a couple years ago. But the point being there, that church and how, and I've also, because of that, I've heard like conversations going on with the person that's now the pastor at that church and what the board is doing and the decisions they're making.

On the other end of that, they're still a church. and they're still learning what to do together and they're reckoning with what to do with the family of the person that perpetrated the violence and how to be the church to those people. I think of like the Amish church school, the church or school shooting, where their response was to set up funds for the children of the shooter cuz they lost their dad too.

Julius: Mm.

Wilson: You know. Oh, wow. Um, and I, I think of in the middle of everything raging in North America in 2022, summer, I think of my friends that in the middle of that, right, they already have a lot of kids. Uh, one of them is in a tough spot, so they're really, really struggling to pay their bills, but they're still, uh, taking in foster children and working to adopt them.

And they've adopted two foster children. Right That, that hearing the spirit do in them what the spirit does, and then finding ways to live it out. That's, that is the politics of the church, but that is also the unity that's possible in the Holy Spirit. The kind of, the kind of unity that heals and reconciles the divisions, the tears, the pain, and the hurt that our world is currently experiencing.


Óscar Romero as Mentor 2: Christ of the Poor


INTRO:

There's a saying, I'm sure you've heard it: "It always looks impossible until someone does it." We understand this truth, and greatly value it, when it comes to something like innovation.

Electricity, indoor plumbing, and flying machines all looked impossible to most of our ancestors. And we're glad someone did things that proved them to be realistic.

100 years ago every single standing athletic world record looked impossible.

When I was a kid, touch interfaces and video calls were the stuff of science fiction.

Then someone did it. So now we all do it, and think nothing of how wondrous what we are doing actually is.

The greatest things always look impossible ... Until someone does it.

In this series, we just want to help you notice how strange it is, then, that we tend to fail to appreciate this same principle when it comes to other things our age does not tend to value a much. Like ancient and religious things.

Why does the gospel seem so impossible to us, when history if full of saints who have done it? Who have lived in ways that show us what is really possible when we trust God's presence and help.

This time we explore how Oscar Romero can help us consider the possibility that Jesus is still very much present in the daily realities of our time and place, and if we can't see this, it might just be that we're not looking in the right places.

[TRANSITION TO ALL THINGS INTRO]

STORY:

[MUSIC BEGINS/CONTINUES]

[Episode 3: True Independence can come to us only from Christ. Pt I - 18:20-19:31; Pt. II - 19:33-20:54]

Y en la segunda lectura también se habla de esta presencia cuando Santiago nos dice a los cristianos: “No quieran unir dos extremos irreconciliables: la fe en nuestro Señor Jesucristo glo- rioso y la acepción de personas”. Es inconcebible que se diga a alguien “cristiano” y no tome, como Cristo, una opción prefe- rencial por los pobres. Es un escándalo que los cristianos de hoy critiquen a la Iglesia porque piensa por los pobres. ¡Eso ya no es cristianismo! El cristianismo verdadero es el Cristo que le dice, por medio de Santiago, al cristiano: “Es irreconciliable. Si tienes fe en el Señor Jesucristo glorioso, trata como a hermanos iguales a ricos y pobres; que no te engañe la apariencia”

Es que muchos, queridos hermanos, creen que cuando la Iglesia dice “por los pobres”, ya se está haciendo comunista, ya haciendo política, oportunista. No. ¡Si esta ha sido la doctrina de siempre! La lectura de hoy no fue escrita en 1979, Santiago escribió hace veinte siglos. Lo que pasa es que los cristianos de hoy nos hemos olvidado de las lecturas sagradas, que deben re- gir la vida de los cristianos. Cuando decimos “por los pobres”, no nos parcializamos hacia una clase social. Fíjense bien, lo que decimos —dice Puebla— es una invitación a toda las clases so- ciales, sin distinción de ricos y pobres; a todos les decimos: “To- memos en serio la causa de los pobres como si fuera nuestra propia causa; más aún, como de verdad es: es la causa de Jesu- cristo, que en el día de juicio final te dirá que solo se salvan los que atendieron al pobre con fe en él: ‘Todo lo que hiciste a uno de esos pobrecitos marginados, ciegos, cojos, sordos, mudos, a mí me lo hiciste’”.

Translation of Part I:

God's presence is also a theme in the second reading, in which James tells the Christians, «Do not try to unite two irreconcilable extremes: faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ and personal prejudice» (James 2:1). It is inconceivable that people call themselves Christians and not have a preferential option for the poor, as Christ himself did. It is scandalous that Christians of today criticize the church because she thinks about the poor. That's not Christianity! True Christianity is what Christ tells Christians through James: «If you have faith in the glorious Lord Jesus Christ, then treat your rich and poor brothers and sisters as equals. Don't be deceived by appearances». (Applause)

Translation of Part II:

There are many people, dear sisters and brothers, who think that when the church says she is «for the poor», she is becoming communist and opportunist, meddling in politics. Not so. This has always been the doctrine! Today's reading was not written in 1979. Saint James wrote it twenty centuries ago. But we Christians of today have forgotten these sacred readings that should guide the lives of all Christians. When we say «for the poor», we are not taking sides with one social class. Pay close attention. What we are doing, following Puebla, is extending an invitation to all social classes, without distinction between rich and poor. To everyone we say, «Let us all take seriously the cause of the poor as if it were our own cause, or even as if it were the cause of Jesus Christ, which it truly is. For on the day of the final judgment he will declare that only those who helped the poor out of faith in him will be saved: "Whatever you did for one of these poor folks--the marginalized, the blind, the crippled, the deaf, the mute--you did it for me"» (Matt 25:40).


You ever wonder how some people from Jesus' own day missed it so badly when it came to recognizing and understanding who he was? According to the Gospels, this even happened with some of Jesus' own disciples. I'm thinking now of Luke chapter 9, when two disciples named James and John asked Jesus if he wanted them to call fire down from heaven to destroy a certain tribe of people who would not welcome Jesus because he didn't just want to visit them, but was also committed to ministering to another group that they hated.

Today, while many may not like institutional or traditional religion, its assumed everyone likes Jesus. But in Jesus' own day, he was a very controversial figure. I mean, the day he was crucified was not the first time people tried to kill him. Many loved him, yes, but there were others who tried to throw him off a cliff.

And the old adage that hindsight is twenty-twenty is a lie, one that makes it a little too easy to look back and assume that we would have recognized Jesus for who he really was, and that of course we would also be about the things Jesus would be about.

Think of it this way, Mary was an unwed peasant. So if the Incarnation were to have happened in our time, what would Mary look like to you? And so how would you, on first impressions alone, see her Son?

It's important for our growth in Christian formation too ask, in light of this, would you and I have paid them any attention, or would we have written them off? And if someone like that were to start challenging the way we think and live, what would our visceral reaction be?

It's important to ask, because he still shows up in similar ways to do these very things.

[MUSIC]

In theology, "Christology" means the way we think and talk about the truth and significance of Jesus, and the Christian faith is what it is because we balance the convictions that Jesus was truly God and truly human. So when looking specifically at the Incarnation, we cannot just talk about "the God that became human in Jesus," we also have to explore "what sort of human being God became".

But during the late-nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, theological reflection on the person of Christ tended to focus a little one-sidedly on Jesus' divinity. So it created some scandal when in the 1970's, and against this sort of theological backdrop, Óscar Romero published a pastoral letter which developed his understanding of the church's responsibility to the poor. Because in this letter Romero didn't just insist that people should be generous to the poor, but rather "identifies the reality of those who are poor and marginalized as both the way to understanding our world and the way to discern the presence of God and God's will in and for the world." Why the scandal? Because that means the kind of human being God became is a poor human being, and the way to understand our world properly is to become the kind of person who can see God's presence in the midst of those who are poor and suffering.

You can't make a claim much bigger than that. So how would Romero defend it?

In his teachings, Romero paid particular attention to the biblical portraits of Jesus's life, especially to those moments that happen between the Incarnation and Jesus' crucifixion. And after paying attention to Jesus' public life and ministry, Romero concluded that the face of Jesus Christ was to be found in the faces of the poor. In Romero's time and place, these were the campesinos, the poor and oppressed peasant farmers of El Salvador. 

Romero states that

"We now have a better understanding of what the incarnation means, what it means to say that Jesus really took human flesh and made himself one with his brothers and sisters in suffering, in tears and laments, in surrender. I am not speaking of universal incarnation. This is impossible. I am speaking of an incarnation that is preferential and partial: incarnation in the world of the poor." (129)

Now, just in case you might start to feel defensive or wary that Romero is laying the foundation for something like a class conflict, let's balance this with another part of his teaching. Romero was capable or incredible nuance, and elsewhere he argued, "When we say 'For the Poor', we do not take sides with one social class, ... What we do ... is invite all social classes, rich and poor without distinction, saying to everyone: Let us take seriously the cause of the poor as though it were our own -– indeed, as what it really is, the cause of Jesus Christ, who on the final judgment day will call to salvation those who treated the poor with faith in him," then Romero quotes Jesus' own words from Matthew 25, "'Whatever you did to one of these poor ones–the neglected, the blind, the lame, the deaf, the mute–you did to me.'"

[MUSIC BEGINS]

So let's return for a moment to one of our introductory questions -- if the Incarnation were to have happened in our time, who would Jesus be, and would we have responded in recognition, acceptance, and love? 

Romero puts it bluntly: "Look at the poor. How much do you love them? That will tell you how much you love Jesus."

In the conversation that follows, Julius, Kevin and I dive deeper into how Romero might help us name and deal with some of the things that block us from being able to hear Christ's voice and recognize his presence in our own time and place.

[MUSIC  TRANSITION TO:]


CONVERSATION [Auto-Generated Transcript]:

Julius: Well, thanks for listening to all things. We're looking forward to today's conversation. Once again, this is Julius,

Wilson: A guilt trip. If you, if you stop this episode before the end, then you've, uh, you squandered our gratitude. That's right. . Thanks for listening all the way through .

Kevin: Five, five more years in purgatory for you.

Wilson: It's, we're being passive aggressive for your own good .

Julius: I'm joined by Wil and Kevin, who just provided those fun clips . Um, uh, but yeah, I, well, I'm excited we didn't get to name this in, starting out this episode, but it's a, it's, it's pretty cool to be engaging in these conversations about Romero, particularly with Kevin, because I know Kevin, uh, for, for a while now.

Um, Oscar Romero has been kind of your saint mentor and Yeah. You've really loved, um, kind of diving into his work, have really, um, patterned yourself after his ministry. So, um, being our Romero expert, In house here at Shama. Um, excited to kind of like, engage in conversation with you and learn kind of some of the insight that you've kind of gleaned from Rome's life.

And today we're talking about Christology, which is a, um, fancy but kind of self-explanatory, theological world word

Wilson: kind of. Yeah. Until you, until you, Well, it's like any word. The more questions you ask, the deeper the rabbit hole goes, the

Julius: different levels. That's true. But the most basic is kind of like how theologically, what our understanding of Jesus is.

Um, and then we'll dive more into that, uh, as to how that co that question can get more and more complex. But today we're talking specifically about, um, Oscar Romero's, Christology and how it's, um, centered in a christology of, as we've named it, kind of a crystal christology of the poor. That, um, that there is a connection between how we see Christ and how we see those who are poor around us, and how, um, those two, um, visions and the ways that we relate to Christ and the poor around us are related.

So just kind of kicking it off, um, what are some of the places in scripture and tradition that inform and shape Romero's Christology that is, um, related to this view of the poor

Kevin: around us? Yeah. For Romero, I think before I, we get into that question, I wanna frame it in this way. Romero was a pastor. Um, and I believe our first episode, we talk about the story in history a little bit.

Biography of Romero. And he, Wait, you

Wilson: wrote it, dude? . .

Kevin: They don't know that .

Wilson: It's in the show notes. Yeah.

Kevin: Okay. And I wrote it. There's

Julius: no hiding. .

Kevin: Someone did it. Uh, but Ro Romero, there's still time for you to go back

Wilson: and rewrite, so there

Kevin: you go. a Romero would, uh, Would, and with a sense of honor and, and like a healthy sense of pride, he would, he would've loved for people to remember him as a pastor, a shepherd, a person who has been commissioned by God to take care of the flock of God, the church to people.

Mm-hmm. . And he, he saw himself deeply, deeply, um, embedded as a pastor. And there are so many other places in when he is talking and, um, uh, you know, writing, he doesn't necessarily see himself as like, a professor or someone, like a teacher or someone in like an academic setting. Mm-hmm. . Um, but he was, I mean, he got his, you know, doctorate and all that stuff.

So he is a very intelligent person, but he always, so all that to say is that his theology, his intelligence, his um, ideas and concepts all came out in his ho. And so in order to understand Romero's Christology, for instance, he didn't write like a book on Christology, but he preached Christology. And so in order to understand Romero's Christology, you had to go and listen to his sermons, which all have context.

Yeah. And so he preaches, um, Christology throughout.

Wilson: Yeah, I mean, just more cred like, and he's in very good company there, Chris. I mean, the origins of Christology, right? So breaking that word down the study, the talk about Jesus. Yeah, the Christ, right? Mm-hmm. , the origins of our Christology is from sermons.

Yeah. Yeah. For the first. Like number of centuries, the best theologians mm-hmm. , the, the people that did the best Christology did them in sermons. Mm-hmm. we're talking like John Christ, Stone, St. Aga, Augustine, or Augustine, depending on how you're, how you taught to pronounce name. We follow that. Yeah. Right.

And so this is really a, in, in the person of Romero, you see a retrieval of something that needs to be retrieved recuperated is that this is the best way to do Christology and theology in general. Yeah, no,

Kevin: for sure. Which is even more profound cuz he, he would preach this to anybody. Mm-hmm. , everybody who gathered in the parish parishes.

And so it wasn't just to like educated folk that he preached Christology. It was like, no, to the farmers and to the workers of the land. He would preach. You know, if you listen, look at his sermons. They're very like, well researched and even well quoted. And he quotes in cyclicals and even like, uh, the popes and theologians.

And so he makes the things of the faith, the traditions of the faith accessible to mm-hmm. , all people. Um, but in one of his addresses, he actually, uh, visited, uh, Louvain University and he gave a lecture to actually university students, and he's talking about the situation in El Salvador. Mm. Which at the time was very, very violent and very, very tragic and dark, and it was on the brink of Civil War, and it actually happened after Romero was assassinated that mm-hmm.

El Salvador would go into a civil war for 12 years, from 1980 to 1992. And Edward Rome wanted to stop that at all costs. And so he was invited in 1980, so like, uh, probably a month or two before he was, uh, gonna be like shot, um, while administering the sacrament. Mm-hmm. . And he gives, uh, this address to these students or to people who are, uh, gathered there.

Mm-hmm. . And he talks about his, his Christology here. And so I want to, it is a fairly long quote, but here's the quote. It's. I want to propose the intuition of Vatican two that lies at the root of every ecclesial movement of. . The essence of the church lies in its mission of service to the world in its mission to save the world in its totality and of saving it in history here and now.

The church exists to act in solidarity with the hopes and joys, the anxieties and sorrows of men and women like Jesus. The church was sent to bring good news to the poor, to heal the contr of heart to see and to. What was lost. And that is a, that last part was a quotation from Luke four 18, um, and then also 1910, but there he draws from, you're asking about scripture passages.

Mm-hmm. , Luke four is a big one for Romero. Cool. Um, that Jesus, this says Jesus at the temple. He, uh, picks up a squirrel from Isaiah, right. And he says, uh, the Holy Spirit has, or the spirit of the Lord has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. Mm-hmm. , um, to proclaim liberty to the captives. And so he uses this.

Um, one of the many starting points for Christol, his Christology, is that Christ came, uh, especially and precisely for the poor and to proclaim liberty to those, um, who find themselves there. Um, another one that he used in that address is from Exodus three, nine. Mm-hmm. , which is, this is the context where, uh, God says the cries of the children of Israel has come to me, and I have witnessed a way in which the Egyptians oppress them.

And this is another place where he links that. Uh, this is why the father sent the son was because in the same way that Israel was crying out, because the Egyptian was oppress, were oppressing them. So the people, the Israel was, were being oppressed by, I mean, sin, death, um, hell, uh, disease, all kinds of evil atrocities.

And so the father sent the son in as a, mm-hmm. , uh, to save and to heal that.

Can you walk us

Julius: through, um, I love the scriptures that you pointed to, and I love that you connect how, um, that you both emphasize that this christology comes from like his context, that it comes from preaching, which is not like a, like, I mean, at, at best the office of like, priest, pastor, preacher, like involves.

Like it's lived in , like calling that, it's not like ab like doing theology in the abstract, but kind of, Yeah, yeah. Um, working things out concretely and how, like the context that he was preaching in, um, and like trying to connect that with the stories in the scripture that he's shaped by that. Those two things connected together, like do a lot to shape how he receives the scriptures and like that there is a tradition beforehand that sets this.

Um, and so you've named a couple of scriptures here. Can you walk us through, um, maybe for some people who might not be convinced that that is, um, like explicitly a call to, um, cuz I know later, I think maybe you, you, you say this in the story, but like pretty explicitly, Romero makes this connection saying something like, Look at the poor.

How much do you love them? That will tell how, how much you love Jesus. And so for some people who might be down with the idea of like, Yeah, Jesus came to. Save all of creation, including the poor and like calls us to care for the poor. Like how, can you walk us through how, um, how and why Romero makes that step, um, even, even further that like, not just like, oh, we take care of the poor, but like how we look at the poor around us is, uh, is a mirror to how we actually see Jesus and that maybe that they are a place that we're able to see like the presence of Christ

Kevin: now.

Yeah. Uh, that highlights other, other passages that Romero utilizes. And these aren't original to Romero, but mm-hmm. , Um, other people, Christians in history and tradition, even contemporary, use these scriptures. Um, but Romero, uh, In one sermon he preached on Matthew 25. Mm-hmm. and he links, um, and he makes notice or gives notice and emphasizes the point that Jesus identifies himself with those who are precisely hungry.

Mm-hmm. , those who are precisely sick, those who are in jail. Mm-hmm. , um, and Romero says like, Jesus did not identify himself with the top of like the social class or the top of the, you know, the oligarchy. Mm-hmm. . And he was talking about like El Salvador and government, like Christ did not mm-hmm. , uh, identify himself with that.

He identified himself precisely with like, whoever, whatever you did for the least of these poor ones, you did it to me. And so Mero sees that in Matthew 25, though, that's another place. Christ identifies himself. Um, he also loves, uh, that's a part in St. Where St. Paul says. Christ who was rich. Mm-hmm. became poor for your sakes, in order that you might become rich in God.

Yeah. And so Christ empties out his, his rich, his richness so that those who find themselves in poverty, um, can become and be alive with richness in God. Yeah. And so he, he links, uh, that, So this ties into what we talked about last time in our, um, theology of Preaching, that the incarnation where the father.

On into a poor, uh, Jewish girl, uh, Mary. Mm-hmm. becomes human. Mm-hmm. , um, not in like precisely the, the kingdoms or the political powers of herd or Caesar, but it's in exactly in the Jewish, uh, girl, in a family. That there is also the basis where, um, for Jesus, for Christianity and Christology, that if. If you refuse the poor, if you neglect the poor Romero, say that is not Christian theology, That is not Christology, uh, because you have neglected something, part and parcel to the very nature of who Christ was.

Hmm. .

Wilson: I got, I had a, a really good discussion with a guy, I think it was like two weeks ago, fairly recently, where the question was raised like, But who are the least? Right? And, and they were starting off with a place like, you know, from my engagement knowledge of scripture. Mm-hmm. . Yeah, I know Jesus identifies with the least, but it's not super clear who the least are.

Uh, so we talked through the scriptures a little more. Yeah. And. You know, in, in Matthew 25, He, he, yes. There are places where for sure the, It's not like, it's not like anyone is because of some accidental or superficial, like trait of their existence. Mm-hmm. . Mm-hmm. how much money you have or the color of your skin, stuff like that, you know?

Mm-hmm. , it's not like anybody's excluded from it. And yes, there are places that extend it to those that are poor in spirit. Yeah. Those that are broken and downcast. Yep. But in Matthew 25, he also clearly says like, those who are thirst. Those who are naked. Yeah. Right? Yeah. And so when you give a drink of water to the thirsty, uh, when you clothe the naked, you know, whatever you do for the least of these mm-hmm.

you do it for me. Mm-hmm. , you know, and those are red letters. Yeah. That's right there. This is Jesus himself saying like, this is, this is where I will be and these, these are the least. And I, and I'll be there in the midst of them. And when we were talking about it, you know, preparing for this conversation, um, I just noticed how often Romero quotes from Luke mm-hmm.

Cause that's, that's a consistent theme in Luke is the reversal. Mm-hmm. , Right. That when the kingdom of God comes, things get turned upside down. Mm-hmm. , you know, so like Mary Prophesize early in Luke mm-hmm. that, uh, those that are high up will be raised low and those who are low will be raised up, which is a leveling, Right?

Yeah. and, and thinking about that theme in Luke and how often Romero moves there, um, and even Romero's own life, you know, we talked earlier episode about how he lived throughout the rest of the week as a pastor. Yeah. You know, just where he was, where he was living, doing his work, where he was resting was hospice.

Yeah. That he consistently put himself in the middle of the people who were dying and those caring for them. Um, and then the way he, Carrie, as, as brilliant as he was and as gifted as he was, that he carries this out as a preacher, not mm-hmm. , as, you know, a high up academic. Yep, yep. Theologian. Uh, all that made me think about in Luke at the, um, early, early on the, the.

instances of people recognizing Jesus. Mm-hmm. are like shepherds cuz the angels lead them to it. But it took my mind to, uh, and, and those who are high up early in the gospels tend to try to squash him. Like Harry tries to kill him. , you know, before he can even get going. Um, and Har was in a position of power if you're not, He was, he was one of the rulers, uh, in that region in that.

So, uh, uh, anyway, it took me to the story in Luke chapter two when Mary and Joseph have been told certain things about their child. Um, they've seen it come to fruition. Yeah. Um, , which, by the way, this is totally tangential, but I saw my favorite comic of the last, like 10 years. I saw a couple weeks ago that, um, it was, it was Mary Jo, it was the holy, it was the holy Family, Mary Joseph, and Jesus, when Jesus was like a toddler, and Jesus asked.

Mom, where do babies come from? . And, and Luke looks, or, and Joseph looks over and goes, Yeah, Mary, where do babies come from?

But, uh, anyway, uh, That aside, Mary Joseph, uh, they've been told certain things. They've seen it come to fruition to a certain degree, and then it says like, when the time had come for them to offer the child mm-hmm. to offer sacrifice for the child in accordance with the law, Moses, which would've been when Jesus hit a certain age, they made their way to Jerusalem, to the temple to offer the sacrifice that was called for in the.

and they came and Luke just says, it's kind of in passing if you, if you're not kind of introduced to the nuances of this, you just miss it. Mm-hmm. . Cause Luke says they came offering. Two turtle doves, a pair of turtle doves, or two young pigeons. Mm-hmm. , which as it was required in the law, which if you, if you go back to the law, there was a bigger sacrifice called for mm-hmm.

But most people couldn't afford that. Yeah. Yeah. And, and the law says, and if you cannot afford this, then you can offer two turtle doves or two young pigeons. Mm. So even Maryanne Joseph, What they bring is the sacrifice of those that are less fortunate. Yeah. The poor. Yep. So the Holy Family was in this kind of social position.

They come into the temple. Yeah. And you also have to, The temple was this center of life. Yeah. Period for them. Yeah. You know, so just like there are very few moments where you can go to a shopping mall and it be totally empty. They're like, there weren't any times of the day that you went to the temple during normal hours and it wasn't busy.

Mm-hmm. . It was always a busy place. And so here comes this, you know these, these Galileans mm-hmm. that the people that lived in Jerusalem kinda looked down on the Galileans, cuz they're not in God's holy city. Jerusalem was even up on a hill. Mm-hmm. , Right? So they literally looked down on the people from the north, even though they're geographically north.

They looked down on them cuz Jerusalem's on the hill. Right? The Galileans come in, they don't have the cultural centers, all that kind of stuff. So they, they come to the hill bringing this sacrifice, not the full sacrifice. And most people don't see that anything special happened when the Son of God offered the sacrifice of dedication.

And, but there are two people that do. Mm-hmm. , uh, Simian and Anna. They notice of all the people that came in and out that day, of all the sacrifices that were offered, of all the business that was transacted, there were two people that recognized something and they prophesy over Jesus. You know, and that just made me think, what is it about them?

Mm. That allowed them to recognize, and part of it was they were devout people. Yeah. They were there in the temple genuinely seeking God in their worship. Yeah. For their whole lives and in genuinely seeking God in their worship. That made them the kind of people that most, I mean there were, who knows how many, but there were lots of people there conducting business that day.

And just like Jesus' baptism, most people saw nothing. Right. But, but Simmy and Anna were able to recognize something because they had eyes that were conditioned, they were trained that would be open and able to recognize God's presence even in the poor there in Jesus. And so, So even at that point, right when Jesus is the poor kid, Yeah.

Being brought to the temple, they're able to see something of the divine glory and maje.

Julius: That's beautiful. I think that, um, so a lot of us on this side of. Like the story of Jesus', like life, death, and resurrection, um, can jump so quickly. I, I know a lot of kind of growing up, so much of my conception of Jesus jumps to like, Oh, Christ is like the, the king. And so all of like images that pop up are kind of like, Splendor and riches and glory that like, that we can gloss over the concrete details that Jesus was born to a family that was not noble in status or like had riches or access to like power or wealth.

And that that's, um, I think. For any of us who might hesitate to make these, these jumps. We, we have to recognize that like where we are historically on this side of where theology and tradition has developed is that we take a, we we take a lot of things for granted that weren't assumptions for people who were doing theology back then that in the days of C system preaching, they were still trying to make sense of this and they were closer to kind of the concrete mm-hmm.

details of everything. And I love that. Um, That this whole like kind of bringing it, bringing it back to Romero, both what Romero calls us to, to, to examine like how, what our relationship is to the poor around us and kind of asking ourselves, would we be like Simian and Anna? Would we have the eyes to see if, if, if Christ were in our midst, in the poor around us, requires us to be up close with like the poor around us, that it's not a.

Like I can, I mean, this might be just an imagined thing, but I can imagine that some people like, um, in Christian circles or like in the church, like, wouldn't hesitate to be like, Yeah, we should take care of the poor. But that, um, their way of doing so that they're content to kind of do so from a place of safe distance and that safe distance.

Um, Doesn't afford us the opportunity to kind of like, uh, like if, if, if we were to take the words of Jesus seriously, that like that whatever you do to the least of these, you do to me. And that if we're kind of like to, to tease that out and to see that like, oh, if we were to take this as seriously as the poor around us, like carry the presence of like, that we were to treat them as if that was Jesus themselves.

If that was Jesus in our midst, like we gotta see the disconnect between like, Why would we wanna do that from afar or like, or why would we think it's sufficient to like, throw money at Yeah. Them or like, and or even that kind of us, them distinction to be like, Oh, it's, I'm content to kind of like give a few dollars or whatever.

Yeah. To some something like afar, but not to get involved with the stories in the way that Rome is like living with like these people and kind of getting to know their stories. And so, um,

Kevin: yeah, Romero, uh, you reminded me of a place where Romero says he, he is, he's going through Math 25, and he says, How can the, how can the church, um, the bride of Christ mm-hmm.

neglect to hear the voice of Christ. Mm-hmm. , you know, like, who would think like, Oh yeah, the church wants to. The voice of Jesus. Mm-hmm. wants to be with Jesus, but in the context of Matthew 25, you're like, Oh, actually no, not there. . Right, right. . Yeah. You know, it's just, And Romero's opposing the question, like, why would you refuse another avenue?

Yeah. And perhaps the best avenue. Yeah. To know the face of Jesus, to encounter Jesus in a brand new way. Yeah. That is completely, um, in a way that creates unending wonder in awe. Yeah. It creates mystery and beauty. Um, Romero would say, That's precisely with the, you know, he is language of the boys sleeping, um, on the streets with the newspaper as their blanket.

Yeah. Or the malor children, or the mother working, um, the single mother working, you know, at the market selling coffee beans. Right. Or her like five children, you know? And so it's, it's those precisely those concrete. And this is, there's no abstraction for Romero. Like he's thinking of real life people when he is preaching this.

Yeah. Is that concrete way of life that Romero, So Matthew 25 is not like some ideal or abstraction for Romero. Yeah. It's like real people. Mm-hmm. with real faces, Uh, people. He, he walks to and f from his home to like the archdiocese's office to the parishes. Like he drives in cars. Like he's seen this like in real life, like every.

Um, and so, yeah, I don't know if you wanted to go. No, definitely.

Wilson: Oh, yeah. Tagging off that. It's, um, actually the, the, the process or the pattern, I'm about to like narrate it's. It's happened enough so that it's getting to the point in me where I have to now be intentional to not jump to conclusions with people and assume I know their story before I know their story.

Mm-hmm. , but, but it's happened enough times where I've sat down like face to face with someone because they wanted to talk because they don't feel close to God anymore. Mm-hmm. , they're struggling with their faith. I used to feel like my faith was alive. I felt connected to God some, but, Right. And there are a handful of things that can happen.

Mm-hmm. , you know, some of it might, you know, this is part of our drawing from the, the resources of our tradition. Yeah. But for a different podcast episode or, or Yeah. Whatever, Um, the. Part of it could be, Yeah, God's doing this on purpose for your own good, you know? Mm-hmm. , just like when you're a, when you're dealing with kids, you use candy or ice cream to get them to do what's good.

Mm-hmm. , you know, but eventually they have to grow up and do what's good because it's good. Not because they're gonna get candy or ice cream. Right. You know, so often God's at work there removing the feelings so that we love what's good. Mm-hmm. , not just so that we're addicted to the good feelings that we get when we do what's.

Yeah. You know, and parsing that out, getting, getting into, you know, the deeper nuances and making sure that we're really chasing the right thing. That could be part of it. Mm-hmm. , but also, this is where I say, I also have just asked, well, tell me about your journey, your life and what is, like, what is your Christian practice now?

You know, how are you seeking God? Where are you looking for God? And often you, you know, one of the things I would just point out is well look. Here's a place where I could see, you know, some, some room for improvement and Jesus himself said, This is where he's going to be. Yeah, right. He told us this is where I'll be.

And so maybe go spend some time there. Just, just go be intentional. Spend some time there and see Yeah. Like if this open stuff's up or this reconnect. Yeah. So,

Julius: Well I think, I mean that's a perfect it. It pretty much already preemptively answers the question I was about to ask, which is for, um, For those of us then who, who might like upon examination struggle to like, if we're honest and if we look upon, if we even do consider like the poor in our communities, like w if, if we do the honest work of self examination and find that in that sense our christology is off that, that we are not like filled with compassion or reverence.

Like the poor people around us. What would Romero kind of offer or invite us to like in order to, um, as like a corrective to like realign our Christology with what

Kevin: is, Yeah. Uh, I wanna share a couple. There's, in my mind gonna go very different directions here, so I wanna, uh, remain focused here. Mm-hmm. , I have two quotes that I definitely wanna share.

Um, and this is, um, , this is, remember Murro is as a here, Romero saying this in a sermon as your pastor. And so receive it in, in that kind of light. Um, so here's the first one he's reflecting on Luke 19, one through 10, which is, uh, the story of Jesus in Zaki. Mm-hmm. , which,

Wilson: which gospel again. Oh, Luke. Oh yeah, that one.

It's all about . No one is all about reversal, right? Yes.

Kevin: Luke 19, uh, Jesus Zakk, he's on the tree. Um, uh, you know, he calls out to Jesus. And, um, essentially l Zaki ends up saying like, he's, who's a tax collector? Who, everyone I've wronged like I'm gonna. Uh, pay back fourfold. Mm-hmm. and those who I def defrauded or something, that nature.

I'll play it back half or something like that. Mm-hmm. and Romero's, uh, riffing on this in his sermon, and then he, he, this is where the quote begins. So it starts, quote, This aspect of the gospel is very interesting because it helps us to see that true conversion expresses itself, indeeds. It is not enough just to say that one repent of a.

It is also necessary to repair the harm that was done. Mm-hmm. , sisters and brothers, the gospel calls us to such a conversion. A conversion that doesn't just remain in sentiments, but that leads to total changes and teaches us the need to share and quote. Um, that's, . Uh, I, I, one I find that just fascinating.

Just the need of repentance requires also reparations, . Yeah. Or, or absolutely. Uh, expressing itself out indeeds. And this is not like something. , uh, Romero's not thinking that this is something, something outside of repentance. Yeah. But it's actually part and parcel to the nature of repentance that the, what the key is realize is that confessing Jesus as Lord and being willing to follow means that I have to make amends, have to repair the harm that I've done.

Um, and so Romero is saying, This in the context of those who ha who are wealthy, who have a lot of resources mm-hmm. , what is the conversion that Christ is calling you to? Hmm. What is, what is the repair, the harm that you, you personally must do, right? Um, you repent of the sin of whatever sin you may be.

Now, how do you, uh, repair. . That's the first quote. The second quote is a is much shorter. Yeah. But this is, uh, receive this as more like a, a contemplative question or a spiritual direction question. Yeah. A question of examine. Um, and here's Romero. He says, quote, a wealthy Christian. Mm-hmm. will find the beginning of conversion in this personal question that person should ask.

Why am I rich? And all around me so many that hunger, um, again, receive that as like Pastor Romero as like your pastor, your, your shepherd. Someone who cares about the nature. Mm-hmm. the, the nurturing of your soul and your Christian devotion. Like, ask yourself that if you find yourself, you know, in that realm of a wealthy Christian, He said that's the beginning of the conversion experience.

Why do I have so many resources and are all around me? There are those who don't have as much resources as I do. Um, and link it back to the previous quote, What is the conversion that Christ then is calling me to do? Yeah. What are the acts, um, of mercy works, of mercy, of compassion that I am called to now extend right to those who don't have as much resources as I do.

Um, and Romero is, is he's, you can see him just pastorally trying to guide people. He's not like someone who's beating people's like you, wealthy people. You, you know. Yeah. You good for nothing. Sinners, You're gonna go to hell and all this stuff. He's like, No, he's, he's trying to guide them to conversion. To repentance.

Yeah. Um, and he, he, he's also gonna turn to the poor and say like, You too must be converted and repent cause you. There are other places in his sermons where he call, he calls out the poor. He's like, You should not steal. Mm-hmm. , you should not commit adultery. You should not murder. You should not do this.

The ver, the vices you should also avoid because the virtues are also accessible to you. Oh, the virtues are not just accessible to those who are wealthy and rich. The virtues, you the poor. Have complete and total access because you are in Christ and Romero. I mean, this is why I love Romero, man. Yeah. . So it's just he, he's a pastor that hits both sides.

Yeah. But is. calling to repentance in the conversion, both sides of the aisle.

Wilson: And that, that's a huge part of the raising up in, in the ancient world, the virtues were not accessible to the poor. Mm-hmm. . Right. I mean, it was even assumed in certain places like Aristotle. Yeah. So not just like some odd corner, like, like dominant

Yeah. Um, cultural forces. It was assumed that the poor didn't even have a full soul. Mm-hmm. . And it's, it's the Christian revolution that's coming out, like in this pastoral voice saying to them, Yeah, this is right. Available to you. Um, mm-hmm. , again, pulling this all together in Christology, right? Cuz this is what Romero's doing.

Pastorally is, is speaking about Jesus. And that's one, one dimension or layer of the word christology. It's, you know what we say and believe. About Jesus is just what I mean. Chris Christology starts off with Christ, right? And ology is like log offs or word or thinking about what we, what we reason and say about Jesus.

But the, the benefit of good Christology is you become a microphone of Jesus and. You when you do Christology Well, when you speak rightly and well about Jesus, you facilitate the opportunity for other people to know him in the way that, from that communion, from that experience of Jesus, mm-hmm. , they're able to do christology themselves to talk about it, then breaking it down to another level.

Um, Uh, Christ Yes. Is a title that has been given to Jesus. It's not a surname by the way. Mm-hmm. , Jesus Christ. It's not . Yeah. If Jesus had a driver's license, Christ wasn't like Yeah, exactly. It wasn't his last name. It's a title. Um, and, and really it means to be christened. To, to be christened means you're smeared with oil and to be smeared with oil was part of the Jewish right ritual that set you apart for a specific purpose.

You were christened for something, you were smeared with oil to mark you out, to set you apart for a particular thing. Mm-hmm. . And so this is, this is the question for what the Messiah. The savior in that sense, the Redeemer, um, was like, and or linked to a Christ, one who was Christian for a specific purpose.

Mm-hmm. . And then there were, there were, you know, several expectations about that. Uh, the key one being to liberate people from Rome. Mm-hmm. the most specific threat. But then Jesus comes and in taking this mantle and being the Christ, the one who is anointed by God for a specific purpose. Also, Yeah. Right.

He doesn't just meet our expectations about what the Christ is going to do. Yeah. In the way he does. It also brings clarity to us about what the Christ is. Mm-hmm. , what the Christ has been christened, anointed, set apart to do. Mm-hmm. tells us straight up to bring good news to the oppressed and the poor.

Yeah. How do you do it? His life? Yeah. His teaching, his healing. The who he lived with, who he hung out with, his death, his resurrection, all of that is how he carries out the office of Christ. Um, and so what, what Romero in doing Christology mm-hmm. in these sermons. And so in that is inviting others to. To commune in a way that they could do Christology.

Mm-hmm. , um, Romero's inviting through, through the story. Uh, and this is what scripture always does, is provide an opportunity, again, not to get info about Jesus, but for us to, to commune with Christ in a way like, like as far as the effect. And the reality of our communion with God was just as real as the first disciples, communion and experience with Christ.

And so, um, sure different time, different place, but as far as the effects and the reality of it, just as real as Lazarus, not Lazarus, uh, Zs the short guy, not the dead, the short one. Not the dead one. , both of them are raised up, but in different ways, different ways. Um, in Z we're invited to see like how this communion happens to lead us to that point where we can do our own Christology, because at the end of it, the, it, it, when.

When Romero's witness clicks for us, uh, we'll start to see that what Zach Heus does at the end of his encounter with Jesus is Christology. Mm-hmm. in, in repairing his harm, in repenting and repairing the harm he has done. Um, because there, there's a reversal happening in this mm-hmm. . So in the story, Z starts off in a tree.

Uh, looking down on Jesus. But Luke has told us, even though he's in a position positionally, he's in a place to look down on Jesus in a tree. Tax collector, wealthy, More resources. Mm-hmm. In reality, he's a small man. And the first thing Jesus says to Zaks when he walks up is get down . But then from that, it's not get down, shame you get down.

So down here I can actually eat with you, right? I'm going to your house, let's eat. And in the, And then bringing that and doing what? In doing what? In being the Christ. Yeah. In that moment to that person, he communes with Zaks and from that, yeah. Zaks recognizes this is communion with God. This is the kingdom of God.

And he gets pulled into that and so his response Yeah. Is, is where he starts to do his own Christology. Yeah. Which was super interesting because in that time and place, the way when you proclaim someone is Lord Caesar is Lord. Then what you would do is find ways to honor that Lord. Yeah. And in that time and place, kind of the, the standard ways to do that is you give a big offering.

Mm-hmm. , or you make a sacrifice, or you erect a statue and the center of town with a plaque, with an inscription about all the great things that the Lord has made possible for this town because of their patronage, or hold a huge banquet. And you put that person in the seat of honor and you invite all the other honorable, powerful people you could.

And the more honorable and powerful people you get around the table, the more honor you're giving to the Lord. That's in the seat of, of position and authority. Mm-hmm. . But what Zaks notices about this Lord, this guy, the character of his kingdom, the way I honor him is to repair the damage I've done. Is to pay back those that I have defrauded and this, this is him from his communion with Christ.

Yeah. Living in a way that he's doing his own Christology speaking and extending the work that Jesus as the Christ came to do, participating in the work that Jesus, the Christ came to do.

Kevin: You revealed to me another layer that I of romero's that question, why am I rich And all?

Wilson: If you, if, if revealed is the right word, let's, let's give it to the Holy Spirit. Right? The Holy

Kevin: Spirit through, through you will reveal this to me. Why? Why am I rich and all around me so many that hunger? Um, uh, I mean that's such a great question.

Cause Romeros, I mean posing that to the wealthy Christian. When you were, uh, Crystal, Crystal Lodge, Well, Theo Theologizing on Christology. Christologically crystallizing Crystalizing.

Wilson: How do you, how do you make that a verb? Yeah. Crystalizing doing Christology in Christology,

Kevin: uh, when you're talking about Jesus and Zakk is, um, uh, I just imagined that is precisely the question that Jesus himself.

Was at, was, was, was living out. Mm-hmm. , Why am I the son so rich in this communion with, with the father in the unity of the Holy Spirit and all around me are people like Zaki, people like Peter, people like, uh, this poor Samaritan woman, People like this who have no, have not tasted, but have not, uh, been failed with that kind of communion with God, that Jesus himself, this is a question that he lives.

I, This is precisely why I came , because him being rich became poor. He distributed his communion with the father through people like Zaks, through people like in his ministry. Why am I so rich and all around me? I mean, that's the world man. That's the world that's hungry, hungry for rich communion with God.

Julius: Of that. Both of these responses, um, bring us back. Uh, no surprise here to the table if that the, the point of it, the point of this Christology is convenient with Christ, and the Christ invites us to communion with God and others. That it's, uh, the, the kind of, the advent scriptures of the high places shall be made low and the low.

Lifted high that it's like a, that the destination at the center is like the, is fixing these inequities that bar us from sitting at the same table, like being at that same level that see the all things

Wilson: logo. . Yeah, ,

Julius: Yeah. See, Refer to our logo. Um, Thanks Janelle. Yeah. Yes. Shout out. Um, no, honestly, seriously, take, take a look at that logo.

It's. It's, it's a beautiful representation of the table and, um, thanks again so much for your time. Um, Getting back to the intro, if you've stuck around at this life ,

Wilson: um, the chosen, those of you who have proven ,

Kevin: those five less years are purgatory for

Julius: those you who are afforded that privilege for

Wilson: our, uh, Calvinist brethren and sister, those who have demonstrated your election.

Julius: Yes. Anyway, jokes aside, thanks for listening. That's, uh, all we've got for the conversation today. But as always, Love to direct you to the show notes and our website, shama d.org, where we can, um, provide some more resources to for further engagement in this topic and, um, in the conversations we've got ahead on Romero.

Looking forward to metaphorically seeing you there.


Óscar Romero 1: Being the Microphone of Christ


INTRO:

There's a saying, I'm sure you've heard it: "It always looks impossible until someone does it." We understand this truth, and greatly value it, when it comes to something like innovation.

Electricity, indoor plumbing, and flying machines all looked impossible to most of our ancestors. And we're glad someone did things that proved them to be realistic.

100 years ago every single standing athletic world record looked impossible.

When I was a kid, touch interfaces and video calls were the stuff of science fiction.

Then someone did it. So now we all do it, and think nothing of how wondrous what we are doing actually is.

The greatest things always look impossible ... Until someone does it.

In this series, we just want to help you notice how strange it is, then, that we tend to fail to appreciate this same principle when it comes to other things our age does not tend to value a much. Like ancient and religious things.

Why does the gospel seem so impossible to us, when history if full of saints who have done it? Who have lived in ways that show us what is really possible when we trust God's presence and help.

This time we look at how St Oscar Romero allows us to think of something like simple human words actually speaking of a transcendent God, and how this also shows not just preacher, but all Christians how to do the work of speaking of God without engaging in manipulation.

[TRANSITION TO ALL THINGS INTRO]


STORY:

[MUSIC BEGINS/CONTINUES]

[Episode 2: The Church of Hope, Nov. 27th 1977, Oscar Romero = 3:09-4:28]

Jamás hemos predicado violencia, solamente la violencia del amor, la que dejó a Cristo clavado en una cruz, la que se hace cada uno para vencer sus egoísmos y para que no haya desi- gualdades tan crueles entre nosotros. Esa violencia no es la de la espada, la del odio; es la violencia del amor, la de la fraternidad, la que quiere convertir las armas en hoces para el trabajo. ¡Qué hermoso llamamiento podíamos hacer aquí, hermanos, cuando el trabajo abunda en nuestras campiñas, no se vaya a convertir en odios, ni en luchas ni en sangre! Desde el domingo pasado, estoy clamando para que las cortas de café, de algodón y de caña sean un canto de alabanza al Señor, no esperando leyes, sino ins- pirando en el amor de fraternidad que une a los dueños y a los trabajadores. Que hagamos de nuestra campiña un himno que haga tono con la generosidad con que Dios nos regala sus cose- chas. Esta es la meta, hacia esa paz caminamos.

Translation:

"We have never preached violence, except the violence of the love that led Christ to be nailed to a cross. We preach only the violence that we must each do to ourselves to overcome selfishness and to eliminate the cruel inequalities among us. This is not the violence of the sword, the violence of hatred. It is the violence of love and fraternity, the violence that chooses to beat weapons into sickles for work (Isa 2:4). What a beautiful call we would make to you here, sisters and brothers, when work abounds in our fields! Do not change this work into hatred or struggles or bloodshed. Since last Sunday I have been crying out that the harvests of coffee, cotton, and sugar cane should be a hymn of praise to the Lord. Do not wait for laws, but be inspired in the fraternal love that should unite owners and workers. Let us raise from our fields a hymn that is in tune with the generosity with which God grants us these harvests. This is our goal; this is the peace toward which we walk."


Notice that we have a host of distinct terms for different kinds of speeches. When it's an expert delivering specialized knowledge to students, we call it a "lecture." If that expert delivers the material on a popular level from an expensive set and it's streamed all over the world, it's a "TED Talk." If it's an actor displaying the inner world of a character, it's a "Monologue." If it's an author delivering some of their written work it's a "Reading," and on and on, and any or all of these could become a particular and ubiquitous form of speech known as "Nonsense."

This episode, we look at what St. Oscar Romero can show us about the peculiar form of human speech that happens in a worship gathering when someone delivers words that expound on some part of the Bible and seek to shape the daily life of the congregation in light of that Scriptural text. This cluster of words might include poems or stories or bits of teaching, but we do not believe any of those terms fully express what's happening. So we do not call this a speech or a lecture. We call it a "Sermon" or a "Homily" or, sometimes, a "Message."

There is a reason this form of speech gets its own distinct name, and to many it must seem unreasonable.

Because a sermon is not just a re-reading of the written words of the Bible, nor does it claim to merely speak about ideas or feelings or facts or anything, really, that we could know or observe from our daily reality with just our time, attention, and wits. But, to paraphrase the great 20th century Protestant theologian Karl Barth, we call this a "Sermon" or "Homily" because we believe these words reveal to us things about God because these words, more than just just conveying information, actually conform to the Word of God to such a degree that they carry God's presence.

[MUSIC BEGINS]

So the observant but unconvinced might justifiably ask, "But I thought y'all said that by definition, God is unknowable?"

Yes. And this tension between God's mysterious transcendence and our speaking about the Divine has gotten the attention of some of our most famous philosophers. Because of it, some have wondered what part of humanity is capable of knowing and speaking about God. Some, like Descartes, said this must be the soul, and others the mind, because these have a greater natural capacity to deal with eternal things that transcend our limited bodily existence. Others ranging from St. Augustine to Ludwig Wittgenstein and Jacques Derrida have wondered about words themselves. How can simple human sounds, many of which seem so arbitrary -- think about the sound of the word "doorknob," how can something that sounds so silly "knob," convey anything about what is eternal?

These are serious and labyrinthine questions in which the best of us, if we choose to enter, seem destined to get lost. Which is why the reminder Romero offers us is like light expelling the darkness of a haunted maze. St. Romero tells us that these might be necessary and interesting questions that are relevant for many dimensions of human speech and action, but for Christians, thinking specifically about sermons, these really aren't at all the right questions.

[MUSIC BREAK]

Romero reminds us that the issue isn't really centered on the human side of the equation, but on God's. The question is, "Is God the kind of God who would be content to let us wander in ignorance, or would God act to communicate with us where we are?"

And if our thought on this question really is Christian, then we also see that "God's side of the equation" isn't way off in some abstract spiritual realm where only the most elite spirits or minds might venture, but in the dusty roads and overlooked byways of Galilee and Jerusalem. This is because Christian faith confesses that God has met us in Jesus of Nazareth and so used his human words and actions to reveal to us who God is.

So the validity of preaching begins with the character of God. And once we center our questions on the person of Jesus, when make our way to asking questions about the human words and actions that are used to continually pass on God's revelation, the question that does matter, then, is do our words or actions reflect the goodness and truth and beauty of Jesus of Nazareth?

It's not really a matter of whether mind or soul or body is properly or essentially fit to communicate divine realities, because Jesus speaks with all these things. So rather than it being an issue of essence, it is a question of formation. It is a matter of whether or not our message sounds, looks, and feels like Jesus.

So in this episode's conversation, Kevin, Julius and I talk about St. Oscar Romero as a preacher who could describe a good sermon as nothing less than, quote, "the actualization of the word of God" without guile or irony because he had first allowed God to conform his own thinking and acting to the thinking and acting of Jesus. Then we look at how Romero's own formation in Christlikeness made him someone God could use to help the peasant farmers under his care imagine how they too could live so that their work and words would speak of nothing less than God.


CONVERSATION [Auto-Generated Transcript]:

Julius: Welcome back to All Things, listener. We're excited to kick off the, um, new set of conversations for this new series. I know it's, I think this is probably the first episode where we're, uh, reformatting the show a little bit, and we're gonna kind of just focus on the conversation piece. And today we're picking up from, um, talking about Oscar Romero and his theology of incarnation and what that has to do with his homo Lytics, like his view on what preaching is.

And one of the quotes from. This particular story that precedes this conversation that, um, um, I wanna read over us just to kind of, um, set the stage is that Rome says you are the church, each one of you, wherever you are, needs to live the life of faith fiercely because you are the true microphone of God, our Lord in your context.

Um, so picking up from that idea, I love that image of, um, being the microphone of God and how Rome places this emphasis on, um, the, the lived life of the church. And so can you talk to us more about the connection between incarnation, like the way that we live our life embodied and preaching and, um, what does that mean to be the microphone of God?

And how does that push back on maybe some of our typical understanding of sermons as mere dissemination of information? Or like an effective speech or as a, a comedian once put it, uh, like a, kind of like a book report. That's also standup comedy.

Wilson: what

Kevin: comedian was that? . Yeah, so I, um, Romero is, uh, one of my good heroes and great heroes of the faith. And. I love this metaphor that he offers through the church and he offers to our conversation and it's this metaphor of microphone. And I, and perhaps we can stay a little bit here, uh, for a little bit.

Um, but essentially what he he's preaching. He's always keeping in mind the people he's preaching to. And the, the majority of the people he's preaching to are, uh, peasant Salvadorians, who are obviously, um, Don't have a formal education. Most of them do not, um, have not got to, you know, formal school and most of them are, are illiterate and can't, uh, really read, um, there's even some stories that some of them don't even know how to sign their own name.

So even like when they go to sign papers, um, whatever for the government, they just like give their thumbprint. Um, and so Romero is in this kind of context. And so it's a, a very. Interesting and fascinating context to be preaching to, but he uses his, uh, analogy of microphone and he kind of breaks it down.

Essentially what he says is like, I mean, we're all speaking into microphones right now. Right? and it's amplifying our voices, um, and it's carrying them through and in his context it's making something. Uh, accessible and amplified so that all people can hear it. It makes it accessible to the great majority.

Um, and without the microphone, then we will not, we could not be able to hear, um, the clarity and the nuances and the tone of Romero's preaching. And he uses the microphone to talk about, um, God in Christ. And so he links it with the, the doctrine of incarnation. And what he says is the best microphone of God is Christ.

And so if you take that in a metaphor, even further that the father speaks in the microphone, um, through Christ mm-hmm . And so whatever the voice of the father. uh, says and does is amplified and made accessible mm-hmm through the microphone. That is Christ. And what Romero was saying is that his entire life, his being his nature, his teachings mm-hmm um, his birth, his laying in the tomb lifeless.

Yeah. His, you know, the entire course of his life is amplifying the voice of the father mm-hmm and that his very life is. The father's preaching to the world. Um, and so he links that with, uh, his preaching and incarnation. And then like with the quote, you, you, um, highlighted mm-hmm then Romero takes that even further.

That's saying, okay, that's the best microphone of God is Christ. And now the best microphone of Christ is you. The church, the body of Christ mm-hmm and you amplify and make accessible the voice and word of Christ in our context, in our everyday. And so he links, that's a cool kind of chain of events that kind of goes from the father into the, through Christ, into the church.

And that he's saying you people. Whether you are educated or uneducated, whether you can read and not read, whether you can write or not write, um, you are the best microphone of Jesus Christ in your world in your particular context. And so you are charged to live that kind of life out. And so that's kind of a cool metaphor.

He kind of links there.

Wilson: Right? So what I love in Rome Romero is, I mean, when, I mean, I mean it's there in the word incarnation mm-hmm right. Yeah, we we've we've set it up that way. Julius, Julius, like intentionally gave us that softball, you know, right there it right up with the word incarnation, because that's that's so.

Characteristic of Romero or maybe, I mean, maybe it'd be better to flip it and just say like, that's why Romero is such a Saint mm-hmm . Yeah. Is the way he incarnation, you know, like lives embodies and proclaims. Right. The guy like he, he was, and he could even say is the preacher that he is because he embodied, like, he received the word and embodied it himself the way he did.

Right, right. Yeah. And, and in that he, uh, he's pulling together, like the way the incarnation reconciles and pulls together humanity and God, you know, heaven and earth, he's pulling together so much in that. Right. There's, there's so much scriptural context. Mm-hmm, that, that allows us to understand what he's contextually doing there.

And in his time and place, uh, you know, he even says like the most important part of. The, the sermon, the homily is the exposition of scripture, but you look at how he practiced it, what he said and what, and how he actually lived it. You know, mm-hmm, , I mean, most of the week he lived in a hospice. Yeah. You know, and, and he, he was intentional about in his time, in the hospice, listening to the voice of God, as he listens to the Christ of the sick and the dying.

Yeah. And it's in living there and listening there that he's able to go and proclaim what he does in the pulpit.

And in, in pulling all that together, you know, he's, he's, um, in, in a very succinct, clear, and, and actionable way, he's proclaiming like the, the whole scriptures in that, the way Jesus. Perfects and, and sums up the whole scriptures. RO Romero can do that with that incarnation understanding of, you know, receiving the word, and then we become the microphone or the medium by which the word is extended to the rest of the world.

You know, mm-hmm cause you think like what he's exposing there as the word of God begins with creation. And so when God speaks, it's not like a radio show mm-hmm just giving out factoids. Yep. Or spin it. It's definitely not like listening to talk radio this week. Yeah. um, when, when God speaks stuff happens.

Yeah. Right when God speaks reality responds. Oh yeah. And when reality responds, it grows in beauty and it grows in complexity. When God says, let there be light, light goes. Yeah. When God says, let there be dry land. Yes. When he says, let the dry land produce vegetation. Yes mm-hmm . Yeah. And that's the, the picture of what's good.

And right. And then in the gospels, it there's a reason consistently in all of them, there are new creation themes to what Jesus does, right. There are echoes to creation, right. Because what sin and fallenness is, is not hearing and responding to the word of. Yeah. Um, not being what we were created to be, that's the kind of inauthentic, like existence that sin is striving for and Jesus sets all this, right.

It's the clearest in the gospel of John. I mean, it's just like, On the nose over even the whole structure of the whole book, but then especially like when Jesus is betrayed in the garden, crucified in a garden, raised in the garden, mistaken for a gardener, you know, it's like, Hey, the world, the cosmos is being recreated here through the, the actions of the word of God.

And so when we, this is why he says to be a microphone, right. Mm-hmm , it's not just, Hey, get the facts down. Yeah. And if you go somewhere else and, you know, oppress your brother, Right or steal from your sister, but then hand them the app, like the accurate bullet point facts of the gospel. You are not a microphone of Christ, you know, and this is, it's almost, it's a, it.

the metaphor has to in our minds stay rooted in Jesus and the scriptural story. Yeah. The way it was for Romero, if we're going to get it. Yeah. Right. And this, and for it to make sense and to, to see his consistency. Yeah. Because if we don't keep it rooted in that scriptural context and in Jesus, the way Romero did.

Yeah. Then we see inconsistencies when he says like, live the. You living the faith is how you become a microphone of Christ. Mm-hmm ex extending it. Right. Um, if we don't hold all that together, we, we see, well, okay. That's a mixed metaphor. Yeah. Maybe kind of a weak one, you know, in public speaking we critique it.

Yeah. But if you see, no, no, no. This metaphor is rooted in this story. Right. Then that's exactly the right way to like, hold the consistency between it. You, you hear you receive the word and you live it and you become the means by which God's word is, is extended to other ears. I love that. Do

Kevin: I? it. Uh, um, one of the books we are utilizing for Romero is, um, uh, utilizing, uh, Dr.

Agao cologne Emrick, um, who wrote a book called, um, uh, Oscar Romero's theological vision Uhhuh. Um, and one of the, the ways he, uh, articulates this. to kind of bring bridge that gap of like, okay, we have the information, the, the, the sermon, the preaching, but then also, how do you like live that out? Mm-hmm and then he, um, Romero and Edgardo kind of pulled this together by saying, imagine Jesus is the best sermon.

Yeah. That the father gave mm-hmm . . And so in my minds, like, it seems like you're mixing categories. interesting. The sermons are supposed to be audible voice, you know, something I hear. Yeah. That's, that's the sermon. It's whatever, you know, the, the sound waves coming outta my mouth and you can point to it in the context, like that's the sermon.

Yeah. But to say Jesus is the best sermon, um, it puts it incarnate. But it's flesh and, and bones and blood. Yeah, yeah, yeah. You know, it's, it discernment becomes the very life. And so, and I love how you linked that with Romero and how he was literally, um, a microphone of Christ because of the way he lived.

I love that story where, um, he chose to live in the hospital. Uh, and it's similar to what Pope Francis did, um, when he was, um, You know, or, or ordained appointed as the Pope is that, especially with archbishops too, there's always like a, a designated Archbishop residency or designated Pope residency. So you can live in like the really fancy, ornate building.

And then for archbishops, there's also one reserved. And so when Romero was appointed as Archbishop, uh, the church was like, oh, here's your housing? And remember said, Hm. He's like, I'd rather live over there with those nuns who are, um, running this hospital who are caring for those dying from cancer. And he says, I'm gonna take a little room in that building.

And so he chose that, you know, and that's the kind of person Romero was that he rather a no to the fancy building, living in luxury and go live with nuns who are caring for the sick and dying and actually taking just a little small corner in the room. Yeah. But then he would, uh, eat and live and, um, Pray and minister to people who are dying and also to the nuns, um, there's even just episodes of him, uh, eating with nuns.

And they're like, they burst out into songs, singing something in Spanish and Romero just kind of joins them along. Yeah. You know, and just kind of that, having that kind of imagery, that that's the kind of Romero that embodied the life of Christ.

I love

Julius: that if I have pre , I've got a couple of things that, um, I'm thinking a lot about microphones specifically right now. Cuz we're picking this is, this might be a force connection, but I'm just like really attentive to we're recording

Wilson: right now. I'm sitting here going like, let's see what happens here.

Cuz like homo Lytics is one of the major fields of my like dissertation. Yeah. Microphones. Microphones is jam Romeros is Kevin's that's it's so funny.

Julius: This is gonna happen. This has gotta be it's gotta the sweet spot. It's gotta. And it could, I dunno, forgive me if this sounds forced, but I was just thinking this whole time of like, I can hear we're recording in a church space right now and there's construction around us.

Mm. And, um, there's part of me is like, oh my gosh, I don't know if I can gate all this noise out. I, I don't know if I can block all this noise on the recording, but then it got me thinking about the microphone metaphor for two reasons. Cuz one, um, this is where it's gonna feel. But I think there's something to it.

um, in, in kind of prepping for this, I was like, uh, like, will Kevin speak right up into the mic? So that like, so that, um, you were getting as direct of a source, like from your mouth mm-hmm like to block out as much noise as possible. Um, and it just kind of made me think of microphones, like. when you will.

We're talking about how we receive, the

Wilson: word, if I'm tracking, I like where you're going. Yeah.

Julius: of, it's kind of like for, for a microphone to have the most clarity, like you're always, depending on what kind of like pickup pattern the mic is or whatever, like the best sound quality like has to be. There's a certain kind of proximity that the mouth and the voice has to have directionally to the microphone.

Right. And so for a microphone to like, to be effective and to like cl to have clarity, to represent the person who's speaking, mm-hmm, , there's gotta be a certain proximity to the person who's speaking. And so that's kind of like, I love that metaphor in, in the sense that as a good microphone, we've gotta be positioned like close enough to yeah.

To the mouth of God to receive. And to and I also love, oh, so many microphone mode of Bush cause I was also thinking, I love that I, with your stuff on, um, ho Lytics will and how you talk AB a lot about how grace doesn't erase our nature, but that like, there's something about like the, the burning Bush thing, right.

About like, um,

Wilson: That's that's Noma. I can't, I can't take credits. No, no,

Julius: no. But you talk a lot about in terms of preaching , you know, well, this thing you invented , but I, I think

Wilson: same Maxim is like, you're, you're lucky. I'm a Christian and I'm I forgive that plagiarism.

Julius: That's really funny, but that's kind of what I was chewing on was.

Um, where in this metaphor of the microphone, do we make room for like the particular, like character of the person and, um, and even like their context. And that's what made me think on the character thing. It's just like, as much as a mic can have like a certain clarity to represent like the, the source that it's recording or amplifying like each mic, depending on how it's wired.

Like they're gonna have. Different styles of microphones are gonna color the sound a little bit. They're gonna pick it up in a different way and they're gonna represent it, um, with different kind of shades of warmth and color. Um, and, and so I love that because like a microphone is like, even, it's just like it as a recording person.

Like there's so much variety. And as you get deeper into it, it's kind of like coffee or like tasting the nuances in coffee, right. Where it's not just a microphone, but you can, you can sense the different like, oh, this kind of condenser mic picks up this kind of nuance in your voice or whatever. And so it doesn't erase character, but it allows the, just, just as God.

With the people who like wrote these words in scripture like that, God, doesn't just, um, ki I don't know, like the, the writer doesn't go into a trance, but God like breathes into the embodied life and the character of this person, their writing style, their experiences. Yep. Then you think about context too, of just like, um, so much of the life in recordings comes not just from the microphone, but the room that they're placed in and that.

The the same, like guitar cab, micd up in the, uh, I'm taking this metaphor so far, but I think there's something to do. That's that's why it's rich. of just like the, like, you can take the same, like gear, like guitar, cab, like pedals and stuff. Have the, like, have the settings the same, but. Um, let's say you're trying to emulate someone, right?

Like slash his guitar tone or whatever. And you, that's funny. That's

Wilson: exactly where my brain went. I know the appetite for destruction

Julius: tone. You can look at pictures of how slash sets his Marshall amps, what pedals he's running. You can have his exact Gibson, but it's never gonna replicate the sound of that amp in that particular room at that particular time, because.

Even the air that's moving in that space is very particular and that's picked up by the microphone and that's translated onto recording. Yeah. And so the con, like, that's why I think like the context matters too, that like part of us living this embodied life that preaches Christ takes into account, all those things, our character, our experiences, and amplifies, even the context around us.

Wilson: It takes me back to, again, the creation story and notice the deep relationship between the father and the son, or the other way it's been said is like the father. The father's word. Yeah. The Lagos, which is Jesus and in creation, the more God speaks, the more happens. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. The more individuation, the more diversity, but also the more beauty and complexity.

Yeah. Right. It tends now in a, in a fallen world. Where sin is there where we're not hearing and responding, or we're not in time with God's cadence, you know? Yeah. When the music and the melody has been lost, then it tends to be the more diversity, the more complexity, the more conflict. Right. Right. But when God is speaking and, and we're really together attuned to God's word, the more complexity, the more beauty there is.

Um, and so, and if, if Christ is the word, the Lagos, then all of the infinite possibilities of creation are already actual and real in Christ mm-hmm. And so, and then this, this is why Romero says weird, like the extension of the incarnation yeah. Is in Jesus of Nazareth. Things were reconciled healed and put right again, potentially.

And when we join with him yeah. Then there's infinite variety and that's still it's it. It's still joining the same song. Right. And everything finds its place. Mm. And so we are all like you, you could pluralize it, you know, if, if he's the log OS, we're the log. Oy. We are, we're the words or the notes in the symphony that is Christ.

And in that place, we, we find our true self, our true individuality and express, who we really are in a way that, uh, that reflects genuinely Christ. Goodness, not just my desires, my will, my, you know, fears.

Julius: So, I mean, I love how much, um, how much life we, we got out of this metaphor, even in this conversation.

And so to kind of move that even further then, um, to, I guess not, not problematize it, but to address kind of like maybe a, a lingering kind of like problem point is what the question would be. Then if. Being the microphone of Christ is like, has to do with like, if preaching has to do with like the embodied and incarnate life.

And we can't divorce that from the person's character and context. Uh, does that mean we can hear the word of Christ properly in UNC Christ? Like people, like how, uh, how do we deal with that tension? If that link between like the person preaching. And the, and the words are, are so strong. Like what do we make of that?

When we hear preaching from people whose character doesn't reflect Christ

Wilson: the, well, the first place my mind goes with that is the gospel of mark. Huh? Um, I've been doing a little, a little study there and the last time through it struck me how often mark puts on the lips of people. Ooh, words that are so much fuller than they understand.

And the cl it's true of like Peter it's true of, you know, character after character, after character. Um, and in fact, up to the crucifixion, the human characters, uh, almost all of them get Jesus completely wrong. Right. Um, the only characters that get him right are demons. And then the human characters that come closest are blind.

Oh, but then the first human character that, that gets Jesus. Right. And actually says the same thing that the father says is at his, at his baptism is one of the soldiers that's crucifying him. Ooh. And that's one of that. This will, this will set up, we'll put a pin in this word scandal. Mm-hmm cause this we'll talk about that in the, the next bit, you know, mm-hmm but that sets up the scandal of the gospel and what God is doing in Jesus is the, the good news doesn't start.

And the world doesn't begin to be healed and reconciled because we got Jesus. Right? It's just God's action. Mm-hmm . And so even then, because of God's action in Christ, even then in that moment, the people close to him are drawn into something so much bigger than they even underst. Right. And so a person who's complicit in Christ murder is at the same time speaking words that are so much bigger than them pilot does it, you know, it's so, um, now that's not to excuse, right, right.

That's to that's to clarify the nature of the gospel, but then that also at the same point, you, you see that through that clarifies that for us to really hear and respond to the gospel means genuine repentance. Mm yeah. A change mm-hmm that we start to recognize, Hey, this gospel, we preach. There are things that I'm saying that are accurate, but they're bigger than I currently know and understand.

And it's always my job to allow it, to transform me, to expand me and make me more like Christ and to continue to journey in Christ likeness. And so I, there, I think it's, you know, uh, to bring it to Romero in one of the, the sources that Kevin had me read. Which was awesome in preparation for this points.

Um, it starts off with Mount Tabor mm-hmm , which is the, the mountain of transfiguration where Jesus goes up with his disciples and he lights up mm-hmm mm-hmm . And even as they're seeing all these incredible things, there's auditory. Uh, data too, where the father says, listen to him. Right? Cause still, even now with this dazzling vision and you see it with Peter, if you don't listen to him, you're gonna mistake and you're gonna misuse what you're seeing.

Mm-hmm , which is exact. You gotta keep him together. You have to keep hearing. If you're gonna see clearly and then speak and act truthfully on the other end of it. Um, and the author tried to make a link between Mount Tabor as this proclamation where Christ is seen and spoken of, right. Where Christ is seen and proclaimed, uh, or visualized and preached on Tabor to Romero.

And he says that there is continuity there, but it's a dotted line. Mm. Because you've got, you've got the conquest, you've got the misuse, the, the, the oppression, the genocide that happens in those places. Hmm. But there are. Fear points, you know, he says, yes, there are, there's clear continuity, but it's dotted line, you know, from there to Romero.

And that comes to be in those places where the, you know, the gaps in the, the dashes. Yeah. They're still bringing Bibles. Mm-hmm , you know, they're still setting up pulpits and talking mm-hmm and there're, there's a bit of it kinda like this IUR. Telling the truth, but not participating in it yet. Yeah. Yeah.

And as we, as we begin, begin to genuinely hear, listen to him and then participate, that's when it comes together. And, and it's not just accurate information, but the actions and the life lights up and the, a fuller like table mm-hmm of fuller manifestation in glory of Christ is herd and

Kevin: seen. Mm yeah.

Rabbi Romero's, uh, Two fair words that Rome loves to use is, uh, verbs , uh transfigure and convert conversion. Hmm. Um, and so he, he definitely uses amount of transfiguration mm-hmm um, but then he links that again. Let's think, uh, God. Uh, the best microphone, God is Christ mm-hmm and then best microphone.

Crisis is church. And so he links the transfiguration is between like the father and son, but then he links it and says you church need to be transfigured. You are called to light up you are called to, uh, be converted. And that means where you know, where your word actions in life are all like in a, a complete alignment in Christ mm-hmm, where they're all, uh, in harmonious, uh, relationship with each other.

And so he constantly calls people and especially in his context, I mean, man, I feel for Romero sometimes when you read his life, it's just such a dark time. Mm-hmm . And for him, it felt like everyone was literally out to get him. And he was against the world. Like the government was against him because he was preaching like this, his fellow priests were against him because he was like, sounding like a Marxist and a communist mm-hmm um, even some of the revolutionaries were against him because they didn.

It's like, okay, we're done listening to like, just preach love and like this will go away. Mm-hmm yeah, yeah. Yeah. And so in Romero just felt like, like any person who preaches and, and a pastor that feels like your words are landing on deaf ears and you keep like working and working, but seems nothing that seems to be happening.

And so Romero was definitely in a time where it just felt like everyone was his enemy or like they. Attributed to him as like their enemy. And he would have found very few friends, uh, in the way he was preaching, but he always called that. And so he was saying transfigure yourself. Um, Convert yourself back to the gospel.

Um, be changed, be transformed, do not settle for me. Mediocrity use soldiers who are taking up arms and in the name of liberation in the name of God, you are literally shedding blood. You need to stop because this is not the way of Christ. Um, the people and the government you need to, the rich, the wealthy, the oligarchs you need.

If you call yourselves a Christian, this is, and he goes on, like, you have to do this and this and this and this mm-hmm repent, convert be transfigured. And so he's always calling people and even he even calls himself out that all of us need to be transfigured. But it's just interesting that this question just highlights, that we're all on the, the path towards transfiguration all on the path towards conversion.

And there is definitely division between our words, our deeds, our actions, and our lives. Um, and Romero's just calling us back into harmonious unity. Mm-hmm , you know,

Julius: Um, speaking of, kind of words that, uh, Romero gravitates to, and, uh, speaking about preaching, you mentioned, um, the, the word scandal, or maybe we mentioned it prior to this conversation. Yeah. Does what, yeah. How does what you said, does it connect to how Romero understands like the gospel as a scandal and thus preaching as a scandalous act?

Yeah. How do, how can we define that? And.

Kevin: Um, yeah, another one. the scandal. Uh, one of the books we also use is called the scandal redemption, right. And it's, uh, a lot of Romero's quotes, um, compiled together. Uh, well, Romero he's, he's biblical to the core. Uh, It's he gravitates towards the Greek words, uh, scandal along mm-hmm um, it's I believe Paul uses it.

Um, and literally the word scandal means stumbling block mm-hmm . And so imagine someone walking on a road and then there's like a giant block or a rock and it just causes you to stumble, you know, can, can we just

Wilson: like, before. Before Kevin helps you here. Can we just name and totally empty your mind of like celebrity scandal, right.

Or tabloid scandal? Mm that's not what we're talking about. Yes. Right? Yes. So package that up, throw it out. make some room for what Kevin's about to lay out. Yeah. Well, thanks

Kevin: for that. And so, um, so a scandal is something like that trips. That you, um, fall and perhaps you get hurt a little bit and you kind of, you, you know, you fall to the ground and there's some sort of, um, tear in your flesh.

It's a scandal that it causes you to trip is the kind of the best way. And so Romero, uh, utilizes this, I mean, St. Paul does this as well that the gospel is scandalous and that it trips people up. He says that it calls it the scandal of the cross mm-hmm it's, uh, foolishness. To the Jew mm-hmm, no it's foolishness to the Greek and the stumbling block to the Jew.

Right, right, right. That the Jew cannot understand why the Messiah had to suffer and die. And then the Greeks cannot understand that this Jesus is divine incarnate. And so this is just something that trips, our epistemology, our understanding of how the world works and it just, it doesn't make sense. And so we, we stumble across.

It scandalizes us. And so Ram Romero uses this and, um, this is very, uh, the prophets are in line here. When Romero talks about how, um, the gospel of scandalous, uh, he talks about how Jesus trips people up that, um, whenever. The prophet would preach the word of God. Here's what the word of the Lord is saying to you.

And you have two options. You can either embrace this word or you can reject it. Um, and there is no middle ground here, uh, for the prophet. And so Romero says if the gospel scandalist then are preaching, needs to reflect that kind of scandal, cuz the gospel and preaching need to be in a harmonious unity.

Right? Mm-hmm . If here's the gospel, here's our preaching. They have to be in unity. If they're divided, then it just all falls. . And so when he talks about, uh, preaching as scandalous, he's saying that our preaching needs to reflect and continue that extension of Jesus causing or forcing for placing people in a position to either embrace his word or reject it.

And so what, what Romero would go in line here? He would say like, um, the world, the world says blessed are the rich. The world says, if you have a lot of things, then you are blessed. Romero would say, and then he would continue. He was like, no, Jesus said blessed are the poor mm-hmm . Um, because they have, they understand that they are a need for God.

And so he would, this is just an example, how Romero preaches in a scandalous way. It's something that trips us up. It makes us kind of feel uncomfortable. Mm-hmm and he says this. Jesus is saying, you need to find yourself in a poverty of spirit. And he calls out the rich, he calls out those in power. He calls out those who rather are self centered and selfish and their sin.

Um, and he says that we need to re re uh, embody the love that Christ has for the poor. And so one of the scandalous, uh, themes in Romero's preaching is that God has a special place in God's heart for the poor. that the poor are. Are to be seen as the faces of Christ. Um, and so he always, he calls out, I mean, this is goes, talk about getting political here.

Uh, he calls out the government, he calls out the natural guard. He calls out the police, uh, officers. He calls out even the revolutionaries and even those who take up arms with the poor, but he calls them out. And talks about how Christ is with a way of, of love and also the way of the poor. And so this is just an example of how Romero's preaching is scandal as it trips us up.

Yeah. , it's uncomfortable. Um, but it's also. in unity with the gospel. Yeah.

Wilson: And like Paul mentions that it, that hits the Jew and the Greek, which is everyone in his world. Right. Romero, uh, tripped up everyone

Kevin: oh, for sure. He, he would, uh, one of, one of his things, uh, I just read this yesterday. Um, and one of his sermons, he says, um, after like highlighting the poor, he says, neither he says, should we neglect the sins of the poor.

nor forget the virtues of the rich. Hmm. And so he kind of says like this, this is not, it's not just like a, a general statement. It's like, okay, poor, good, rich, bad. It's for Romero. It's much more nuanced than that. Um, but he says like the God in Christ can reveal himself through all people, but he would say the gospel is.

Uh, came to earth, especially for the poor, um, and kind of highlights the emphasis, but he also says that there are definitely the, the rich have virtues. And good, uh, Christian lives, except that they need must recognize that their own poverty and recognize that the, how the poor realized this, um, really well is that they need, they have a deep desire and need for God and they know God.

And so Romero calls the rich, like you need to know and have a desire for your need of God in the same way. The poor does.

Julius: Well, thanks. I mean, I feel like you both have given me plenty to sit with, um, and to thanks for your time. And I'm excited to explore this with you both in the coming episodes, talking more about, um, the implications of Romero's preaching on other aspects.


Saints as Mentors - An Introduction to St. Óscar Romero


INTRO

There's a saying, I'm sure you've heard it: "It always looks impossible until someone does it." We understand this truth, and greatly value it, when it comes to something like innovation.

Electricity, indoor plumbing, and flying machines all looked impossible to most of our ancestors. And we're glad someone did things that proved them to be realistic.

100 years ago every single standing athletic world record looked impossible.

When I was a kid, touch interfaces and video calls were the stuff of science fiction.

Then someone did it. So now we all do it, and think nothing of how wondrous what we are doing actually is.

The greatest things always look impossible ... Until someone does it.

In this series, we just want to help you notice how strange it is, then, that we tend to fail to appreciate this same principle when it comes to other things our age does not tend to value a much. Like ancient and religious things.

Why does the gospel seem so impossible to us, when history if full of saints who have done it? Who have lived in ways that show us what is really possible when we trust God's presence and help.

This time we introduce to you St. Oscar Romero. And over the course of this series we will look at what he shows us, in Christ, by the Spirit, and in this world is possible in the areas of communication, community, and liberation.

[TRANSITION TO ALL THINGS INTRO]

STORY:

[MUSIC BEGINS/CONTINUES]

[Romero Audio Recording: "Episode 1: The-Church-Serves-Personal-Communal-and-Transcendent-Liberation--The-Archbishop-Romero-Trust, Part 413:45-14:50]

El Texto Original:

“La Iglesia, defensora de los derechos de Dios, de la ley de Dios, de la dignidad humana, de la persona, no puede quedarse callada ante tanta abominación. Queremos que el Gobierno tome en serio que de nada sirven las reformas si van teñidas con tanta sangre*. En nombre de Dios, pues, y en nombre de este sufrido pueblo, cuyos lamentos suben hasta el cielo cada día más tumultuosos, les suplico, les ruego, les ordeno en nombre de Dios: ¡cese la represión!*.”

Translation: 

[13:45-14:50] The church defends the rights of God, the law of God, and the dignity of the human person and therefore cannot remain silent before such great abominations. We want the government to understand well that the reforms are worth nothing if they are stained with so much blood. (Applause) In the name of God, then, and in the name of this suffering people, whose laments rise up each day more tumultuously toward heaven, I beg you, I beseech you, I order you in the name of God: stop the repression! (Applause) [Kevin Read]

If Óscar Romero knew we were looking for a way to introduce him to you, Romero would be pleased if we said first, that he was a Pastor. Romero was certainly many things. He was a Roman Catholic, Salvadoran, priest, prophet, preacher, and archbishop. Through whatever means he was capable, Romero defended the poor -– which in El Salvador were known as campesinos -- and he worked against the use of violence as a means to an end. He did this with such determination and conviction that he was eventually assassinated for it. And with all this in mind, saying Romero was primarily a pastor does not reduce him to just that one thing; rather that one thing encompasses and unifies all these other aspects of his identity. To Romero, the honor of growing into someone who could faithfully carrying out the role of pastor was the greatest gift God gave him.

And by living into the role of Pastor, Romero's life became something that can illuminate for us ways we might creatively, intelligently, and courageously engage our culture through things like preaching; advocacy; prayer; love expressed in nonviolence, fortitude, fidelity, and ultimately Christian perfection. Which is a huge claim, but we'd do him an injustice by settling for anything else. Óscar Romero embodied the kind of Christlikeness that our Tradition has decided is best named by the word "saint."

[MUSIC]

French Catholic novelist, Leon Bloy, wrote: "The only real sadness, the only real failure, the only great tragedy in life, is not to become a saint." There are some traits common to all saints. You can't be a saint without love, courage, or generosity. But there are also as many ways into saintliness as there are people. No two people become courageous of generous by exactly the same path. So how did Óscar Romero get there? Romero was born on August 15th, 1917, in Ciudad Barrios: a rural & poor town in northeastern part of El Salvador. His parents were Guadalupe De Jesus Galdamez and Santos Romero. Óscar was the second eldest of 8 children. His family made ends meet by selling coffee, cotton, or sugarcane -- but just barely; Óscar occasionally had to sleep on the floor.

Romero's father was not particularly religious, but his mother, Guadalupe, was a devout Catholic. So Óscar was baptized when he was 2 years old, and his mother taught him and his siblings how to pray and led them through rosary devotions every night. 

As a child, Romero was quiet, serious, and introspective. His siblings remembered him as being too intense, particularly in regard to his faith. Romero's favorite childhood game was "playing processions," where he would put on one of his mother's aprons and walk on the streets pretending to be a priest leading a Mass. Óscar's father trained him to be a carpenter, but at the age of 13 he informed his parents he wanted to enter the priesthood.

So by 14, Romero entered the seminary. 

What are you doing with your life?

[MUSIC]

Romero's pastoral formation and seminary experience was a lot like living in a monastic community. There were about 40 other seminarians, aged 13-18, who lived and studied together. Each seminarian was initially taught to pastor people by being assigned a plot of land to tend. The fruits and vegetables they grew were used for the seminary kitchen. They also kept something like a Benedictine daily routine. The boys woke up at 5:30 each morning, attended Mass an hour later, ate breakfast, and went to classes for a total of 8 hours which were punctuated with midday prayer, lunch, work and study, and evening prayer and night prayer. 

After graduating at the age of 18, Romero received a scholarship to attend a major seminary in Rome. He accepted and spent the next 6 years becoming deeply formed by the Vatican and Roman Catholicism. This period instilled in Romero a deep love for, and fidelity to the Church, an unwavering devotion to her doctrines and teachings and deep appreciation for Jesuit spirituality. This cannot be overstated: Romero was a devout Catholic was loyal to her tradition throughout his whole life. It vital to remember this especially when trying to understand some events from later in his life when he might appear to be against the Church.

During his time in Rome Romero became deeply inspired by Pope Pius XI. Óscar loved Pius' emphasis on global mission, the ordination of native people, his commitment to social issues and justice, the integration of Christian faith and the sciences, the use of radio for preaching, and for the way Pius exemplified the virtue of fortitude in preaching. Pope Pius XI wrote encyclicals against, and publicly rebuked Benito Mussolini in speeches and sermons, especially when Mussolini sided with Hitler in persecuting the Jews. Romero stated later in life that he learned how to preach against the powers that be from Pope Pius.

Romero was ordained a priest in 1942 and wrote his doctoral dissertation on the theology of Christian Perfection in the work of 16th century Jesuit, Luis De La Puente. Romero became convinced that the whole goal of the Christian life was Perfection in Love after the patter given by Jesus. Romero said, quote, "The Lord has inspired in me a great desire for holiness. I've been thinking of how far a soul can ascend if it lets itself be possessed entirely by God." 

[MUSIC]

Romero was diligent. From 1944 to 1970, alongside his priestly duties, Romero worked in administration for his whole diocese and acted as secretary to the archbishop, organized catechism classes, conducted spiritual direction, and counseling for young adult organizations, chaplained, and ran a radio ministry for people in the streets.

Romero always had a heart for the poor; he organized an association of homeless shoeshine boys to make sure they were fed and had a place to sleep. He founded a trade school that taught poor children practical vocations. He visited the local jails and prisons, to offer spiritual direction and bring movies for them to watch. Romero arranged dietitians to teach proper nutrition to his parishioners. He gave away alms to beggars, peasant farmers, and prostitutes. But he would also hang around the wealthy to leverage their resources for the benefit of the poor.

Romero also always had a special heart for those addicted to alcohol, because his father and his brother suffered from the same disease. 

But like any human -- and every saint is all the way human -- Romero's diligence came with a shadow side: He struggled with perfectionism and judgmentalism. He would often get into debates with his fellow priest over things like whether or not they should wear cassocks and looked down on those priests who did not follow the rules and disciplines of the Vatican. Romero was overworked, overextended, exhausted, and obsessive-compulsive. For much of his life he struggled with chronic stress and mental anxiety. 

[OMINOUS PAD BEGINS]

You should know, though, that it would be unfair to say his fears were unfounded. To understand the darkness and violence looming over later episodes of Romero's life, you need to know something about two two councils that took place in the life of the Roman Catholic Church. The first is Vatican II. It took place from 1962 to 1965 and renewed and reoriented the Church in many directions. This council issued critical changes in the liturgical worship of the Church, redefined the ministry and role of the laity, took a positive stance towards ecumenicalism, called for a return to the sources of the Scriptures & the Church Fathers and called everyone to recover the importance of prayer through the Liturgy of the Hours.

Most controversially, the council called for a change in relationship between the Church and the larger Society. To this day, Catholics remain divided over whether Vatican II was a great step forward or a terrible step toward the grave.

The second is the Latin American Bishops Council in Medellín, Columbia. This Council was called to discern the best ways to appropriate Vatican II's ecclesial reforms throughout the Latin American context. Pope Paul VI opened the Medellin council and proclaimed as a guiding principle a key emphasis from Vatican II: quote, "The Mission of the Church is to personify the Christ of a poor and hungry people" endquote. In Latin America, there was a serious imbalance of wealth and power which effected the church's spiritual vitality. And Pope Paul exhorted the wealthy to detach from the stability of their position of privilege and serve those who need what they have. The Latin American Bishops coined this phrase: God has a, quote, "preferential option for the poor."

Romero was in agreement with the majority of these reforms and his peers recognized his authenticity and ability. So in  1975, he was named the new bishop of Santiago De Maria.

At the time, ⅔ of the population under Romero's care were living in poverty. That's a staggering number. Unsurprisingly, given that bit of context, El Salvador's wealthy elites were being challenged by union workers, political activists, and campesinos (poor peasant farmers).  Those advocating for reform quickly became associated with Marxist ideology and communist revolutionaries. Violence became a tragic new normal. Much of this was perpetrated by the national guard, ORDEN, an intelligence-gathering arm of the government ordained to detect and eliminate communists. ORDEN transfigured into death squads who would kidnap, torture, and murder anyone considered to be a Marxist or communist sympathizer. As just one example, on June 21, 1975, guardsmen attacked Tres Calles, which was in Romero's diocese. They raided the houses of peasant farmers and  pulled 5 men into the open air and hacked them to death with machetes. When Romero protested this action to the local commander, the commander responded: quote, "Cassocks are not bulletproof!"

Then  in 1977, Romero was appointed as Archbishop of San Salvador, which meant that he had pastoral oversight for the entire country of El Salvador.

He was elected because he was a conservative, reserved, and quiet Christian, and people assumed he would not be the kind of person who would stir trouble through his preaching. Romero did frequently addressed the problems of El Salvador, but usually in a purely spiritual ways. But given his fidelity to the councils we mentioned, and because of his experience living in close contact with the poor, Romero's perspective and approach began to shift. He later stated: quote, "By God, the poor were the ones who revealed to me my true vocation." 

When he became Archbishop on February 10th, 1977, 2% of the country's population owned 60% of the cultivatible land. 20% of the land was too mountainous or rocky to farm, so that left only 20% of usable land to 98% of the country's population. Most of the people were unemployed and in existed in crippling poverty, and a tiny handful were incredibly wealthy and powerful. Given this situation, El Salvadore was ripe for Communist conversion, which led El Salvador to become a player in the Cold War. U.S. President Jimmy Carter began bankrolling the Salvadoran military and provided help in training national guardsmen who then became death squad members.  Romero wrote to President Carter, asking him to stop sending weapons and money to El Salvador, explaining that this way of resisting communism was only further hurting the poor and killing Salvadoran peasants. 

In response to the violence of national guardsmen and death squads, resistance groups were formed. Their original purpose was to lobby for campesino civil rights, unions, fairer wages, and agrarian reform, but they too eventually fell victim to the demon of violence and became guerilla soldiers who would commit their own share of murder and regularly kidnap wealthy Salvadorans to finance their resistance. 

Romero frequently condemned both sides of the conflict for their violence and urged all people to find nonviolent ways to institute justice. Yet, as is often the case when truth leads someone to refuse to join sides, neither side would listen to him. Some priests, in wanting to side with the poor, became Marxist. The government and wealthy class then created a slogan: Haga patria, mate a un cura – "Be a patriot, kill a priest." And other bishops and priests allied themselves with the government. While the political divisions and commitments of El Salvador seeped their way into the lives of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, Romero increasingly found himself alone.

[MUSIC]

Romero had one very close Jesuit friend. His name was Rutilio Grande. Both Rutilio and Romero were born in rural towns to modest families, pretended to be priests as children, and were awkward and shy. During the troubles, these two would take long walks, share memories of their childhoods, and discuss their hopes and vision for the Church. 

Rutilio Grande organized base communities that educated and resourced the poor. This was enough to make the Government suspicious he was teaching Marxism and training those he helped in Guerilla warefare for revolution. Neither was true, but the National Guardsmen still took matters into their own hands.

One day Grande was driving 4 farmers, two of whom were young children, when his car was ambushed. The 2 young children were let free, but Grande and the others were riddled with bullets.

Romero went to investigate and when he saw his best friend's corpse, he was angry. He was shocked. He was broken and weeping. And he was marked; from that time on Romero was indelibly changed.

A little later he said, quote, "If they killed Grande for doing what he did, then I must walk the same path." Romero wrote in his journal: "I believed in conscience that God was calling me to take a stand that contrasted with my temperament and my 'conservative' inclinations. I've been awakened to take a positive stand to defend my Church and, on behalf of the Church, to stand with my greatly oppressed people." He stated in another place: "I prefer to call that moment a 'change in attitude' or 'development in the process of awareness.'" Romero spoke of God awakening in him the virtue of fortitude: the courage to confront fears, even the fear of death.  The following quotes exemplify the way Romero began to preach against the principalities and powers of the world:

"The world does not say: blessed are the poor. The world says: blessed are the rich. You are worth as much as you have. But Christ says: Wrong! Blessed are the poor, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven, because they do not put their trust in what is transitory." 

"A church that doesn't provoke any crises, a gospel that doesn't unsettle, a word of God that doesn't get under anyone's skin, a word of God that doesn't touch the real sin of the society in which it is being proclaimed–what kind of gospel is that?" 

"The Beatitudes are not something we can understand fully, and that is why there are young people especially who think that the love of the Beatitudes is not going to bring about a better world and who opt for violence, for guerilla war, for revolution. The church will never make that its path. Let it be clear, I repeat, that the church does not choose those ways of violence and that whatever is said to that effect is slander. The church's option is for what Christ says in the Beatitudes."

"How do I treat the poor? Because that is where God is. The degree to which you approach them, and the love with which you approach them, or the scorn with which you approach them--that is how you approach your God. What you do to them, you do to God. The way you look at them is the way you look at God." [Kevin]

They also show how Romero became a prophet.

[MUSIC]

And like prophets tend to do, Romero suffered greatly. His friend Grande was not the only priest who was killed under Romero's oversight as bishop. In all, he lost about 7 other priests he considered friends.

Other Bishops and priests who sided with the El Salvadorian government and elite began to speak of Romero as a, quote, "traitor," who had, quote, "abandoned us." The President and the National Guard accused Romero of joining the Marxist communists and revolutionary Guerrilla soldiers, and then his fellow clergy added to the accusations.

On the other side, the revolutionaries did not trust Romero either, because they grew tired of hearing that "love and peace can change things." And Romero got into heated arguments with fellow priests who took up guns to fight on behalf of the peasants and poor.

And yet, also like a prophet, Romero continued to preach faithfully and courageously in the face of loneliness and opposition. He spoke against the oppression and atrocities of the National Guard, the El Salvadorian government, the wealthy, and the powerful, and called them to love and care for the poor. On the other end Romero continued to preach against the violence of the revolutionaries, pleading with them to find alternative solutions for peace and justice. Against the powers and trends of his day he advocated for the, quote, "violence of love" that could tear down oppression by seeking the well-being and salvation of all. 

But, as all Pastors know all too well, Romero saw nothing changing in response to his exhortations. The violence of El Salvador only escalated. In one of his final sermons, Romero preached: quote, "The denouncements of the left against the right and the hatred of the right for the left appear irreconcilable, and those in the middle say: Wherever the violence comes from, be tough on them both. There can be no love at all where people take sides to the point of hating others. We need to burst these dikes, we need to feel that there is a Father who loves us all and awaits us all. We need to learn to pray the "Our Father" and tell him: Forgive us as we forgive." [Kevin] Endquote.

On March 23rd, 1980, the 5th Sunday of Lent, Romero delivered his last recorded sermon. He preached that the mission of the church was to open up God's Word for all people, both the oppressed and the oppressor, in order to shed light on the social, political and economic realities challenging the nation. To preach that way is not to meddle in politics, he said, but a proclamation of the Easter promise of Christianity --- the prospect of the victory of divine justice and peace in the face of the world's death. Liberation does not come magically, nor does it come with violence. According to Romero, it comes only through a fidelity to Jesus Christ that leads to actions based upon his teachings and example. Romero ended with a call to stop the repression in the name of God. It was at the same time a lament and a command.

[MUSIC BEGINS]

Throughout this final sermon the parish responded with resounding applause with "Amens" breaking through their clapping. Romero had become so immersed in both the life of Christ and the life of his people that his sermons were simultaneously proclamations of the Gospel and the cries of the Salvadoran people. 

At 6pm on Monday, March 24th, 1980, Romero was scheduled to celebrate the Eucharist for the 1st anniversary of the death of a friend's mother. The Mass was held in the same place he lived: a hospital run by nuns for people dying of cancer. As Romero was blessing the bread and wine, and lifting the cup of the blood of the Lord, a single rifle shot exploded from outside the open doors of the church. The bullet hit Romero squarely in the chest. He collapsed with blood streaming from his mouth and nose. Horrified sisters ran to him, cried, held him, prayed, and consoling him in his last moments on earth.

Just as he predicted, 3 years and 12 days after his best friend, Rutilio Grande, was killed, Romero shared the same fate.

[MUSIC] 

In October of 2018, Pope Francis canonized Óscar Romero as a Saint and named him a Christian martyr who laid down his life for preaching Jesus Christ. The Pope referred to Romero as: "A ... shepherd after the heart of Christ, evangelizer and father of the poor, heroic witness of the kingdom of God." During the ceremony another Archbishop referred to Romero as, quote, "defender of the poor," a title that was also given to the ancient church fathers. Today, Romero is known as "the father of the Latin American Church."

As a true shepherd, Romero knew his people, cared about his people, and loved his people by working and sacrificing greatly for them.

On March 24th, 1980, as the gunman rested his rifle on the door of the car that pulled up outside the open doors of the church, Romero saw the shooter. But he made no movements to escape. Because he was a shepherd, and as a shepherd he did not want to put any of his people in attendance in harm's way. In this moment, Romero proved he was no longer the anxious and fearful priest of his youth, but a saint, who could defeated the temptation run and instead stand firm. He was not, in Jesus' words, quote "a hireling who flees when the wolf snatches and scatters the sheep --- a hireling runs away because they do not care about the sheep." Saint Oscar Romero laid down his life for the flock of God, like the Good Shepherd does.

And you may not know this, but the word Pastor means "shepherd."

May we have more pastors like Romero.

[MUSIC  TRANSITION TO:]

MEDITATION

[PAD AND MELODY  SWELL AND FADE THROUGHOUT]

If Saints show us something about possibility, about human potential in Christ, this meditation seeks to help some of Romero's example flow into your actual experience.   

So, from the introduction to Romero provided in the podcast, think about the early episodes of his life and ministry, and note, like ever saint, Romero did not begin as a saint. Like all of us, who in our own ways find fear to be one of the major forces holding us back from a fuller life, Romero spent much of his priesthood avoiding conflict. His core convictions about his faith may have changed very little, and some not at all, but early on Romero often pulled back from speaking directly to the events and issues of his world by overly spiritualizing the issues, and speakin only in terms of principles. Thus, Romero didn't betray his faith or convictions, but this did allow each side to interpret the principles in ways that justified their own conclusions and actions.

So, in what ways are you afraid to engage your world because of fear of backlash or criticism from people on other sides?

Be honest about your fear, and open your heart to the Spirit. What do you sense the Spirit of God saying to you about your fear?

Now, in fearful and polarized times like Romero's, and ours, most Christians would agree that the Gospel and Scriptures should enable to see things differently, and call us to something higher. But notice what the Bible itself tells us about the way the Word guides us: in Jesus day, many people, whole crowds and multitudes, heard Jesus' sermons. And many of these folks failed to recognize the divine power and truth in his words. So they stayed caught up the the same power games.

Just hearing Jesus' words in Scripture don't guarantee we will truly be guided by God through difficult and contentious seasons. And without God's guidance and grace, we won't act as witnesses to God's transcendent kingdom.

So now notice, those who tended to follow Jesus where he went, to watch what Jesus did and then emulate his actions, these became the ones who could recognize in Jesus' words the power of eternal life. And these became embodied witnesses of what is possible when Christ's enternal power flows through our thoughts and actions.

In Romero's day and time, he spent much of his life in the places Jesus said he would be -- with the sick and the poor. And in those places, Romero practiced keeping Jesus example. This allowed Romero to really hear God's voice in the Scriptures, and this is why Romero said the voice of the poor became the place where he heard his true vocation from God. and all this is what allowed Romero act as a saintly witness in a violent and unjust world.

So, if in our own divisive time, you want to let not just your opinions about the Bible guide your responses to the fear and violence of the world where you find it in yourself and in external circumstances ... but instead want to find God's voice guiding you through the Scriptures, and shaping you into an instrument of justice and peace, in what ways do you currently, or could you, actually engage and practice the Scriptures, live the Gospel, to give it opportunity to speak?

Where could you hang our where you'd be likely to meet the Jesus witnessed to in the Gospels? What might he call you to do there?

Finally, if you're willing and ready, think about the murder of Romero's best friend, Rutilio Grande. And put yourself in Romero's place. Imagine someone you cared deeply for was killed simply for trying to do something good. Honestly, how would you react?

Given what you would feel, what sorts of images or fantasies do you think would take over your mind?

Romero responded to his friend's murder by calling for, and working for, an end to all methods of violence. What is you initial reaction to, or evaluation of, Romero's response?

In spending time not just with his friend and the poor, but also with his enemies, Romero came to understand how everyone suffers in times of violence and fear. Even enemy soldiers have children and loved ones. And when they lose a parent or friend, they too suffer the kind of pain that tempts them to continue the very cycles of hatred and violence that caused their suffering. So Romero find in Christ the grace to sublimate his pain and anger and put it somewhere redemptive.

What do you think it would take for you to have genuine empathy for the loved ones of your enemies? For your enemies themselves?

And because of Romero's sacrifice, people on all sides of the conflict benefitted.

So how do you think you would react if in response to your pain, obeying Jesus' guidance led to healing and redemption for your enemies?

[END]


BONUS EPISODE - "Why Jesus?" by Wil Ryland


INTRO:

Hey everybody. Thanks for listening to All Things. I'm Julius Obregon and I produce and co-host this show. We're gonna do something a little different for this episode. As we prepare for our next series today, we're excited to share a sermon from our very own Wil Ryland. Wil, as you may know, is one of the co-hosts of All Things and the director here at Shema Center for Christian Formation.

But on top of all that, he's a preacher. If you were to talk to him, you'd soon find out that he understands all of his roles as an extension of that vocation and calling as a preacher. The following is a recording from coastline church here in California. They've got the audio and video on their website as well, which will include a link to in the show notes.

But we thought it'd be helpful to share it all with you here. It's a sermon that will preached back in March as part of a series called why Jesus and I'm excited that you listeners get to hear will preach in a way that our podcast format doesn't always make possible. We hope this can be an encouragement to you because preaching is just one of the gifts that we're happy to give as a way of pouring into our local churches.

So if you think your church or organization could benefit from any of the topics we've talked about on this. We'd love to connect with you and figure something out. If you're interested in inviting either will or one of our other staff members at Shema as a guest speaker, please feel free to reach out to us at Shema sd.org/contact-us.

That's S H E M A S D.org/contact-us as always. Thank you for listening. Stay tuned in the coming weeks. As we give you more updates about the future of all things podcast and in the meantime, enjoy the sermon from our very own Wil Ryland.

SERMON TRANSCRIPT [Auto-Generated]

All right. Good morning. Hey question for you. Do you know why you don't remember the day that you were born? So you ask in neuroscientists, they're gonna be like, well, they're infant brain has yet to develop. Nope. The reasons grace

think about it, right? For your whole life, your entire existence, mom, hasn't just carried you. She's fed you, but she hasn't just carried you and fed. For nine months, your mom has breathed for you. And then instantly one day, bam, not bothering to give you a heads up. Nobody consulting you here. You are kid.

Hey, there's this thing. You need it to survive. You don't even know what it is. Good luck. Welcome to the world. And so of course we figure out this breathing thing, like we do, we figure it out. We get there by screaming, like from day one, your entrance into this world from day one, fear drives the development of our skills in our know.

and this dynamic between fear and the development of our skills and our know how it doesn't just stop with our breathing skills. Like pretty quickly you start to notice, there are certain things that intuitively I get, there are many things in this world that make no sense to me, but there are some things that I just, I understand I can see into the logic there.

I can, I can Intuit the principle there. And so some of you, you just get power dynamics, but you're afraid of not being in control. So you develop the skills that free you to command a room. Some of you get communication, you get how information travels and so you fear being misunderstood. And so you develop the skills to be able to talk your way through just about anything.

Some of you are people, people, people, people, what do you fear? people cause you know, 'em so what do you develop the ability to kind of sit back and read what's going on this, person's got this and this person and you can just subtly move all of that in a direction. That's good for you. And so I'm not saying though that because the development of our skills are tied to fear that it's a bad thing.

It's not a bad thing, nothing to be ashamed of. It's our world. It's, it's where we live. It's just who we are. It's not a bad thing, but it starts to go wrong. If you start to believe that at some point, your skills will get to a certain place where you will have enough power to fix enough things to make the world always feel safe,

especially if you want to feel safe and free from. because fear is often, it's the thing at our very core, developing those very skills. And so those skills are powerless to free us from the thing that develops them. Right. So sure. These skills give you power. Some it'll give you the power to pay your rent.

One more month. It'll give you the power to disappear into a crowd. The freedom to work a room, but as powerful. And they can become incredibly powerful, but as powerful as your skills and your abilities, your knowhow can become, it can never free you from fear and as long, so long as we're not free from fear, it will not fear.

Won't just drive the development of our skills. It will also shape how we use them and what we use them for. And if this is true on a personal level, Right. And you see, when we zoom out to a social level, to a communal level, then you'll notice other people who resist your power and they'll band together with other people to resist your power.

And so you'll do what you'll band with other people to resist them and community won't be a place of giving and receiving. It becomes a place of conflict warfare. It becomes the place where we leverage. to restrict the power of fearful individuals and to fight off the advances of other fearful tribes.

So like, look at it, watch for all the talk about our world being so divided and in so many ways it's so true. But for all that talk about our world being so divided, take any issue, whatever the issue is that we could divide ourselves up on right. And place on this side. I would go all the way to that end of the stage.

But there's a red line right here that I saw. I've seen it. Like, I don't know how many times I've met here. I didn't know what it's for. This is Aaron's border. He can't, it's like a video game when you reach the end of the code. Like, that's it. But if I could I go all the way to that far end and you, you put whatever extreme position you can on that end of the stage and stretch it all the way across the other side and whatever opposite extreme position there is there.

However you would divide. Right. Make it three dimensions and you don't just have from there to there, you've got it spread all across, up here. You have different tribes mixing it all up, right. For all the talk about how divided we are from this angle. It's actually pretty easy to see isn't it sounds weird, but it's obvious isn't it?

That there is something that has been uniting us for a very long time. And the thing that unites us is fear

guys. The problem isn't that we're not United the problem's what. Is uniting us. Right? And so in this series, we're asking why Jesus and what I want to present to you in this message is an opportunity to think. Well, maybe Jesus, because in this broken scared world, Jesus is the only thing that could offer me genuine freedom.

Hm. And in doing this, Jesus starts the way we do. He's born into the same world that we're born into and for all to talk about ancient people being so different. Yeah. And in so many ways they were very different. They ate things. You would never eat. They believe things that you find incredible. Right. But in so many other ways, our world's not that different.

He was born into world where they already had their tribes, they had their issues and they'd banded together into their camps. And they'd lob bombs at. he's born into this world. He develops his skills. He moves around, he starts gathering his own tribe, but he doesn't play by the same rules. He starts messing with the rules when he starts gathering a tribe.

You see, for us, we tend to band together with people that on some level, right. They're super annoying and they have different personalities. They irritate me, they talk weird. Right. But if the goal of this group is not just pleasure, right? If the goal of this group is survival. Then it's strategically advantageous to deal with these annoying people because on a deeper level, we agree on what the problem is and what to do about it.

And they have different skills than I do. And so we bind, we like gather up, we hunker down with our tribe. Jesus goes around to these tribes that are already forms and starts messing with them. Like he walks up to a Pharisee. Pharisees are the people that they had, all the rules, they knew all the rules.

They actually tried to follow all the rules and they made it their business to make sure everybody else followed all the rules too, walks up to a Pharisee and he says, follow me. Then he walks over here to a prostitute and he doesn't say, follow me over here. And then over here be like, why didn't you listen to those phar?

They're rules. There's something to that. Right? You understand this and that, right? He goes up to the Pharisee. He follow says, follow me. He goes to the prostitute and he says, what? Follow me. He goes to a zealot. These were the radical gorilla warriors of the Jewish world. That day. They hated the Romans.

They would kill the Romans and they would kill anyone who helped the Romans. He goes up to this freedom fighter Simon and he says, Simon, follow. and some of you're like, yeah, but wait, because then he goes over to a tax collector, somebody who helped the Romans, exactly the kind of person that a zealot would stick a dagger into and says, Matthew Levi, follow me too.

He brings them all together. He puts 'em in a boat and then he takes them directly into their fears. The first passage I wanna look at with you this morning comes from mark chapter. versus 35 to 41. He gathers this kinda like dysfunctional bear. Like I guarantee you for like the first two years they were together.

Every time they camped on the roadside, Jesus had to sleep between Simon, the zealot and the tax collector, just to make sure the zealot didn't roll over and stick a dagger in his gut, in the middle of the night. And then he puts 'em in a boat, takes 'em out on the middle of the sea. And this happens on that day when evening had come, he said to them, let's go across to the.

leaving the crowd behind. They took him with them in the boat just as he was other boats were with him and a great Gale arose and the waves beat into the boat so that the boat was already being swamped. But he was in the stern, asleep on the cushion. They woke him up and they said in teacher, do you not care?

They were perishing. He woke up and rebuked the wind in the seas and said, peace, be still. And the wind ceased. And there was a dead calm. He said to them, why are you. have you still no faith. And they were filled with great awe and they said to one another, who then is this, that even the wind and the seas obey him.

So here up here on the screen, we've got a map with that body of water that Jesus put the disciples out into on the boat. We were the top. You see where it says gate to Galilee that's, what's what mark calls the sea of Galilee right up there. They were over here on the west side of that body of water.

And so the left on this map, that was Galilee. That was where Jesus worked. That's where Jesus started doing his initial ministry. That was where these good Jewish people live. The other side, just on the other Eastern side of that body of water, what was, is what was, what was called the deist deist means 10 cities.

Those were 10 cities that Rome had founded with the specific intent of mounting, a cultural invasion against the Jewish people to infiltrate and overtake their. so already at the very be just by going saying, let's go to the other side, guys. Jesus is taking them right into a chaotic unclean place that they feared.

And then it's like reality itself tried to add to all this fear because the wind kicks up and the waves start rocking the boat with this. Like it's not just violence. It's like a, it's like a, almost malevolent, a twisted kind of intelligent violence, trying to swallow them down into the deep. And I guarantee you.

AB, absolutely like this isn't in the text. This would be in the white space between the letters. Right? So that's where you'd find it. Not in the actual words, but it's there cuz I guarantee you that in this moment, nobody in that boat is arguing over what to do with a woman, cotton, adultery, nothing, nobody in that boat is arguing over what kind of Jewish liturgy actually pleases God the most or what to do about the Roman.

in this moment, they are binding together and whatever skills they have, whatever talent and power they have, they are working together to do anything. They can. The fishermen are tying down the ropes and trying to read the wind, right? The, the people with the commanding presence. We're barking out orders.

The people people are helping like tie down this loose rope, bail, water, encourage those who are discouraged. And so look at for those of us that sit and we look at our fractured, fearful world, and we think guys, don't you see what all your fighting does? Like can't we just work together. Can't we, if we could just figure out how to work together, check it out here.

They are like, they're working together. It's happening, but also like check it out. So what, that's not gonna fix that problem.

many things that it could help with. It would be better. Sure. But there are also things that absolutely there is not even our best efforts, even our best community is powerless when it comes to this. And what if in this, what if scripture is not just showing us this problem, that those people faced way.

what if in this story, in this image with the sea kicking up and the disciples overcoming their differences to work together and still fearing that they're gonna be swallowed by that sea. What if in that problem, the scripture is showing us the problem

and it is, but it's not obvious to us right off the bat and, and to see why it wouldn't be it's like this. Like if I, if I in the middle of a sermon, just say, drop it in the middle of the line, the force be. Like suddenly the whole star wars world is in the sermon. Right? That's all it takes the force be with you.

Correct. Even, even if you've never seen a star wars movie, which if you've never seen a star wars movie, you've, you've had time and it's just spiritual sloth at this. Right. But even if you've never seen a star wars movie, you understand what I'm referencing and all that gets pulled in with just that simple word.

Right. But now look, if we had a time machine, I went back in time and I'm not talking to you. I'm talking to the 12. The 12 apostles or more than 12 disciples, 12 apostles. And I say the like, Peter, Hey Peter, the force be with you. Is Peter gonna get it? Nope. Is it cuz Peter's dumb? Nope. It's cuz it's not Peter's world.

What's he gonna, uh, force be with you too.

Right. But now you reverse that. And what we've got here in this text is something like that. But in our. To them, that word C would've brought in so much, so many other stories. So many other pieces of art that fast in the ancient world, the C was an image, not just for unfortunate circumstances. The C was an image for like the birthplace of chaos itself.

Self yet. Imagine back then. There's nobody getting on these big cruise liners and spending a whole week at C2, relax the sea. Isn't the place you go to relax. The sea is the place they went to try not to die. And a lot of them didn't pull it off. Imagine what it is back then. No, no like Marine biology, no submarines to sit on the shore and see a whale out there.

You're not like, oh, how majestic and beautiful. What they were like is like that's LA Leviathan. That's the chaos monster. And the ocean burst that kind of. and so in literature you see all, and it's in the old Testament, it's in Hebrew culture, but it's not just Hebrew culture. Very widespread in the ancient world thus see was the birthplace of chaos.

And so what the scriptures are trying to help us see at this point, right, is not just that Jesus is here to take care of this problem, although he is, he's taking care of that problem for them, not just that, but Jesus is here to enter into the heart of chaos. Not just this instance of tyranny, but tyranny itself, not just this instance of moral failure or rebellion against God, but sin itself.

He's after the root of all the rebellion, wherever you find it anywhere in God's creation. That's why mark calls this a sea look everywhere else. In ancient literature, they called this a. even the gospel of Luke uses a different word. Doesn't call it a sea, calls it a lake. Right. So why would everybody else call it a lake?

Well, here's the body of water. We've seen that over here on the left. You've got the Mediterranean sea, at least a little bit of it right now. The Mediterranean sea is a sea. If we zoom out to see a little bit of the Mediterranean sea, how big does that body of water that Jesus and his disciples were crossing become now is the Mediterranean sea, a big.

Yes.

compared to the Atlantic or the Pacific. Oh, that's like, that's like the Runk of the litter, right? Mediterranean C that's a cute little C, but if we zoom out to see all of that cute little C where does the sea of Galilee go? Like we don't have enough pixels, so why do they call it a lake? Cause this is a lake.

The real questions. Why did mark call it a sea? Cuz he wants you to see in this. The problem, the issue,

and when Jesus in the middle of this problem sleeps.

Right. As the disciples are running around, like they're responding to the chaos. Sure. They're responding in a positive way. They're trying to do something about it. They're giving their talent, they're giving their effort. They're banding together in community. They're responding to the problem. What is Jesus doing?

Taking a nap, showing us that in this, like he has some kind of inner peace that does not at all match the circumstances. is not at all hindered by the violence around him and the disciples. Wake him up. This is what gets his attention, not the chaos, the cry of his people saying, don't you care that we're drowning.

He gets up. And he gives something of that piece that he has within himself with a simple word, peace be still and the wind and the seas obey.

Okay. Now those of you that are like really good with words, Notice something about this, the wind in the seas obey what? Not just his words. It's not some magic incantation. This isn't like he doesn't like get on like, oh, I gotta grab my magic staff and put on my robe and flip my head up and pull out this like ancient incantation that was scribed in the first ages of Mor door.

Wave my wave, my staff, that's got this jewel set in that was mine from the heart of a dying. and once he speaks these magic words, the forces of chaos are going well. You said the magic words when everybody's gotta obey the magic. It's not an incantation. It's not just some universal principle. The disciples notice it.

They don't just obey the words. What do they obey him? Because they're his words they obey. And so the question they ask is exactly the right question. Who is this?

Now for those of you who weren't here last week. I don't this next bit. Like I wanna make some connections, but if you weren't here last week, I don't want you to feel like I felt in the eighties when I missed one week of my show and it was part one of a two part series and I started halfway through and I have no idea what's going on.

So Aaron introduces to some stuff last week that I'll just catch up briefly. So you can notice these connections if you weren't here. And if you were, here's a nice reminder because I mean, I know that like everything we preacher say, you remember every word. So the rest of you that remember every, you know, maybe this is just running over some things, but don't check all the way out.

But like last week, pastor Aaron introduced us to the concept of a log OS. That's a Greek word log OS. That's usually translated word, but showed us that the word log OS doesn't just mean word because it's tied to the ancient Greek search. For some pattern, some rational principle that governs all of life, their search for the thing that makes order and stability possible.

And this search right for this larger universal structural principle was the search for the log offs. This larger universal structure or principle of life, they called the logs. So if you look for this thing that, that allows life to happen, that can take stuff like dirt and water and air and bring it together.

Like this is the stuff we are made of. So when you're looking for the thing that what can take that stuff, put it together and allow it to breathe and live. You're looking for the log offs, the principle of life. And when you're carrying out that search, you call it biology. Bys means life. and then log offs, the log offs of biology, the structure, the pattern, the principle of life.

When you're looking for it in the earth. When you find the structure, the pattern, the principle that shapes the way our earth, what you call it, the search it's by it's no, it's not. It's geology geo the earth and log OS. When you look for it in the human mind, you don't find anything, but they still keep going for it.

And they call it psychology. The search for the log OS the reason, the principle of the human mind, but the Greeks didn't just look for this to build up individual knowhow or personal skills. This was also their soci. The Greeks believed if they could just come to understand this universal rational principle well enough that they would be able to band together with their understanding and their skills and know how, if they understood the Lagos well enough, they believed that they could build these perfect little city states.

They would be tiny. Islands of order in the midst of all the world's chaos, little vestiges of safety were the structure. The reason the patterns of our life together would allow life to flourish and be safe from the onslaught of the forces of death and destruction, the sociology, the logs of society. I watched this connection, this one, this one gave me chills.

When I found it. I liked it. There was this other guy named phlo, who was a Jewish. Philosopher a younger contemporary of Jesus, right? So their lives overlap. We probably never met him because FOH lived in Alexandria, which is a city down in Egypt, which at that time was like the center of culture and learning.

And so he doesn't meet Jesus, but he does encounter this Greek idea of the log OS. And when FOH hears about this Greek search for this universal structure, reason order pattern, he says, I think us Jewish people have something to offer to this convers. because look, we know something that it doesn't seem like, you know, it's not just some universal principle that calls light from darkness.

It's not just some universal principle that allows dust to breathe. It's the word of God? The log OS word is the word of God. And it's not just some mindless unbending principle. It comes from the heart of who God is. It's.

And then the gospel writer, John picks up on this and says, you want an introduction to the gospel, the law, the word of God became flesh and D longus in Jesus of Nazareth. And so when the wind and the seas obey, not just his words, but. The disciples ask exactly the right question, who is this? And there's only one answer.

And if it's not already blatantly obvious to us, Jesus being the Lagos means Jesus has a power beyond anything that any of our scap, any of our skills can bring about. Right? So you action people, look what Jesus' actions get done, right? He takes twisted legs, useless arms, and makes them. He turns a few loaves of bread and some fish into more than enough for this massive crowd that trusted him enough to follow him out into the desert.

For those of you who just know how to have a commanding presence, notice how much weight Jesus's presence has. He can scatter an angry and judgemental crowd with just a gesture. He puts a Roman ruler in his place with simple silence. He has God's power. He's the log OS, but he displays it through the same human strengths that we develop words, gestures, physical acts, gathering, and shaping communities.

And so for those of you who can talk those of you who get words, let's notice what happens, what, when this log OS decides to open his mouth, because as amazing as it is, it's not just piece B still that he says, he also goes up to Lazarus who was dead. And says Lazarus come out of the tomb. And he does, he goes to a little girl that was dead and says little girl rise up.

And she does. He walks into a synagogue on the Sabbath, gets up to preach, chooses Leviticus as his text and makes it interesting. this guy like he has the power. to be free to do anything he wants.

And so let's talk about freedom because in our world, when we start to talk about freedom, we often just tend to think about freedom from. we think and talk like freedom is the freedom from any structure, freedom from any rule freedom, from any principle that would impose itself on us and keep us from being free to make whatever choice we make.

So by default, our idea of freedom becomes infinite choice. Infinite choice is freedom, infinite choices, freedom, and I can say it over and over a thousand times, and you're not gonna believe it's true. If you Netflix. That should be true. somebody else has spent way more time scrolling that Felix, trying to choose than actually watching something.

I remember the week that I moved out of the house feeling so confident and ready, cuz I knew how I was gonna pay the bills. And at the end of the week I realized I've gotta do laundry. And I went to the grocery store to buy laundry detergent and I looked at all the choice and I didn't know what to. I was incompetent.

I was unable to make the choice, infinite freedom, infinite choice, without something more is just another form of being enslaved. It's another way to paralyze you. Just the freedom from any restrictions that would guard your choice does not mean freedom. Let's think about it this way. There's not just freedom from there has to be freedom.

So if I were just to stop, I'm not going to, I'm using all my time, but if thought experiment, if I were gonna stop and just say, Hey, no more expectations on this time. Right. You're free too. Do whatever you want. What would you be free to do? How many of you would be free? I, I don't know, like how many of you would be free to get up and start running and not stop till you'd run 10 miles?

There's no way I would. like, first of all, I don't want to. So even like, I don't have the want to, but even if I did have the want to, I wouldn't be free to, because why I haven't trained my body, what does it take to be free to do something like that? It takes training. It takes time. It takes sacrifice. It takes work.

It takes discipline. It takes submission. It probably also takes some kind of genetics that I'm not sure I have, which might just be an excuse, but it also might be true, cuz we're not all caught cut out for it. Right. Or. That was something that from a very early age, I had this strong desire to be able to play the guitar.

And I felt like I had this soul that wanted to express things and I, I love beauty and I wanna pick up that guitar. And every time I played it, I was not free to play anything that anybody wanted to listen to. So I did what I went to a guitar teacher. And what did the guitar teachers start to talk to me?

The logic of music, music theory, the structures of scales, the patterns and, and the way that those patterns map onto the guitar neck. And I was like, no, don't talk to me about that kind of stuff. I don't want that. I just wanna bend a note and make people cry. but, but, but if you wanna be free too run, you have to submit, you have to trust.

You have to trust your teacher. You have to trust the wisdom that's come before you have to trust the principal. You have to trust the process. You might say, you've gotta trust the log OS of running. If you want to be free too, play the guitar with other musicians and create something people would want to listen to.

You have to trust the log OS of guitar. And you're also gonna have to face fear time after time, day in and day out. You're gonna have to journey through the fear of trying and failing the fear of the. The fear of the effort and the pain that it takes. Right? So if freedom is not just freedom from, but it's also the freedom too.

And if Jesus is our example of freedom, then what is Jesus free to do? Jesus is free to be good.

And when we look at our response to his freedom, our reaction to his power, our fear. when he enacts his freedom, we'll see that Jesus was free to be good. Even when the circumstances were not,

he loves us when we mess up. And what do we do to him? We accuse him of being a drunk in a sinner in several episodes in the gospels. People try to run him outta town. And if you haven't read the things heads up, the cross is not the first time that people try to kill Jesus. but Jesus keeps giving his strength.

Even when people try to murder him, he keeps giving his strength and his energy to heal their broken bodies. He keeps giving himself to fill their empty bellies. He keeps presenting himself to welcome their lonely souls. He keeps teaching his wisdom, even when it's misunderstood and rejected and mocked why to free our minds that have been distorted by pain fear.

Broken by the injustice of the world that we inherited. He keeps giving himself to order our lives inside and out, according to the peace and the truth of God, because he's the Lagos and he's good. And when the church people, the very people that should be able to recognize God's power, when they see it, accuse them of having a.

Now the pastor pointed out last week, according to the gospel of John, there are two ways that John tells us we can reject the law OS. We can try to overcome it outright aggression and attack, or we can misunderstand it. And the more Jesus reveals himself as the law OS, the more we misunderstand and reject him and guys, look, this isn't just bad for us.

It's absolutely terrible for us. Yes, but it's not bad for us alone. It also makes it really, really hard for. to the point where we not only fail to recognize the dignity of his life, the worth of his work. We come to hate him so much. We can no longer stand to have him around. We don't want him working by our side.

We don't want him playing in our streets with our kids. We don't want him in our homes having dinner with us. So we start plotting to have him kill.

and here's a point in the gospel narratives where we find another instance of a very strange unity because the two groups that got together and really got things rolling to arrest Jesus were the Pharisees and the Herodians. These people did not get along about anything except. we both think the world would be better off without Jesus.

This would be like the liberals and conservatives going, Hey guys, differences aside. Let's do something together. Cool. That's exactly what happens towards the end of the gospel, because what, because of what unites them, God guys, the problem is not that we're not United. The problem is what unites us and what unites us, sets us against the log.

Us guys. This is our soci. , this is the logic of fearful human society fighting, resisting, misunderstanding the Lagos of creation. And so our response shows that it's not just the sea and the winds that kick up. There's something inside us, deep inside us. The root of who we are that is threatened by him, that is afraid of him.

And so that fear. Distorts our thinking, distorts our emotions, distorts our actions and turns us against him. And so we can see that this earlier story with the wind and the sea was showing us in external circumstances, a picture of what's true at the very heart of who we are. And it's true that the heart of who we are is this way, because we've been hurt.

We've been broken, we've been abandoned. We were born into this world and had to figure out breathing by scream. . And so this indicates that this rebellion against God goes down deep into reality itself. So now notice the Lagos has become flesh. One of the implications of it being the Lagos is incredible power.

What are the implications of the log? Us becoming flesh as a human Jesus embraced our limitations. If he wanted to get somewhere, he walk. if he wanted to communicate something, he didn't send like fire scribbling across the sky. He talked or he gestured, or he remained silent

in this scary world in this broken world. In this fractured world, God in Christ embraces our limitations. Even the ones that make us feel fear and pain, like in one episode, his friend dies. And he cries. He makes friends and betray him and they betray him by the end of the story. He is on his face in agony, crying out God.

Is there any other way? Like he doesn't just shoot around from body to body when he wants to move. He doesn't just like inhabit somebody, then shoot up and spend some time in the clouds and then manifest his fire. He spends his whole existence on earth in one body. And look what we do to that. after this strange twisted unity that we find in plotting against him, we tie his hands and the ropes hold.

We beat him. And the logs, flesh, bruises, we whip him. And the log us is flesh opens up and bleeds. He, he really is really is one of us. He's one of us, but he's not just like us and he's not, not just like us, just because he has more power than us notice. Jesus never uses his power for his own benefit. He never uses his power to find the easy way out.

He uses it over and over again. Yes. In astounding ways. Yes. For the good of other people. , but there's never any point. Like when he really gets into it with some knucklehead that thinks they know what God is all about. And this happens all the time. In one instance, in John chapter three, he gets back, back and forth with a Pharisee.

And at one point, Jesus says to him, dude, you're a teacher of Israel and it's not like we're two deep stuff. This is Judaism 1 0 1. And you don't understand what I'm talking about. How am I gonna in this moment of exasperation? He never resorts to like Jedi mind tricking his opponent. Like, no, I am right.

You're right. You are right. he sees it through.

Look with this kind of power facing the kind of terrifying reality Jesus faced. It becomes astoundingly important for us to notice that throughout all of the gospels Jesus explodes. Exactly. Zero heads. It's true. like I have read them all multiple times with a counter precise count. None, zero. Right in a scary world, it's understandable that we would want power, that we would want to control the structures that would give us some kind of safe space.

But just the fact, just the brute fact that there is some brute force out there that can overcome anything. Give us the freedom to fight whatever we find to be scary and oppressive doesn't necessarily solve a single.

we need more than that. Just like we need more than freedom from, we need more than just brute power, like to show you what I mean. Look at Luke's gospel. There's an episode in there. Chapter two, where Jesus at 12 years old goes through the temple. And at this point we know that he knows he has a very special relationship with God and he has access to divine wisdom and power, and he gets into it with some of the temple rulers.

I do not even want to begin. No, I guess I'm gonna, so let's be, it's scary. But if I even begin to imagine what 12 year old me would do with that kind of understanding, and to know that I had like Jesus level power, do you have any idea what would happen to the atheist on Reddit?

If there are all sorts of things that become incredibly clear. When I think of like 12 year old me with my fears, my desire, plus like Jesus level. Right. That would never, ever be appropriate to share in a, from a pulpit, what that would lead to. But there's one thing that's like abundantly clear on my March towards power and domination and pleasure.

I would not set the cross before me, even if it was good for you. Sorry. , I'll do what I can about this or that if I've got some time, but that no, you figure it out guys. now I could see if on my March to power and domination, that I did get some enemies that banded together and they got some kind of resistance together.

And I heard that they planned on crucifying me. I might let them put me on the cross. Right. If I knew I had that kind of power for real, I might let not because I loved them because I could imagine no better way to mess with them. Just let, let put up there and just wait, wait till they're sure that I'm done.

And I see it in their. Right. There's no more guesswork. There's smug. They are sure. They've beat me at that point. I would just like yawn, flex my muscles, rip the arms off the cross. Nah, I'm not even gonna pull the nails out. I'm just gonna start spinning the arms of the cross around on those nails, because how tough is that?

And I'm gonna walk down and I'm start cracking skulls with the arms of that broken cross. That's me, that's me in that kind of situation with divine power,

but not Jesus.

Jesus was powerful enough to be free, to do anything he wanted. And so it's a very, very good thing for us that what he really wanted is good. That's who he is. that is the log OS. That is the principle. That is the rationality that creates the structure of any real and true thing. And so even when we beat him and nail him to a cross, there's no moment.

There's no moment. Even though he's free to choose the good and go into it. Even at that place, he never gets bitter about it. He never gets uncertain about his choice. even when this is happening, he never like looks around and goes to his followers. Like you guys have seen. Right. I've been more than patient.

Can we agree? But I've tried everything possible. Right. And this, okay. So look, we're just gonna take a couple people out, explode, just the minimum number of heads necessary. So we can back up and try this again. No, instead, what do we read in Luke 23 versus 33 to 34. This guy? when they came to the place that's called the skull.

They crucified Jesus they're with the criminals one on his right. And one on his left. And Jesus said to them, father, forgive them for, they do not know what they're doing.

Even when fear and lust for power had led to twisted hearts and minds. And when those twisted hearts and minds had led to rumors and false. And when those twisted hearts and minds had led to rumors and false accusations that led to a rig trial and whips and nails and a broken desiccated body, even with the power to overcome that kind of chaos with a single word, what does the Lago say, father, forgive them.

Like, what do we make of this

one? Jesus shows us that he wasn't free just because he was powerful enough to do what he wanted. He was free because what he wanted was good and he was free to do it. He was free because he was free from anything that would hinder him from being good guys. This is God's freedom. Does God have unimaginable power?

Like God doesn't just have more or the most, or all of the same kind of power we have. God has a totally different kind of power. We can't, but just brute power. That's not it. If Jesus is our model of freedom, we see that it's not just power. It's his goodness. What makes God free is not just that God could do whatever God wants.

God is good and God is so good and so powerful that no matter what God will be.

that's freedom. And so when we're looking for instances of God's divine presence on display in Jesus of Nazareth, then right alongside the episode in the boat, when the chaotic and the demonic forces inhabit the wind in the season, they try to swallow him and he says, peace. Be still when we're looking for instances of God's divinity on display in Jesus.

We also look at that moment when he used that last lung full of breath, that the world was trying to steal from him to say, father, forgive.

the wind in the seas. They did what he said, what? And they, and they listened. We did what to him. And he said, what, who is this?

Who is this? He's the one whose words make things. He's the one who's let there be at the beginning, brought light out of darkness. He's the one who's let there be sent. Galaxy's spinning, initiated the dance of the seasons. And if his peace be still brought the wind and season to harmony, what did Jesus' father forgive them do to reality?

if he's the Lagos, the word of creation, what did those words do to our world? What do we make of this? Jesus is with those words, father, forgive them. He is calming chaos with a word, but not just the chaos of those nails, not just the chaos of that cross, but the chaos of our sin and our rebellion against God and that not just.

Some violence from 2000 years ago that our rebellion against God, that is the thing that makes your world so scary. And so why Jesus, because if the gospel's true and the logoff said that then the universe has suddenly in him become a very, very safe place.

And you safety, you find in him unlocks all sorts of freedom that you could never know on your own,

the universe, if it's true. And the logout said that the universe becomes in him a very safe place, and that's something that it has not been since the day that you were born, which is why trusting it is like being born.

And so there's freedom from fear offered in Christ, right. But if freedom's not just freedom from, but the freedom to live as we were created to live, how does Jesus bring freedom to how does Jesus bring us freedom to live the way he lived? Well, because when the log speaks, reality responds and Jesus, didn't just say as great as it was.

He didn't just say peace. Be still, he didn't just say father, forgive them. He also says. Follow me. And when the law speaks reality responds and he also says, follow me, and I will be with you. He says, follow me and remain in me. And so Jesus, doesn't just get up there and set an example of perfect freedom and then demand that we imitate him.

Cuz that would be the Greek idea of the log OS. That would be a heartless mindless, unending, universal Princip. But Jesus is a non oppressive, absolute because he doesn't just set an example of freedom and then demand. We imitate him. He's a person he promised to be with us. And so he said that the truest thing about your reality can be that he will lead you and he will be with you.

So he doesn't just invite you to imitation. He doesn't just demand imitation. He invites. To communion.

And so when you journey into your fear to journey through your fear in him, there are layers to your reality that you're powerless to do anything about. And it's okay because it's not your fight. He calms it. He absorbs it. He heals it. He says, follow me. I'll go first. Where are you going? What do we need to do?

I'm there. What do we need to face? I'll go first, come with me, follow me, remain in me. And I will remain with you and you will have life abundant.

And so communion on the corporate level, that is the social logic of the church. That's our sociology, not what we can do with our best efforts to build a great place. And to impress people and increased numbers. No, no, no. The logic of the church is we hear his call and we gather around him and we let him his piece, whatever that piece was that let him sleep in the middle of the storm, his piece, founds our piece, his call, founds our unity.

So if you heard this story, right, you understand guys that this isn't a story at all. It's not at all about our skills or what kind of community we can. It's not at all about what our skills plus community can make possible. This is a story that is 100% about Christ, continued presence and power, even in our scary world.

So when this like clicked for me, I was in a season where I was working through some of the things that had happened that made me terrified of the world, the kind of stuff that it doesn't just make you intellectually look at it and go, God, how is this your. If you're good. And if you're the creator, how does this kind of thing happen?

Not, not just on an intellectual level, but on that place that makes you go, where were you? If you're good, if this is yours, and if you're everywhere, where were you? The kind of thing that doesn't just hang you up, like in your head, right? The kind of thing that gets into your instincts, the, the thing that creates the fear that makes all that baggage that you.

I'm processing all of this. And I had worked to a place where I knew God was good. I knew God loved me. God hadn't abandoned me. And I knew there was some kind of hope. Right. And I got to this place where I was like, God, okay, look, I trusted. You're good. And I'm with you. Right. But I still, I, I want to know where were you like when that was happening?

Where were you? I asked that question for 10 years. About halfway through. I started asking about, I trust you enough that if you want me to stop, like if I don't need to. Just tell me and I'll stop asking, but you've gotta, you've gotta tell me if you don't tell me to stop, I'm not gonna stop. So where were you?

One day? I got an answer driving home and I had to pull the car over. Cause it was so overwhelming. And his answer was where were you?

Like you couldn't find me cuz you're looking for me off on the edges, looking in from a distance you're looking for me three weeks down the road, trying to pick up the pieces. I'm not the kind of God that would be far away when something like that is happening to one of my kids. You wanna know where I was?

Where were you?

I was even more present to that moment than you were.

Follow me, remain in. When I got that answer, everything shifted all the stuff in my life that just felt like sheer obedience. Like I do it cuz I have to cause I do it cuz the Bible says, so I do it cuz that's the principle. I do it. Cuz that's what good people do. All of that stuff that up to that point had felt that way immediately shifted.

And I now saw that what was good and true in all of that, wasn't just a demand for invitation. It wasn't just a demand for an obedience. It was an invitation to my healing.

And pastor Aaron's gonna come up and pray, and then we'll sing a song. Just invite you at this time to listen to the spirit as a spirit, awakens you to the logouts and discern how he's present to you saying exactly what you need to hear laying out for you, a path for your own communion and your own healing.

OUTRO:

Well, we hope you enjoyed that sermon from will Ryland as always. Thanks for listening to all things. Again, if you'd like to invite one of us to come speak at your church or your organization, please reach out to us at Shama sd.org/contact us. Come back in a couple weeks as we pick back up on another Saints As Mentors episode to introduce our upcoming series on Oscar Romero. Until then grace and peace to you all.


St. Benedict 7 - Crafting the Sacramental Use of Time


STORY:

[MUSIC BEGINS/CONTINUES]

The Shema Prayer, in its older form, goes like this: Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength.

This prayer is first found in the Old Testament book of Deuteronomy, and given our theme for this series on St. Benedict and our goals for this episode, we can't just pass over the fact that the book of Deuteronomy is itself a product of Israel's desire for communion with God and her efforts to reconstitute their way of life around love for YHWH. After their outer lives had been fragmented by the forces of invading empires and inner lives struck with a crisis of hope, Deuteronomy was composed to help reintegrate their prayer and politics and work and rest in YHWH's presence and promises. So, Deuteronomy is something like a Rule for God's people.

And the Shema Prayer became a central component of that integrating way of life. It became so important that committed Jewish people started praying it two times every day, in the morning and again in the evening.

Later, when Jesus came along, Israel again found herself in a place of fragmentation - they were divided both as a people and within themselves as again, the forces of the world seemed to be working powerfully against God's purposes, and they struggled to keep faith and hope in God when answers were hard to come by.

One day, in the middle of all this, a Lawyer asked Jesus what the greatest commandment was, and Jesus responded with the Shema prayer. But, he expanded it a bit, saying, "The greatest commandment is this: Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.' The second is this, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'

For many, in our own fragmentation and disengagement and struggles with faith and hope, hearing this is inspiring. Who wouldn't want every bit of every day to be whole in God and shining with the glory of divine love?

[MUSIC BEGINS]

But then, for many, trying to live this, in the midst of our own fragmentation and disengagement and struggles with faith and hope, this is also intimidating. How could you even begin to get every moment to shine with divine love?

For Christian thought, though, the fact that Jesus reinstitute this prayer changes everything about how we can not just say it, but live it. Because Jesus wasn't just another prophet telling the truth and calling us into our potential. Jesus was God in flesh. The divine, thoroughly enmeshed with our everyday reality. And this divine presence in worldly time and affairs is what opens christian thought to a brand new concept: the Sacrament.

A sacrament is an everyday, finite thing, like bread and wine, water, or human commitment, that presents us with nothing less than the divine presence, here, where we are. So within a sacramental view, something like prayer shifts from simply being us speaking words to God, to us finding communion with God.

So Jesus offering us the Shema Prayer shifts it from being something presenting us with a demand or expectation that we figure out how to use each moment to love God, to an invitation to find each moment becoming the very conduit for God's love to us, which then fuels our loving God in return in every graced moment.

And if that sounds inspiring, the exercise I'm about to introduce you to draws from St. Benedict's wisdom to help you begin to think about, use, and experience your time in this kind of sacramental way.

[MUSIC BREAK]

As we work to embody the Shema prayer, we don't start with expecting ourselves to suddenly love God with our whole being, any more than someone who at 17 awakens to their desire to be a neural surgeon should begin by busting into an operating room and demanding a patient and a scalpel. We begin great things with small things. So in striving to love God with all we are in every moment, we begin by simply paying attention to what we pay attention to.

Because both giving and receiving love requires attention. We cannot love something we ignore, and we cannot receive love without attending to the giver and the gift. But paying attention is a skill that must be developed and practiced.

So, right now, take a moment to evaluate your capacity for unbroken attention. If you were going to do something like pray, or read a challenging book, or solve a complicated problem, how long do you think you could keep your focus on that one task before getting distracted?

Be realistic and honest. Your ego will probably want to overestimate this, but that only sets you up for failure and shame -- which is the opposite of what the Shema Prayer offers. Most people in our culture would begin at somewhere between 90 seconds to 7 minutes.

So, find your starting point.

Then, as a target goal, studies have shown that the ideal time frame for a human mind to focus intensely on one challenging subject is between 50 to 90 minutes. That's the limit, and the sweet spot, for human attention.

Over time, most people can come to handle 4 to 5 of these 50 to 90 minute blocks in a day before they reach exhaustion and start to work against themselves. But, odds are, most of your schedules are not open and discretionary enough to allow you to fill your whole workday with these kinds of time blocks.

So, to begin, simply find one or two times in a normal week where you could work to increase your capacity to give and receive love by devoting 50 to 90 minutes to practicing unbroken attention.

Then name one activity -- like reading Scripture or a Spiritual Classic or learning a difficult concept or skill -- that would connect with something or someone you already genuinely love and know it would be good for you and for the world if you were to love this person or thing more.

Then, work to protect that time, and to actually dedicate it to the task you've named.

You won't do it the first time. That's normal and okay. Remember, you're working to increase your attention span to 50 to 90 minutes. More than once, you'll start to get bored and ready to move on to something else. Acknowledge those feelings, but do your best to push through. And if you keep at it, you'll notice the span between these moments of distraction getting longer and longer.   

Along the way, receive grace for yourself and notice and celebrate your progress.

Once you've built your capacity, you can start to integrate these time blocks into other areas of your home, work, and relationships, adding more and more intentional blocks in more and more areas.

[MUSIC BEGINS]

And always try to remember, these periods of growth are for more than just your productivity. Their real aim is sacramentality. The goal is divine love, flowing into and through you in more and more moments of your everyday life.

We at Shema like to say that people like Mother Teresa of Calcutta and Benedict of Nursia became St. Teresa and St. Benedict during intervals like these where they did small things with great love.

Becoming someone who loves God with your entire heart, soul, mind, and strength, and truly loving your neighbor as yourself can seem like an overwhelming goal. But isn't that exactly what you want to experience -- a love that overwhelms every moment and dimension of your being?

And while 50 to 90 minutes might not seem like a lot in comparison to that overall vision for life, small chunks of time, carried out multiple times a week, then multiple times a day is exactly what keeps you progressing in love, becoming who you were created to be.

[SHORT MUSIC BREAK]

If you do try this exercise, and find you have further questions or would like some more specific guidance, or if you would like to share the results with someone, you can find more resources or contact us  at www.shemasd.org

[MUSIC  TRANSITION TO:]


DISCUSSION [Auto-Generated Transcript]


Julius: Welcome back listener to “All Things.” Um, this is Julius and Kevin and will again, um, yep. Yep. 

Kevin: Indeed. 

Wilson: Yes. 

Julius: Verily . Um, today we're talking about, as we keep on going through Benedict's rule and kind of like, um, Take a deeper look into what these monastic communities look like and what we can learn from them.

Um, today we're talking about leadership and, um, this one, I I'm very like, uh, fascinated to see where this conversation goes. Cuz I think this was very pertinent for me in reading through I, I borrowed Will's copy of Benedict's rule like a couple of months ago and kind of was like fing through it myself.

And I remember, I think just like where I was. In life. that time. I was just like, in a particularly like angsty anti-authoritarian mood.

Kevin: As we all are.   

Julius: As we all can be. And I think, I remember just like being in a bad mood, reading it and being like. All this stuff about like how the people in the monasteries are to listen to the Abbot and like how much authority is given to the Abbot.

I was like, who the heck is the Abbot? Like why, who gives him this much power? Why is that? Okay. And then like I brought that with will and he said some really good stuff to help kind of like reframe how I understand what authority is and how, um, ways that we can understand authority that is not like exploitative, which is, I think so many of our resistance to it is that we've seen so many examples of bad leadership and authority being exploited.

Wilson: And so. As is like our usual Mo like, how can we kind of like, reframe that and take a look at like, what, like just starting with what can good leadership look 

like? Right. That I that's one of, well, first of all, I was all ready to go. And then you gave the intro and it always feels like when the expectations are there, it's like, shoot.

Now I gotta say good stuff. , don't be a bad leader. . Do it. Oh, but that would be so with all, I mean, time after time, after time, I keep coming back to the same sort of like fundamental position where we go like, yes, it's correct. That that is bad. And yes, that is abusive and yes, that is a misuse of these things, but that doesn't mean any of us really wants to live without this stuff.

Like power again, it's not, is there power being used? The question is like, is it good power? Mm-hmm is it being used? Well, authority, judgment. right. You know, again, I, these shouldn't be like fly by topics where you just mention them, cuz people are gonna be going like, whoa, whoa, whoa. hold on. I'm not convinced.

But so like. I guess for all of those things, we'll have to deal concretely with the principle I'm hitting at with leadership. Mm-hmm . So with all of these things before we're ready to think that the world would be better off without them. Right. Let's look for good examples. Yeah. Don't this is over and over again over again.

I tell the people like don't let the bad examples spoil something for you. Like when, when people are grasping for something that has. Influence and power when they're grasping, after it to use it for something bad to just don't let 'em have it. Mm-hmm like, don't let them take it and run a run away with it and do all kinds of wreckage and damage.

Right, right. Pulling back and, and saying like, oh, no judgment or no leadership. Right. Essentially does that. Mm-hmm . And so, so don't reclaim it. And the way to reclaim it is to look okay. If that's bad, if that's not, it what's a good example of, of where there's genuine. Genuine leadership mm-hmm . And so it's, it's clear in Benedict's rule how the Abbot is chosen and they're chosen because the community recognize you have the character and the gifts and the graces that will allow you to take authority in this role.

Mm-hmm you have they've. Already recognized the right kind of authority. And so then they're choosing to put them in that place where they can exercise that authority. Yeah. And think about it in the sense of exercise as a metaphor, use it and enact it in a way that everyone gets stronger because of your gift.

So a, a class, if you go to a class, uh, I mean an exercise class. Yeah. And they're saying touch your toes and you do it. You're recognizing their authority. You're recognizing yeah. That they have something to give. And if you obey. If you follow their lead. Yeah. Then what they have to give will be communicated to you and you will benefit from it.

Yeah. So that that's like good authority. And so I thought of that, like, what's one of the cases of like a place where I've recognized because I have, I mean, this is like, um, uh, who doesn't have issues with authority, right? yeah. It's kind of. Who doesn't have daddy issues, you know, like, you know, did you have a good one?

You, well, you got 'em still, did you not have one? You got 'em, you know, it's like, like who doesn't have authority issues. and I can, I can kick against it. I can have this like inner, passive, and even outward rebellion as much as anyone else, you know? And so when I look back to that phase, when I was kind of the most, most prone to just Uhuh yeah.

oh, I wanted to, yeah. I mean, my go-to example here is when I checked out Frankenstein from the library in my high school, cuz I was honestly just. Surprised that my small Christian school had Frankenstein in the library surprising. And I was like, I wanna read this book. And then by happenstance, a week later, it was assigned to me in my literature class, I had to read it and I suddenly no longer wanted to read it.

So like, oh yeah. And this is like that same phase in my life where, where I could just suddenly. Uh, I now suddenly don't want to do it anymore just cuz you told me I have to mm-hmm was a time when I was like in other ways, most submissive and in a way that didn't turn out to be totally bad for me.

Mm-hmm and so there was a. and actually what I'm doing here is there's one kind of like key example where I, I played, but along with there being one concrete key example for honesty and disclosure case, I'm kind of taking three or four different coaches and putting them into one kind of composite character.

Kevin: Yeah, yeah. Like a Frankenstein. 

Wilson: Yeah. Um, most people, but there, but of all of these, there was, there was one that. Most embodied the characteristics. And so got mm-hmm the, the highest kind of obedience from me and that's where it came to basketball. Yeah. And this coach knew basketball. Mm-hmm there were and improved it.

Right. There are people that could talk it, but then to watch them do it, to watch them organize a team. Yeah. And he had been a coach at an NCAA D-1 team that had gone to the final four. Right, right. Had experience had proven himself. And so when this, and so there's that he had that kind of experience that sort of real.

Know how mm-hmm he understood the game. And two, we had a shared desire. I wanted to be a good basketball player. He wanted to make me a good basketball player. Mm-hmm . And from that, we had a shared tell us mm-hmm from that shared desire, we had a shared goal mm-hmm and now in that place, because he had the authority because those pieces came together.

When he told me to do something, I. If he told me to pick up the ball and don't shoot for an hour, but just dribble this way. If he told me to run all these drills for two hours, without even picking up a ball, I did it if he told me to run till I puked I, and literally once like on the court and everyone was like, duh, cuz we had to stop the, we had to stop practice for cleanup.

Like, but if he told me to run till I puked, I ran till I puked because he knew it and in basketball and in area. That there were like secondary areas that had something to do with that. Mm-hmm like, he's the reason that when I was a freshman in high school, I stopped drinking soda because he talked about nutrition.

Yeah. The connection to my body and how that connected to my goals as a basketball player. Yeah. And so I just decided at 15 years old, I'm done drinking soda. And it wasn't, I mean, it wasn't the same thing as like not partying, you know, the peer pressure, but you know, we're talking soda, not the, but it wasn't easy of course, to, for in the next four years to say no to soda, but I said no to soda.

Yeah. Because of this shared and that authority. Right. And it, it reaped huge benefits for me. In ways that still carry over, even though I didn't end up playing college basketball, like was my dream mm-hmm it got certain things into me that carry over and benefit me in all sorts of areas in life, especially now that I'm tipping over.

And I'm, you know, I'm in my forties and aging, there are certain things about physical health mm-hmm and what is good pushing through and what is no, listen and pull back mm-hmm right. That's allowing me even into my forties to experience some activities, some health and do things with my kids. Yeah. That it was, he taught me how to do.

And it got ingrained in me at that point. Right. In those areas where he had that and that's genuine authority. You recognize it. Yeah. You know what you're talking about? And so when you say so I listen. Yeah. I had other coaches that it was like, yeah, no, you have no idea what you're talking about. right.

The school just couldn't find anybody. Right. And you were the only person that agreed to take on this job. Uh, but, but, but Gary, no, no, no. You tell me to run tele IPU coming to run to LPU because you know what you're talking about, we have the shared desire and the shared tell us. Yeah. And in other like secondary issues where that's line, but then there were plenty of other places, especially as we got to know each other more and more.

where he didn't have authority in my life. but he, he tried to give me several times advice about girls and it was just a very quick, no, right? Nope. You're out of your jurisdiction. Exactly. right. No, I mean, you could 

Kevin: have tried 

Wilson: it and so, well, that was the thing. Like I looked at his history with basketball and his knowhow.

Right. And I looked at his for sure. That's where I'm gonna, this was pre this was no. Book, right. I'm not, I'm not going through his browser history, although I'm pretty sure, but like, but you know, but then I, I looked in those other areas and was like, no, no, no. With, with that, that's just a trailer wreckage and that's not what I want.

And so you're free to tell me these things, but I'm also free to say no, and I'm not gonna do what you say. Yeah. Right. That's that's gen the first key bit of, of genuine authority and leadership. And this is what Benedict gets at very early on the, when he first starts talking about the Abbot, he's talking.

To he's not talking to the potential Abbot that has ambitions for running a monastery. He's talking to the, the monks. Yeah. Saying these are the qualities you look for in choosing this leader. Mm-hmm this is how you recognize genuine authority where

Kevin: you were just going spark several. What sparked several ideas. Mm-hmm , uh, a couple I wanna, I wanna kind of highlight is it sounds like leadership is the kind of, um, the metaphor that comes to mind is like a, like a teacher or master to like an apprentice master. Yeah. Um, or someone like an, a craft, uh, that someone like a right.

You're trying to initiate somebody into a school of craft. Whether it be, I. Uh, wood making carpentry. Yeah. You know, and you're trying to instill in them, here are the skills, here's how you do it. And so leadership should be in that kind of realm of instilling skills and practices and, and things of that nature to make, you know, produce or what's what was a good word there, um, to create.

Someone who is like the master mm-hmm , um, to like, you know, pass on that. And what that got me going with all this, like, talk about leadership and authority is there's, uh, um, I think I quoted Bon ho last time too. So curious again, just pops up outta nowhere. It's like, oh, Hey, Hey Bonnie , um, 

Wilson: back at it again.

Um, theology, nerd jokes. 

Kevin: uh, but one of the cool things, I think it's in his book Christ center, he talks about Jesus and how he, he comes about and. Ex essentially comes almost outta nowhere. And people are like, who are you? Um, who are you to say these things? Um, by what authority do you do them? Mm-hmm uh, what is your leadership like?

who gave you this? Um, and essentially what Bon Harper highlights is that Jesus is on a different plane than any other human in, in, uh, history. Jesus, doesn't say like here's the teaching or Jesus doesn't have authority or Jesus doesn't give like a good word. Like he is that. Jesus is the authority. Jesus is the word that is being spoken.

Jesus is by its very nature. You know, he brings it. It got me thinking when you were talking, will that, uh, perhaps the, the mistake that abusive leaders and dictators make is that they confuse having authority with like being the authority. Yeah. 

Wilson: There you go. There there's I think you, if you didn't nail it, you're right there with like your finger super close to the heart of, I mean, cuz there is a BAJI.

Specific mistakes that they make over, but that's maybe the, the fundamental. Yeah. Yeah. 

Kevin: It's just confusing that having authority, which where versus saying like, I am the authority. Yep. This is ingrained in my being. So therefore listen to whatever I say, even matters that I have no jurisdiction over.

Wilson: Right. And that's where you start. When you look at. And again, it's like, uh, I mean, this is used so many times, but I, I think there's a reason they talk about counterfeiting the way the FBI trains people to find counterfeit bills is not to chase down all the, the bad ones to show them how they counterfeit or what the mistakes are.

They just over and over show them the real thing. Yeah. Right. They learn to know the real thing over and over and over again. And so. Yeah, it, I mean that's and the truth for all of us, and this is where we're gonna like put a little pressure back on all of us know that I know that this comes back to me too.

Yeah. Is you don't just complain and feel, um, feel like you've done. What is sufficient, if you can point fingers at bad cases of authority. Mm-hmm, like part of what we need to do is recognize, do the work to recognize true authority. When you start to recognize genuine authority, you'll also recognize we all have.

In certain areas. We, part of the mistake we make is to think so, uh, categorically, and even that it, I don't feel like that fully communicates, but we, we think so all or nothing. Mm-hmm so a person is a leader or they aren't a leader. And if all we have is bad leaders, then we shouldn't. Right, right. But what we need to recognize if we're gonna handle this well, is we need to recognize where authority genuine lies.

And if you start to see that, you'll start to recognize the areas where you have it. Yeah. Where people do look to you and where rightly they should. And that means responsibility to develop that so that you can provide. In, in fuller and fuller ways for the people that are looking to you. Yeah. That need that.

Right. This is even in the monastery. Right. And, and this is another, a test case of a good example. Mm-hmm to look at it, to see what's healthy and good. The Abbot is not the whole leader. The Abbot is not the leader. Not the only leader. Right. We'll come back to like what the Abbot is. Yes. There's a, a different kind of authority there because of what you just laid out and what the monastery is seeking to conform to yeah.

In the kingdom of God. But it also talks about like, Hey, but part of what you need to do is choose a leader here. And this is what you look for here as far as virtues characteristics, but also skills. So who's gonna oversee the resources of the monastery. That's not all in the Abbot's hands mm-hmm right.

And that's one of the things where you see with dictators is they want to control everything, whether or not they have the genuine authority to do it. Yeah. And so they make calls and they make hu huge calls that really affect people's lives, where they. . I mean, they may have positional power. Yeah. But they don't have authority.

They don't have knowhow. And so it goes badly and this is why they end up themselves. What they worship is power itself. Yeah. For them. So they grasp after it. And that's why there's like incredible repercussions for challenging the authority. Real leaders love helpful. Feedback right now. Well, maybe love isn't.

I mean, it can still sting them, but they recognize it they're to it and they're open and they listen and they adjust. Right. And so the community and the Abbot also chooses, here's the person that oversees the resources in the seller. Yeah. Here's the person who handles the outside business. Here's the person that, because you guys have authority in this area and they a, a, a good leader in that sense also like enables others to recognize and live into their own leadership.

Yeah. And their own authority.

Um, and the, the thing with the Abbot is, and this is where you have to with, with the characteristics. This is where, um, the things start to coalesce, or I like, I like Flannery O'Connors everything that rises must converge. Mm-hmm like if, if all of these things really are. Rising up toward God, then there's also a, a massive, beautiful convergence of all these disparate elements.

Cause we all live in a dome but uh, yeah, it's a spiritual truth. Not a physical . Alright. Earth. Okay. Um, so what Benedict right off the bat tells the community to look for. And the qualifications of the Abbot are like Christlike qualities. Mm-hmm . Right. And so your right to take it to Bon Hoffer, Jesus is on a different level.

He is the authority. And what does Jesus do when Jesus comes and uses that authority? That's one of the things you see over in the gospel is Jesus shows. He doesn't just have expertise in this area. Mm-hmm he has authority over life. Mm-hmm right. When he says, be heal, he's healed when he interprets the scriptures life changes, and God is actually revealed a book just isn't, uh, talked about right.

Mm-hmm he has authority over life. And what does he do? It's and this is the go to here. It, this is the new Testament in Christ. God was reconciling the world to himself. Mm-hmm, the one who has genuine authority, that kind of, that kind of authority, not like positional I'm the master. So do what I say. Yeah.

But the kind of authority we've been talking about Christ has that over life, cuz he's the source of life. And so what is he doing? He's healing and reconciling it. Yeah. And so if the Abbot, this is why Benedict right off the bat says these are the qualities that you look for because these are Christlike, qualit.

Hmm. And he gives the strongest warning to the people who take that position. Yeah. That the consequences of you misusing this are worse than anybody else misusing the authority or the position they have. Yeah. And so, and this is why over and over again, the, the stories of the best leaders, the best Abbots, the best bishops in the church.

Almost all of 'em have an element of, and when the church tried to put them in this position, they tried to run away. Yeah. like, like John Christo literally ran to a cave and hid and they had to physically drag him out and place him on the Bishop's seat before he would take that position. Yeah. Because they realize that in this place, what, and this is what, he's, what Benedict says.

You're you are representing. Re-presenting Christ and that is, that is an authority and a position. And like, that's the kind of thing that you don't want to just arrogantly assume for yourself. Yeah. And you probably you're qualified to take it if a good part of you knows you don't want it. Yeah. um, Because your job at that point, and this is what you see as he lays the rest of it out is to be that thing that, that heals and reconciles.

And so if that's the case, you are not amassing all the authority for yourself, you're helping other people discover, find their authority and trust that in themselves yeah. Become who they were made to be and give them opportunity to give those gifts to the community. It, and it that's the Christlike reconciling power.

That's, that's quite a different thing. You know, this is, I mean, Jesus himself says it. I didn't come to be served. Right. But to serve, yeah.

Julius: I think. That's the important, that's the important distinction that clicked for me in that conversation. When I brought it with you will, was this distinction between like we've named it as positional authority and genuine authority, that authority and leadership is like equality. It's like a type of being, it's a way of being that precedes the title and with so many abuses of power, what happens is Kevin, like you've named that people will like.

Receive the title first that they'll be like, I am the authority. That's me, regardless of whether or not they have like, um, I think you were spot on to connect it to craft because that's what I think of is like, that's the, the immediate analogy of like, oh, there are people who like, I want to learn from them.

I will listen to them because they exhibit, um, virtuosity is what it is right in craft. And in musician musicianship, it's a thing of virtue. It's a way of being that like, If this guitar player, I want to learn from them. And I want to listen to what they have to say, because I know in, in the same way that like in the scriptures, like there's a way that Jesus teaches that he teaches with authority, right?

Not like the other scribes of the day or whatever, but there is just this sense that you kind of get of like, you know what you're talking about. And also like bringing that into conversation that the best leaders that I look to, whether it's like musicians or like, and like pastors are people who know when to lead and when to, when to follow that, like the best leaders, don't always like, feel the need to be in the center of.

Like attention. And yet people still want to hear from them. Mm-hmm, , there's this like, back and forth of like, Jesus knows that he's got like this authority, but it's the Philippians two thing. He never like exploits that authority. Right. But pours himself out, knows when to speak and when to stay silent, when to listen and knowing like.

And I think that's the quality that you see in like, in my favorite teachers, my favorite musicians, like the best, like most virtuosic guitar players, like know when to not play to . Yeah. And they, and like, I there's something too when like, like I, again, like a guitar player or even like a pastor who I see that like, there's a humility in them still of like a, oh, you're still learning too.

Like, there are people that you look up to so that it's not this stark, like black and white of like this person's leader and this person's a follower and like leaders have absolute authority over everything in your life. 

Kevin: Yeah. It's because, uh, authority is, is gift. It's always a gift. Right. And that's what I I've always thought about and kind of described to people in the same way.

Like respect is a gift. Like I can't demand respect me, like give me authority. right. You know, it has to be freely given and freely, freely received. Um, but even it's fascinating, even in the Trinitarian life, like Jesus has the authority, but who gave him the authority? Mm-hmm the father. the father bestowed all judgment and authority onto the son.

Mm-hmm , you know, and Jesus receives that humbly re he receives that, um, you know, with grace, but, and then he is that mm. In his very nature and. we commit like ironic idolatries when we think like, oh, I, I deserve this authority. Mm-hmm I earned this authority. I, whatever my titles, my prestige, my history, like I am this authority.

Mm-hmm that, that is just not even the son of God. mm-hmm , you know, claim that. Yeah. And so it just kind of, we rise up to some so weird form of idolatry. Yeah.

[MUSIC TRANSITION TO MEDITATION]


MEDITATION

[PAD AND MELODY  SWELL AND FADE THROUGHOUT]

If we're truly leading within the Kingdom of God, then leadership is always most primally about following Jesus -- through all the normal victories, defeats, and pauses of every day, all the way through the normal end that we all face.

And if the central task of leadership in a murky and chaotic environment is to creat clarity, then the first step in that process is getting clear on where Jesus is leading you next.

So, for this meditation, we want to take you through a lectio divina practice of Mark 9:33-37.

Now the ideal setting for this kind of practice is one where you can be quiet and undisturbed. So, if possible, get there, take a posture that is comfortable, but not so comfortable that you might fall asleep, take three deep breaths, and invite the Holy Spirit to guide this time.

The first time through, set aside the urge to interpret or apply anything about the text. Still your mind, and simply listen.

33 Then they came to Capernaum; and when he was in the house he asked them, "What were you arguing about on the way?" 34 But they were silent, for on the way they had argued with one another who was the greatest. 35 He sat down, called the twelve, and said to them, "Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all." 36 Then he took a little child and put it among them; and taking it in his arms, he said to them, 37 "Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me."

Now notice any image, word, phrase, or idea that stood out to you. And just sit with it for a moment. Again, delaying any urge to interpret or apply it.

Now, I'm going to read the passage again. But this time through, ask the Holy Spirit for help in meeting Christ in the text, and understanding what he is saying to you, right now, through these words.

33 Then they came to Capernaum; and when he was in the house he asked them, "What were you arguing about on the way?" 34 But they were silent, for on the way they had argued with one another who was the greatest. 35 He sat down, called the twelve, and said to them, "Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all." 36 Then he took a little child and put it among them; and taking it in his arms, he said to them, 37 "Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me."

Now, once you have something, talk with God openly about your reactions. Where you are drawn in, or where you feel defensive. Where you are encouraged, or where you might be unsure or afraid. Whatever your responses to Christ's words here happen to be.

Now, with these words, ask Christ for clarity on where he is leading you ... And imagine the concrete events and opportunities lying before you in the coming weeks. And see yourself moving though them as Jesus would.

Finally, ask for the grace that you need to actualize your greatness in Christ. And when given the opportunity, share the clarity you've received with others around you.

This is Christian leadership, as we help others welcome God into our world through Christlike service.

[END]]


St. Benedict 5 - Leadership and Clarity


STORY:

[MUSIC BEGINS/CONTINUES]

Before we jump back into the 6th century for some leadership lessons from Saint Benedict, let's look at the contemporary world of Business and Leadership Consulting. In this world there's a man named Patric Lincioni, who's considered to be something of a master in the field. For good reason: he's something of a master of the field.

The contemporary world of organizational management makes itself from the tangled intersections of money and power and human motivation, production and art and cultural trends and any number of other forces, all of which seem to move according to their own disconnected or warring rules. This makes this world a very confusing one.

In this kind of environment, it's easy to spend days getting nothing important done but rather simply wondering, of all the seemingly important things that need to be done, to what should a leader devote their time and energy?

For those who feel the tension of this question, Lincioni is able to cut through the confusion by making a move that is kind of brilliant in its counterintuitive simplicity; he says the main job of a leader is to cut through the confusion and create clarity.

If someone can do just this one job in several key areas, creating clarity about what the organization does and why, simply explaining what are the most important strategic initiatives right now, defining how the company is going to strive to achieve those initiatives and plainly assigning who in the organization is going to do what, then this is the leadership needed in today's confusing world.

This kind of clarity, when it happens, is often done by some executive order delivered from the top down, or by a group in some sort of democratic process carried out over the course of an off-site, multi-day, strategic leadership retreat. But however it's accomplished, whenever it is actually pulled off and executed in actual operations, this kind of clarity is a powerful means of getting the collective vision, creativity, intelligence and energy of a group aligned so that the organization can accomplish things not even the most driven and talented individuals could pull off on their own.

But, what this level of clarity does not bring, is clarity on the deeper, spiritual and moral levels that helps us discern whether or not what the organization accomplishes is truly good.

[MUSIC BEGINS]

With this kind of focus, an organization might make a lot of money, and produce more jobs and wealth for many households, but still leave broken families in its wake. With this kind of clarity, a group might create a killer product, and that might be both figural and literal; they might introduce the whole world to something dazzling that stimulates addiction and so kills any number of other dreams.

So now, with both that powerful leadership insight about clarity and that warning, let's move to the 6th century world of St. Benedict, to see how his leadership can help us bring clarity in a way that also highlights and facilitates the connection between effectiveness and goodnesses.

[MUSIC]

St. Benedict's leadership began not when he was named Abbot of a monastery, but when we decided to be a great follower.

We often talk about leadership like it's some all or nothing thing. As if God, when creating us, uses that as a primary category, like God's thinking, "This one I'm making 'a leader,' and this one, not." We do this when we say someone is a "born leader," or treat our positional titles like they say something about our identities. But nobody is ever capable of leading everyone, in every dimension of every activity, all the time. No one. Because we trust we are made for good, and that would not be good for anyone.

So notice, even with the sparse biographical details we do have about Saint Benedict's life, we know he was a good follower. When he decided to learn to pray, he followed the advice of Romanus, even when Romanus told him to go live in a cave.

And Benedict stayed there, not just until he got bored or until he felt ready to start something, but until other people started to recognize his gifts and ask for his guidance. Then, he accepted the responsibility even through he still felt fearful and inadequate - which, when you think about it, is another form of following - he followed the genuine needs of the community over his own fears.

And then, it's not like Benedict just followed until he became a leader. Or that once he became the Abbot he was always only the leader.

He continually learned from the Abbots and the monks and nuns that came before him and pioneered monasticism. And, ultimately, for his whole life, whether leading or taking an unseen supporting role, Benedict followed Jesus. Until he became the kind of person who could follow Jesus even in giving commands that would help other's come to see, more and more clearly, how they could experience the goodness of life in Christ.

[BEGIN MUSIC]

And he followed Jesus in the way he evaluated the success of his monasteries: not just by looking at their financial sustainability or the number of new monastics taking vows, following not just the metrics, but by always looking for Christ's ongoing presence in the life of the community marked by the brothers' and sisters' growth in holiness and love and making decisions based on how they could continue to feed that life.

The way we follow, and who we follow, are central to our own leadership, because if you want to get clarity not just on what will win an established game, but what is truly good, it is never a simple matter of judging according to external metrics like profit or number of customers or attendees. All of these things can be easily measured even while they turn sour on the inside. But discerning the good requires inner spiritual work that tunes our instincts and desires toward God. And if you're always grasping after control in every situation, you're missing opportunities to do this inner work.

[MUSIC]

So Benedict's larger Sainthood made him a particular kind of leader. Benedict's whole way of life, being oriented toward God, made him someone who could create something like his Rule, something that would clarify precisely how, day after day, in prayer and work and choosing who would handle what duties, a community could come to know God more clearly.

And this is just another aspect of what we talked about in the first episode, where we framed this whole series with the question, what makes the kind of soul that could write something like Benedict's Rule?

So in the conversation that follows, Julius, Kevin and I continue to explore what Saint Benedict's witness can tell us about the quality of soul needed for good leadership in volatile times of disintegration and uncertainty.

[MUSIC  TRANSITION TO:]


DISCUSSION [Auto-Generated Transcript]


Julius: Welcome back listener to “All Things.” Um, this is Julius and Kevin and will again, um, yep. Yep. 

Kevin: Indeed. 

Wilson: Yes. 

Julius: Verily . Um, today we're talking about, as we keep on going through Benedict's rule and kind of like, um, Take a deeper look into what these monastic communities look like and what we can learn from them.

Um, today we're talking about leadership and, um, this one, I I'm very like, uh, fascinated to see where this conversation goes. Cuz I think this was very pertinent for me in reading through I, I borrowed Will's copy of Benedict's rule like a couple of months ago and kind of was like fing through it myself.

And I remember, I think just like where I was. In life. that time. I was just like, in a particularly like angsty anti-authoritarian mood.

Kevin: As we all are.   

Julius: As we all can be. And I think, I remember just like being in a bad mood, reading it and being like. All this stuff about like how the people in the monasteries are to listen to the Abbot and like how much authority is given to the Abbot.

I was like, who the heck is the Abbot? Like why, who gives him this much power? Why is that? Okay. And then like I brought that with will and he said some really good stuff to help kind of like reframe how I understand what authority is and how, um, ways that we can understand authority that is not like exploitative, which is, I think so many of our resistance to it is that we've seen so many examples of bad leadership and authority being exploited.

Wilson: And so. As is like our usual Mo like, how can we kind of like, reframe that and take a look at like, what, like just starting with what can good leadership look 

like? Right. That I that's one of, well, first of all, I was all ready to go. And then you gave the intro and it always feels like when the expectations are there, it's like, shoot.

Now I gotta say good stuff. , don't be a bad leader. . Do it. Oh, but that would be so with all, I mean, time after time, after time, I keep coming back to the same sort of like fundamental position where we go like, yes, it's correct. That that is bad. And yes, that is abusive and yes, that is a misuse of these things, but that doesn't mean any of us really wants to live without this stuff.

Like power again, it's not, is there power being used? The question is like, is it good power? Mm-hmm is it being used? Well, authority, judgment. right. You know, again, I, these shouldn't be like fly by topics where you just mention them, cuz people are gonna be going like, whoa, whoa, whoa. hold on. I'm not convinced.

But so like. I guess for all of those things, we'll have to deal concretely with the principle I'm hitting at with leadership. Mm-hmm . So with all of these things before we're ready to think that the world would be better off without them. Right. Let's look for good examples. Yeah. Don't this is over and over again over again.

I tell the people like don't let the bad examples spoil something for you. Like when, when people are grasping for something that has. Influence and power when they're grasping, after it to use it for something bad to just don't let 'em have it. Mm-hmm like, don't let them take it and run a run away with it and do all kinds of wreckage and damage.

Right, right. Pulling back and, and saying like, oh, no judgment or no leadership. Right. Essentially does that. Mm-hmm . And so, so don't reclaim it. And the way to reclaim it is to look okay. If that's bad, if that's not, it what's a good example of, of where there's genuine. Genuine leadership mm-hmm . And so it's, it's clear in Benedict's rule how the Abbot is chosen and they're chosen because the community recognize you have the character and the gifts and the graces that will allow you to take authority in this role.

Mm-hmm you have they've. Already recognized the right kind of authority. And so then they're choosing to put them in that place where they can exercise that authority. Yeah. And think about it in the sense of exercise as a metaphor, use it and enact it in a way that everyone gets stronger because of your gift.

So a, a class, if you go to a class, uh, I mean an exercise class. Yeah. And they're saying touch your toes and you do it. You're recognizing their authority. You're recognizing yeah. That they have something to give. And if you obey. If you follow their lead. Yeah. Then what they have to give will be communicated to you and you will benefit from it.

Yeah. So that that's like good authority. And so I thought of that, like, what's one of the cases of like a place where I've recognized because I have, I mean, this is like, um, uh, who doesn't have issues with authority, right? yeah. It's kind of. Who doesn't have daddy issues, you know, like, you know, did you have a good one?

You, well, you got 'em still, did you not have one? You got 'em, you know, it's like, like who doesn't have authority issues. and I can, I can kick against it. I can have this like inner, passive, and even outward rebellion as much as anyone else, you know? And so when I look back to that phase, when I was kind of the most, most prone to just Uhuh yeah.

oh, I wanted to, yeah. I mean, my go-to example here is when I checked out Frankenstein from the library in my high school, cuz I was honestly just. Surprised that my small Christian school had Frankenstein in the library surprising. And I was like, I wanna read this book. And then by happenstance, a week later, it was assigned to me in my literature class, I had to read it and I suddenly no longer wanted to read it.

So like, oh yeah. And this is like that same phase in my life where, where I could just suddenly. Uh, I now suddenly don't want to do it anymore just cuz you told me I have to mm-hmm was a time when I was like in other ways, most submissive and in a way that didn't turn out to be totally bad for me.

Mm-hmm and so there was a. and actually what I'm doing here is there's one kind of like key example where I, I played, but along with there being one concrete key example for honesty and disclosure case, I'm kind of taking three or four different coaches and putting them into one kind of composite character.

Kevin: Yeah, yeah. Like a Frankenstein. 

Wilson: Yeah. Um, most people, but there, but of all of these, there was, there was one that. Most embodied the characteristics. And so got mm-hmm the, the highest kind of obedience from me and that's where it came to basketball. Yeah. And this coach knew basketball. Mm-hmm there were and improved it.

Right. There are people that could talk it, but then to watch them do it, to watch them organize a team. Yeah. And he had been a coach at an NCAA D-1 team that had gone to the final four. Right, right. Had experience had proven himself. And so when this, and so there's that he had that kind of experience that sort of real.

Know how mm-hmm he understood the game. And two, we had a shared desire. I wanted to be a good basketball player. He wanted to make me a good basketball player. Mm-hmm . And from that, we had a shared tell us mm-hmm from that shared desire, we had a shared goal mm-hmm and now in that place, because he had the authority because those pieces came together.

When he told me to do something, I. If he told me to pick up the ball and don't shoot for an hour, but just dribble this way. If he told me to run all these drills for two hours, without even picking up a ball, I did it if he told me to run till I puked I, and literally once like on the court and everyone was like, duh, cuz we had to stop the, we had to stop practice for cleanup.

Like, but if he told me to run till I puked, I ran till I puked because he knew it and in basketball and in area. That there were like secondary areas that had something to do with that. Mm-hmm like, he's the reason that when I was a freshman in high school, I stopped drinking soda because he talked about nutrition.

Yeah. The connection to my body and how that connected to my goals as a basketball player. Yeah. And so I just decided at 15 years old, I'm done drinking soda. And it wasn't, I mean, it wasn't the same thing as like not partying, you know, the peer pressure, but you know, we're talking soda, not the, but it wasn't easy of course, to, for in the next four years to say no to soda, but I said no to soda.

Yeah. Because of this shared and that authority. Right. And it, it reaped huge benefits for me. In ways that still carry over, even though I didn't end up playing college basketball, like was my dream mm-hmm it got certain things into me that carry over and benefit me in all sorts of areas in life, especially now that I'm tipping over.

And I'm, you know, I'm in my forties and aging, there are certain things about physical health mm-hmm and what is good pushing through and what is no, listen and pull back mm-hmm right. That's allowing me even into my forties to experience some activities, some health and do things with my kids. Yeah. That it was, he taught me how to do.

And it got ingrained in me at that point. Right. In those areas where he had that and that's genuine authority. You recognize it. Yeah. You know what you're talking about? And so when you say so I listen. Yeah. I had other coaches that it was like, yeah, no, you have no idea what you're talking about. right.

The school just couldn't find anybody. Right. And you were the only person that agreed to take on this job. Uh, but, but, but Gary, no, no, no. You tell me to run tele IPU coming to run to LPU because you know what you're talking about, we have the shared desire and the shared tell us. Yeah. And in other like secondary issues where that's line, but then there were plenty of other places, especially as we got to know each other more and more.

where he didn't have authority in my life. but he, he tried to give me several times advice about girls and it was just a very quick, no, right? Nope. You're out of your jurisdiction. Exactly. right. No, I mean, you could 

Kevin: have tried 

Wilson: it and so, well, that was the thing. Like I looked at his history with basketball and his knowhow.

Right. And I looked at his for sure. That's where I'm gonna, this was pre this was no. Book, right. I'm not, I'm not going through his browser history, although I'm pretty sure, but like, but you know, but then I, I looked in those other areas and was like, no, no, no. With, with that, that's just a trailer wreckage and that's not what I want.

And so you're free to tell me these things, but I'm also free to say no, and I'm not gonna do what you say. Yeah. Right. That's that's gen the first key bit of, of genuine authority and leadership. And this is what Benedict gets at very early on the, when he first starts talking about the Abbot, he's talking.

To he's not talking to the potential Abbot that has ambitions for running a monastery. He's talking to the, the monks. Yeah. Saying these are the qualities you look for in choosing this leader. Mm-hmm this is how you recognize genuine authority where

Kevin: you were just going spark several. What sparked several ideas. Mm-hmm , uh, a couple I wanna, I wanna kind of highlight is it sounds like leadership is the kind of, um, the metaphor that comes to mind is like a, like a teacher or master to like an apprentice master. Yeah. Um, or someone like an, a craft, uh, that someone like a right.

You're trying to initiate somebody into a school of craft. Whether it be, I. Uh, wood making carpentry. Yeah. You know, and you're trying to instill in them, here are the skills, here's how you do it. And so leadership should be in that kind of realm of instilling skills and practices and, and things of that nature to make, you know, produce or what's what was a good word there, um, to create.

Someone who is like the master mm-hmm , um, to like, you know, pass on that. And what that got me going with all this, like, talk about leadership and authority is there's, uh, um, I think I quoted Bon ho last time too. So curious again, just pops up outta nowhere. It's like, oh, Hey, Hey Bonnie , um, 

Wilson: back at it again.

Um, theology, nerd jokes. 

Kevin: uh, but one of the cool things, I think it's in his book Christ center, he talks about Jesus and how he, he comes about and. Ex essentially comes almost outta nowhere. And people are like, who are you? Um, who are you to say these things? Um, by what authority do you do them? Mm-hmm uh, what is your leadership like?

who gave you this? Um, and essentially what Bon Harper highlights is that Jesus is on a different plane than any other human in, in, uh, history. Jesus, doesn't say like here's the teaching or Jesus doesn't have authority or Jesus doesn't give like a good word. Like he is that. Jesus is the authority. Jesus is the word that is being spoken.

Jesus is by its very nature. You know, he brings it. It got me thinking when you were talking, will that, uh, perhaps the, the mistake that abusive leaders and dictators make is that they confuse having authority with like being the authority. Yeah. 

Wilson: There you go. There there's I think you, if you didn't nail it, you're right there with like your finger super close to the heart of, I mean, cuz there is a BAJI.

Specific mistakes that they make over, but that's maybe the, the fundamental. Yeah. Yeah. 

Kevin: It's just confusing that having authority, which where versus saying like, I am the authority. Yep. This is ingrained in my being. So therefore listen to whatever I say, even matters that I have no jurisdiction over.

Wilson: Right. And that's where you start. When you look at. And again, it's like, uh, I mean, this is used so many times, but I, I think there's a reason they talk about counterfeiting the way the FBI trains people to find counterfeit bills is not to chase down all the, the bad ones to show them how they counterfeit or what the mistakes are.

They just over and over show them the real thing. Yeah. Right. They learn to know the real thing over and over and over again. And so. Yeah, it, I mean that's and the truth for all of us, and this is where we're gonna like put a little pressure back on all of us know that I know that this comes back to me too.

Yeah. Is you don't just complain and feel, um, feel like you've done. What is sufficient, if you can point fingers at bad cases of authority. Mm-hmm, like part of what we need to do is recognize, do the work to recognize true authority. When you start to recognize genuine authority, you'll also recognize we all have.

In certain areas. We, part of the mistake we make is to think so, uh, categorically, and even that it, I don't feel like that fully communicates, but we, we think so all or nothing. Mm-hmm so a person is a leader or they aren't a leader. And if all we have is bad leaders, then we shouldn't. Right, right. But what we need to recognize if we're gonna handle this well, is we need to recognize where authority genuine lies.

And if you start to see that, you'll start to recognize the areas where you have it. Yeah. Where people do look to you and where rightly they should. And that means responsibility to develop that so that you can provide. In, in fuller and fuller ways for the people that are looking to you. Yeah. That need that.

Right. This is even in the monastery. Right. And, and this is another, a test case of a good example. Mm-hmm to look at it, to see what's healthy and good. The Abbot is not the whole leader. The Abbot is not the leader. Not the only leader. Right. We'll come back to like what the Abbot is. Yes. There's a, a different kind of authority there because of what you just laid out and what the monastery is seeking to conform to yeah.

In the kingdom of God. But it also talks about like, Hey, but part of what you need to do is choose a leader here. And this is what you look for here as far as virtues characteristics, but also skills. So who's gonna oversee the resources of the monastery. That's not all in the Abbot's hands mm-hmm right.

And that's one of the things where you see with dictators is they want to control everything, whether or not they have the genuine authority to do it. Yeah. And so they make calls and they make hu huge calls that really affect people's lives, where they. . I mean, they may have positional power. Yeah. But they don't have authority.

They don't have knowhow. And so it goes badly and this is why they end up themselves. What they worship is power itself. Yeah. For them. So they grasp after it. And that's why there's like incredible repercussions for challenging the authority. Real leaders love helpful. Feedback right now. Well, maybe love isn't.

I mean, it can still sting them, but they recognize it they're to it and they're open and they listen and they adjust. Right. And so the community and the Abbot also chooses, here's the person that oversees the resources in the seller. Yeah. Here's the person who handles the outside business. Here's the person that, because you guys have authority in this area and they a, a, a good leader in that sense also like enables others to recognize and live into their own leadership.

Yeah. And their own authority.

Um, and the, the thing with the Abbot is, and this is where you have to with, with the characteristics. This is where, um, the things start to coalesce, or I like, I like Flannery O'Connors everything that rises must converge. Mm-hmm like if, if all of these things really are. Rising up toward God, then there's also a, a massive, beautiful convergence of all these disparate elements.

Cause we all live in a dome but uh, yeah, it's a spiritual truth. Not a physical . Alright. Earth. Okay. Um, so what Benedict right off the bat tells the community to look for. And the qualifications of the Abbot are like Christlike qualities. Mm-hmm . Right. And so your right to take it to Bon Hoffer, Jesus is on a different level.

He is the authority. And what does Jesus do when Jesus comes and uses that authority? That's one of the things you see over in the gospel is Jesus shows. He doesn't just have expertise in this area. Mm-hmm he has authority over life. Mm-hmm right. When he says, be heal, he's healed when he interprets the scriptures life changes, and God is actually revealed a book just isn't, uh, talked about right.

Mm-hmm he has authority over life. And what does he do? It's and this is the go to here. It, this is the new Testament in Christ. God was reconciling the world to himself. Mm-hmm, the one who has genuine authority, that kind of, that kind of authority, not like positional I'm the master. So do what I say. Yeah.

But the kind of authority we've been talking about Christ has that over life, cuz he's the source of life. And so what is he doing? He's healing and reconciling it. Yeah. And so if the Abbot, this is why Benedict right off the bat says these are the qualities that you look for because these are Christlike, qualit.

Hmm. And he gives the strongest warning to the people who take that position. Yeah. That the consequences of you misusing this are worse than anybody else misusing the authority or the position they have. Yeah. And so, and this is why over and over again, the, the stories of the best leaders, the best Abbots, the best bishops in the church.

Almost all of 'em have an element of, and when the church tried to put them in this position, they tried to run away. Yeah. like, like John Christo literally ran to a cave and hid and they had to physically drag him out and place him on the Bishop's seat before he would take that position. Yeah. Because they realize that in this place, what, and this is what, he's, what Benedict says.

You're you are representing. Re-presenting Christ and that is, that is an authority and a position. And like, that's the kind of thing that you don't want to just arrogantly assume for yourself. Yeah. And you probably you're qualified to take it if a good part of you knows you don't want it. Yeah. um, Because your job at that point, and this is what you see as he lays the rest of it out is to be that thing that, that heals and reconciles.

And so if that's the case, you are not amassing all the authority for yourself, you're helping other people discover, find their authority and trust that in themselves yeah. Become who they were made to be and give them opportunity to give those gifts to the community. It, and it that's the Christlike reconciling power.

That's, that's quite a different thing. You know, this is, I mean, Jesus himself says it. I didn't come to be served. Right. But to serve, yeah.

Julius: I think. That's the important, that's the important distinction that clicked for me in that conversation. When I brought it with you will, was this distinction between like we've named it as positional authority and genuine authority, that authority and leadership is like equality. It's like a type of being, it's a way of being that precedes the title and with so many abuses of power, what happens is Kevin, like you've named that people will like.

Receive the title first that they'll be like, I am the authority. That's me, regardless of whether or not they have like, um, I think you were spot on to connect it to craft because that's what I think of is like, that's the, the immediate analogy of like, oh, there are people who like, I want to learn from them.

I will listen to them because they exhibit, um, virtuosity is what it is right in craft. And in musician musicianship, it's a thing of virtue. It's a way of being that like, If this guitar player, I want to learn from them. And I want to listen to what they have to say, because I know in, in the same way that like in the scriptures, like there's a way that Jesus teaches that he teaches with authority, right?

Not like the other scribes of the day or whatever, but there is just this sense that you kind of get of like, you know what you're talking about. And also like bringing that into conversation that the best leaders that I look to, whether it's like musicians or like, and like pastors are people who know when to lead and when to, when to follow that, like the best leaders, don't always like, feel the need to be in the center of.

Like attention. And yet people still want to hear from them. Mm-hmm, , there's this like, back and forth of like, Jesus knows that he's got like this authority, but it's the Philippians two thing. He never like exploits that authority. Right. But pours himself out, knows when to speak and when to stay silent, when to listen and knowing like.

And I think that's the quality that you see in like, in my favorite teachers, my favorite musicians, like the best, like most virtuosic guitar players, like know when to not play to . Yeah. And they, and like, I there's something too when like, like I, again, like a guitar player or even like a pastor who I see that like, there's a humility in them still of like a, oh, you're still learning too.

Like, there are people that you look up to so that it's not this stark, like black and white of like this person's leader and this person's a follower and like leaders have absolute authority over everything in your life. 

Kevin: Yeah. It's because, uh, authority is, is gift. It's always a gift. Right. And that's what I I've always thought about and kind of described to people in the same way.

Like respect is a gift. Like I can't demand respect me, like give me authority. right. You know, it has to be freely given and freely, freely received. Um, but even it's fascinating, even in the Trinitarian life, like Jesus has the authority, but who gave him the authority? Mm-hmm the father. the father bestowed all judgment and authority onto the son.

Mm-hmm , you know, and Jesus receives that humbly re he receives that, um, you know, with grace, but, and then he is that mm. In his very nature and. we commit like ironic idolatries when we think like, oh, I, I deserve this authority. Mm-hmm I earned this authority. I, whatever my titles, my prestige, my history, like I am this authority.

Mm-hmm that, that is just not even the son of God. mm-hmm , you know, claim that. Yeah. And so it just kind of, we rise up to some so weird form of idolatry. Yeah.

[MUSIC TRANSITION TO MEDITATION]


MEDITATION

[PAD AND MELODY  SWELL AND FADE THROUGHOUT]

If we're truly leading within the Kingdom of God, then leadership is always most primally about following Jesus -- through all the normal victories, defeats, and pauses of every day, all the way through the normal end that we all face.

And if the central task of leadership in a murky and chaotic environment is to creat clarity, then the first step in that process is getting clear on where Jesus is leading you next.

So, for this meditation, we want to take you through a lectio divina practice of Mark 9:33-37.

Now the ideal setting for this kind of practice is one where you can be quiet and undisturbed. So, if possible, get there, take a posture that is comfortable, but not so comfortable that you might fall asleep, take three deep breaths, and invite the Holy Spirit to guide this time.

The first time through, set aside the urge to interpret or apply anything about the text. Still your mind, and simply listen.

33 Then they came to Capernaum; and when he was in the house he asked them, "What were you arguing about on the way?" 34 But they were silent, for on the way they had argued with one another who was the greatest. 35 He sat down, called the twelve, and said to them, "Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all." 36 Then he took a little child and put it among them; and taking it in his arms, he said to them, 37 "Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me."

Now notice any image, word, phrase, or idea that stood out to you. And just sit with it for a moment. Again, delaying any urge to interpret or apply it.

Now, I'm going to read the passage again. But this time through, ask the Holy Spirit for help in meeting Christ in the text, and understanding what he is saying to you, right now, through these words.

33 Then they came to Capernaum; and when he was in the house he asked them, "What were you arguing about on the way?" 34 But they were silent, for on the way they had argued with one another who was the greatest. 35 He sat down, called the twelve, and said to them, "Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all." 36 Then he took a little child and put it among them; and taking it in his arms, he said to them, 37 "Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me."

Now, once you have something, talk with God openly about your reactions. Where you are drawn in, or where you feel defensive. Where you are encouraged, or where you might be unsure or afraid. Whatever your responses to Christ's words here happen to be.

Now, with these words, ask Christ for clarity on where he is leading you ... And imagine the concrete events and opportunities lying before you in the coming weeks. And see yourself moving though them as Jesus would.

Finally, ask for the grace that you need to actualize your greatness in Christ. And when given the opportunity, share the clarity you've received with others around you.

This is Christian leadership, as we help others welcome God into our world through Christlike service.

[END]]


St. Benedict 6 - Monastics and Stability (feat. Nathan Oates)


STORY:

[MUSIC BEGINS/CONTINUES]

In our previous episode on Benedictine life and leadership, we said one key to St. Benedict's leadership was that he was always a good follower, and this had massive implications for how he thought about place. One of the monastics that came well before Benedict and so provided him guidance and wisdom, named Abba Moses of Ethiopia, when asked by younger monks what they should do to progress in their journey toward Christlikeness, used to tell the novices, "Go, sit in your cell, and your cell will teach you everything."

Wandering. Distractions. Novelty. Are all often only means of avoiding the things that really need our attention and energy if we want to grow.

This led Benedict to open his Rule - before saying anything about Praying the Psalms or wearing habits or choosing leaders – by describing four different types of monks. The first two are the types of monks we tend to imagine. The cenobites are those who live in a monastery and under an Abbot, and the Hermits are those who have spent many years in a monastery under an Abbot and now ready to battle alone with only God's help. 

The next two, we don't really see in contemporary life, but they were common enough in Benedict's day. And he did not like their way of life for monks and nuns. 

"Sarabaites" were monks or nuns who loosely gathered in small groups with, quote, "no experience to guide them, no rule to try them as gold is tried in a furnace ... Their law is what they like to do, whatever strikes their fancy. Anything they believe in and choose, they call holy; anything they dislike, they consider forbidden." End quote. 

Fourth and finally, quote, "there are the monks called gyrovagues, who spend their entire lives drifting from region to region, staying as guests for three or four days in different monasteries. Always on the move, they never settle down, and are slaves to their own wills and gross appetites."

 The reason Benedict didn't like these latter ways of life for nuns and monks was because of what he did envision, and crafted his rule to help his followers live into: communities of people committed to building up each other as they worked together to build up a place.  

If you commit to each other, and a place, and then actually stay, it will teach you a lot.

Now, in a world with endless streams of endless kinds of content, this might be the least palatable advice we could be given. When you could laugh at pet videos and get tips for the gym and watch gradeshoolers fight demons from the upside down in the 20th century's best decade for pop culture all holding all the world's music in your pocket, why would anyone want to intentionally put themselves in an environment characterized by a lack of variety?

[MUSIC BEGINS]

We'd want this if we care about things like justice, beauty, and, well, love. Because we can't really be agents of justice in the outside circumstances of our world if we're numb to our own internal injustices, we can't make beautiful things to share with the world if we don't face the ugliness lurking in our resentment and fear, and we can't love difficult people in difficult situations if we don't really know, that the deepest and truest thing about us is that God loves us.

So maybe we'd want this if we've decided it's time to stop running.

[MUSIC]

But don't just take my word for it. Listen to Benedict, and listen to someone from more recent times who serves as an example of what the kind of life and disposition Benedict's Rule seeks to help us attain can do even for our world today, because he lived this wisdom out seeking justice and love for himself and others. 

Nelson Mandela spent 27 years in prison for his efforts to fight Apartheid in South Africa, but then returned to become President of South Africa from 1994-1999 and was key in helping his nation topple the racist system of Apartheid. And he said, "The cell is an ideal place to know yourself. People tend to measure themselves by external accomplishments, but jail allows a person to focus on internal ones, such as honesty, sincerity, simplicity, humility, generosity. In absence of variety, you learn to look into yourself." 

So, this episode, we have a special guest. Someone who has spent time in a Benedictine monastery and taken this call to stability to heart. In the conversation that follows, Julius, Kevin, and I talk with Nathan Oats about how we can bring this wisdom to our world through our own steadiness and reliability.

[MUSIC  TRANSITION TO:]


DISCUSSION [Auto-Generated Transcript]

Julius: Well, welcome back listener to All Things. We're excited, um, because as a remedy to my inability to come up with a fresh start for these, we actually get to introduce somebody else today rather than me just kind of going around, being like, “Wil and Kevin are here, like every time….” So, um, we're, we're really excited.

Um, we're gonna throw it over to, um, Kevin in a little bit here because Kevin actually introduced us to our new friend, Nathan, and he is gonna talk to us about, um, how some of the stuff that he's writing about regarding stability and ministry intersects with some of the stuff that we're talking about in Benedict's rules.

So, um, we've got Nathan Oates here. Kevin, if you wanna give kind of a brief introduction or just like, uh, or maybe Nathan, if you wanna say a little bit about yourself, I’ll throw it over to you before Kevin starts asking you some questions.

Nathan: Alright. Uh, well, thanks for having me on. I'm excited to get to know you guys and share common interest. Um, I'm a, I'm a pastor in Northern California started a church here 17 years ago. We've been pastoring since we began in ‘04 and I've got three kids, a beautiful wife, and still full of juice for what we're doing.

Um, fell in love with Benedict about 15 years ago. And, uh, excited to talk to you guys about him.

Julius: Awesome.
Wilson: We-we've already bonded over technological issues. Now let's bond over Benedict.
Julius: Yeah.
Nathan: Please. Yes, please. Yes, please.
Julius: …a better thing to talk about. And then Kevin, how do, how do you

Kevin: Yeah. So I recently moved, uh, from the Sacramento district of the Church in Nazare about four months ago and Nathan and I were serving on the same district and he was actually part of my, uh, ordination interviews. So he gave me the thumbs up to be ordained. So.

Nathan: I voted for him.

Kevin: So thank you for that. Thank you for not like, I don't know, voting down for me, I guess. [laughs] Yeah, but, uh, I've heard Nathan Oates, uh, speak, um, really well and robustly about St. Benedict, uh, through workshops and, um, district events and, uh, pastors retreats and, and days like… He also wrote a book, um, on St. Benedict called Stability: how an ancient monastic practice can restore our relationships, churches, and communities.

Um, and he has, um, a really cool experience that I want to kind of, uh, get started with, with St. Benedict. Um, but I heard this, uh, Nathan kind of talk about his trip to Rome and his trip living with Benedictine monks for several weeks. And that really captured my attention. And as we were going through this series, I was like, “We have to get Nathan and kind of have him share his experience and his knowledge with us on stability.”

So the first question Nathan is, what is your experience with St. Benedict and Benedictine spirituality? Uh, you can talk a little bit about your experience in the, uh, living in a monastery and kinda what you learned, how you became, you know, attracted to his rule and the impact St. Benedict has…

Nathan: Super. Uh, well for about 21 years, my spiritual director was, uh, a super contemplative man. Um, he, he since passed away, but, um, he, um, he introduced me to, uh, Orthodox theology, to ancient Roman theology, and even prior to the, the, the kind of the classic divisions to Benedictine spirituality. But I wasn't really aware of what we were talking about by name or label.

And, uh, it was after a retreat with him at a retreat center in Northern California— I was waiting for my ride and there was a small library in the kitchen of this place. And, um, I pulled out this little red book and it said The Rule of St. Benedict and I was interested. I'd never really, you know, I'd never heard of that.

And I was immediately captivated by the first sentence of the rule of chapter one, which is, “Clearly there are four kinds of monks.” I just thought, I just thought that was the coolest start to—I didn’t know there were four kinds of monks, I thought there was one kind of monk. So I, I, um, I proceed to read.

Nathan: Great. So, I mean, I just remember the experience really clearly Kevin, because I was so intrigued by this author's ability to, um, clearly describe the problem of the church. In, in terms of consumerism. And I was looking around in the book to try to figure out who is this guy? And when did he write?

Because if he understands the problem that I'm also facing and sensing, maybe he has a good solution for it. So I was actually kind of shocked to find out that Benedict lived in the sixth century in Italy. And so that began a, a, a pursuit of learning more about who he, um, was and is, and the impact that the rule has.

On the history of Christianity. And, uh, along the way, I began to build friendships with different people in, in different elements of religious life. And, um, through a connection with a Dominican nun was introduced to this monastery in Noria, which is the birthplace of Benedict. And w um, asked if I could go there and, and stay for a little.

and their response was awesome. Uh, they, it took like a month and a half to respond and then they responded with, you know, it's kind of a difficult time for us right now. So we can't really host you for a long time. Um, but maybe, maybe just two or three weeks. And I was like, oh, this is gonna go. I was thinking like a weekend.

I mean, literally my, my imagination was a weekend and they're like, you could probably come for three weeks. And so I was able to, uh, get a sabbatical in 2018. Spent a month with my family touring around Italy and then spent a month, um, solo and with the monks there at, at the monastery. So it was, it was just a, it was absolutely life changing experience.

And this is part of why it, it matters in relationship to the con, um, to the subject of stability, 2016, there were two massive earthquakes that just rocked this little town in the UMBR countryside. And everybody Al ultimately leaves the town of Nord. Modern name is Noria old, old name ISIA uh, the water, the water supply is disrupted.

The electrical is disrupted all the houses crumble. The church has crumble. Everybody leaves except these 12 Benedictine monks because they've taken a valve stability. And so the town begins to rebuild literally around the work of the monastery as they rebuild their own place to stay. So by the time I visit them two years later, 2018.

I have, um, I'm staying in their guest quarters, which is a metal storage shed. And that, that was it, man. So I got to do everything with them for three weeks. It was beautiful. It was really a powerful experience.

Kevin: Wow. Uh, before we get into the actual vow stability, I'm really curious. What did day daily life look like in the, in the monastery? Like when did you get up? When, what did you do throughout the day? When did you go to his sleep?

Nathan: Mm-hmm

Kevin: describe to us a typical day.

Nathan: Yeah. So I, I didn't know this until I got there, but they're a, they're a Roman right. Monastery. And essentially what that means is they, they pretty much have a, a dim view of Vatican too, and feel like the, the Roman church has gotten pretty thinned out. And, and so they are, they're attempting to live the rule as it was originally written in the sixth century.

So everything's in Latin, first of all, and they pray the full. Prescribed prayers. The, they say literally the same prayers that Benedict wrote. They go through the same, um, the, the same routine that as outlined in the rule. So we woke up at three 30 in the morning. That was the first time of prayer. Um, and then they prayed seven times a day.

Uh, they prayed the hours, the offices, LODs, tur none all the way through vespers complan. And then, um, we ate. Sometimes and, uh, and we worked, yeah, it was prayer work and sleep. And so essentially it breaks down to eight hours of prayer, eight hours of work and eight hours of sleep. And we eat a little bit in there.

Yeah. So they welcomed me all the way in. The only thing I wasn't really able to participate in is their daily mass I could attend. But of course I, I couldn't fully participate in the Eucharist with them, but yep.

Kevin: Nice.

Nathan: I got to work in the, in the brewery. That's how they sustained the monastery. So that was hilarious. Uh, if you, if some Nazarene boys here, um, Nate's working in a, in a brewery yeah.

Wilson: hilarious to Nazare. I don't know a lot of, a lot of others just like, yeah, no big deal.

Nathan: Great.

Wilson: seems smart.

Julius: work in amazing. almost all of us. . Yeah.

Kevin: that's awesome. Great. That's great. Nathan, that's a cool experience that you've had, so let's get into,

Wilson: well, hold, can I just quick question on that? Um, getting up at three 30 to start to pray, what time did they go to bed?

Nathan: I think the last, the, I think Colan was about 8:00 PM. Um, they. there was a little nap time that some of them would take it would just mess me up even more. So I was PR I, I wasn't pretty uncomfortable. Wilson. I was very uncomfortable for three weeks. I was very uncomfortable. I was uncomfortable spiritually.

I was uncomfortable physically. I was hungry the whole time. Um, I, I wasn't sleeping. Well, my dreams were the most. I don't have a, I have a very dynamic dream life, but it's. Psychological weirdness. It's not anything spiritual, but there, my dreams were like, I mean, I'm like casting out demons of people that I know.

I mean, I was like in this, I was in this warp space there where I felt it was a thin place to quote Lewis. It was just a place where I felt like it was a battle. The whole thing was, uh, was a battle. it was wonderful. In retrospect, I cried as I left, I felt like I had tasted heaven. I wondered if in an, if I had been introduced to Christ in a Roman context, if I would've pursued that vocation, because it was so attractive to me, so attractive.

And yet I, I felt like an old man. I felt like, uh, underdeveloped, spiritually compared to these 20 year old monk. I felt like they were talking about something that I had tasted, but had really not feasted on. And they knew it inside and out. So this is incredibly, I mean, I'm like, I'm moved emotionally, even just thinking about it.

It's already been four years. There you go.

Wilson: yeah, yeah. This is, I mean, this is a huge can of worms, but just that that's got me. Well, not a can of worms. It's a. It's a huge treasure trove that we have a limited time to open and peek at, but it's just where that, where that connected with me is, uh, I'm doing in, in my PhD program, I'm doing a, a lot of work on even just perception.

And, uh, and one of the things that I'm chasing down that I, the more and more I hear and experience, the more and more I, I see the truth of this is like, um, well, I think, I guess the way to get into it is people often say like, if God were real, why wouldn't God show God self to me? Why wouldn't God manifest?

Why wouldn't God, this or that? And the, the, like part of the response that I'm chasing now that I think is true. And if we, we listen to the response of. The deepest best spiritual traditions, and especially in the deepest best of like the Christian tradition, the Christian faith would respond with like, well, what are you doing to be able to see.

There, there are certain ways of life that shape what we're capable of perceiving, um, and, and living those ways, open up those doors to perception to, to see what, like, what is, and this is, I mean, I think this makes a lot more sense of like what the book of revelation is getting at to it's that moment when the, I mean, revelation, apocalypse.

Is the Greek word translated revelation. And it literally just means uncovering like a veil is lifted and when the veil is lifted, we'll, we'll finally see, what's always been there. You know, it's not that that God isn't speaking, it's not that God's not showing God's self to us or responding, but there's a certain way that we're kind of like habitually living that lowers the veil that, that shuts the doors of our perception.

Nathan: that's powerful.

Wilson: And where, like the connection point there was, you mentioned, oh, we would get up to pray at three 30 and I start thinking, oh my gosh, that's the worst sleep, deprivation, depression, et cetera, et cetera. But then I think, but they also live the rest of their life, according to a totally different rhythm.

We're so used to artificial life, you know? And so going to bed at 11 is going to bed early for a lot of people. And if going to bed at 11 is early, then yeah, three 30 is insane. But if you go to bed with the sun, You know, um, and, and your rhythms are following the rhythms of the world. And like, if, if that's, what's shaping your rhythm, you know, if Christ is the rhythm, the logouts of all creation, if you're living in harmony with that, then not only does, you know, getting up at three 30, become a different thing.

If you've gone a bed a different time, but if you're living in those rhythms, you start to perceive and notice and dream and yeah. Differently.

Kevin: I think it's also, uh, for me is, is illuminated how, I mean, we're always formed in specific

ways. And so like, even right now for us non monastic, Like we are always, we are continuously being formed in such, such, such a way, even like you mentioned consumerism, like even though I can critique that I have been deeply influenced informed by consumerism. Um, but like people like those benedicting monks who literally live an alternative way of life, they are.

And a sense, yeah. Bringing the kingdom of God or witnessing to the kingdom of God on earth as it is in heaven. And when you go there, like it, it feels uncomfortable. Like this is strange abnormal, it feels wrong, but is actually quite right and actually good for us. Um, it's kind of healing to our, to our formation and souls.

Wilson: Yeah. So we say often, like the question's not, how do I get to heaven? It's how do I become the kind of person that would enjoy it

Kevin: Yes.

Nathan: love that. Yeah. Yeah. I love that. And that's, that was, uh, something that I heard the monks there say quite often was that they chose, there were several that I got to speak to eventually in my time there and spend time with, and almost everyone said, cause I would ask them, I was asking 'em questions like crazy.

And one of the reasons of course, one of the questions is why'd you become a monk, like what's attractive about this. Several people said, essentially this is like the fastest. Most efficient, most, uh, comprehensive sanctification experience. So I'm in, like I'm in and one of the guys was like, it was either gonna be a Marine or a monk.

I knew it had to be something that was completely all in.

Wilson: Yeah.

Nathan: dude, it was just, um, and they were just becoming holy and I wouldn't say that they were very comfortable with. Themselves, even Wilson. I mean, yeah, they had, they weren't as tired as I was, but they were tired. Um, and, uh, and they worked hard, but gosh, they were very, they, they appeared to me to be very focused on the big picture of why they were there.

Yeah. Yeah.

Wilson: it's amazing. How, like what your goal is, how much that shapes what you mean by words, like fast and efficient.

Julius: I know you're right,

Wilson: in so many

Nathan: Yeah, you're right. Yeah, you're right.

Wilson: life is so inefficient and slow, you know?

Nathan: like, uh, not, not there's no distraction. Um, they weren't being, they weren't wasting time

Wilson: Yep.

Nathan: or maybe they wouldn't say wasting actually, but they weren't taking time, um, with a spouse. Or with, um, with a job that's requiring them to, to learn how to code or learn how to pastor or learn how to, I don't know, whatever coach baseball. I love it.

Kevin: uh, Uh, the kind of heart of this episode is called stability. And so, uh, Nathan has wrote written extensively on the Val benedicting vow of stability and the value of stability. Um, but let's get into this heart. Uh, so first of all, just general question, what is the vow of stability for our listeners? Um, and also related to that question, what's the value of this vow?

Nathan: Um, So I'm, I've been describing the vow itself as, um, a, a valve permanency. It is, it is essentially the commitment to a place and a people and a purpose. Um, in Benedict's context, it was, you're staying in this cloistered monastery for the rest of your life. And you're living with these men for the rest of your life.

And you're obeying. The Abbot, the father a and you're living according to this rule for the rest of your life. So that was his context. And I think we can translate the essence of it by saying it's a commitment to a place and a people. And a purpose sometimes I've said is like the commitment to the farm and the family.

And then the fruit that comes from that would be like the purpose. Like there's gotta be a why. Um, I think that if the, the temptation for some in kind of the template of spiritual. Community is to embrace stability for stability's sake. And I think that misses the point stability is instrumental.

Stability is valuable because of what it enables. Um, it is such a critical piece of work that matters of change that lasts that Benedict realizes that the value and it's so counter the fallen nature of man, cuz we're restless. Wanderers Benedict recognizes the value. Recognizes the difficulty of keeping the value.

And so he turns the value into a vow. And so it's not just that, that stability is one of the three values of Benedictine spirituality. It's one of the three vows and you don't enter the community unless you make a vow of stability. So I, I, I mean, when I'm talking to people on the sidewalk about it, I say, this is the thing, this is an essential ingredient.

that enables your work to make a difference, whether it's the work of being a father or the work of building a house or anything. I mean, the bottom line is that if we're constantly moving and we are not remaining, if we are instead abandoning or leaving, then you know, we might have a couple. Brilliant moments of innovation that people, you know, cheer for.

But in the end, the work that we do is not gonna last. It's not gonna make a difference. A father that leaves is not a good father, a tree that is transplanted two or three times simply doesn't bear fruit anymore.

Julius: Hmm, you know, that's F it to kind of go back to your point about the, um, how funny, like the different kind of definitions of like the fastest and most efficient way to sanctification or salvation. And their like, version of that is to stay in one place for a lifetime. That that's the fastest way is to live a lifetime with the same people and finding myself like it, it really does highlight, um, kind of like wills use the image of kind of like if you're like in a dark room or whatever, and you like for a long time and you flip the lights on in someone it's gonna hurt.

And that's kind of like the growing pains. Being in a very like fast paced consumer capitalist culture to be like transported into kind of like this rhythm of life. Like, I, I, even myself not having spent two or three weeks there, I find myself resistant to kind of like, how can, like, how can you stay in a place for so long?

I moved around like, Every three years, at least growing up. And that was, and a lot of that was because of like necessity of like how like my parents having to find work. And so like, to, to be in like a kind of, um, society and like economic system where that's not even POS like stability, isn't literally possible for so many people.

And so I'm, I'm curious, like, how did. how do they make that kind of happen? Feasibly, as far as like, um, like being able to stay in this place, do they own like this property, like as far as like the, are they, like self-sustaining in terms of like the stuff that they're growing to eat, you said that they run like a brewery.

Right. And that makes that kind of like really possible, like. Um, I'm curious about like the kind of practice of it that, that allowed them to like, have the stability to stay in a place where, like you said, it was like physically tumultuous of like, there were like earthquakes and all that stuff. How to

Nathan: Right, right. Yeah. The whole place was destroyed. Yeah. You're getting to a great, the answer to your questions are yes. And yes. And yes, they, they own property and they, they sustain their work there. And in a variety of means some of them are, you know, some monastery cell wine, some cell candles, some cell, uh, some basically are retreat centers and it's like a hospitality.

Um, it's like a, that's how they, that's how they raise money. Um, and, and to the. To the impossibility side of what you said. Um, it's easy to miss the point. The, the, the point is not ultimately the point is not the cloister or their, their place where they live. And ultimately the point is not for me to stay in Lincoln, California for 50 years.

Julius: right, right.

Nathan: Um, the point is, is like a stability of heart. it's the ability to, it's like the literal capacity to be in chaos and, and know who you are and why you're there. But, but here's the thing we don't get there until the theoretical gets tested in the real. And that's why I should stay in Lincoln for 50 years because it's learning how to interact with the reality of the actual things and people in my life that will teach me.

How to have stability of heart. I can't just read a book about it and go what a beautiful idea I choose to do that. I need to practice that, you know, with the dog that wants to keep going in and out as, or whatever that's, what's going on here. But if the, if real life doesn't press in to actually challenge, um, the concept or the value, then we don't ever really learn.

does that, does that make sense?

Wilson: Yeah. That's

Nathan: That's why place is so important and that's why people are so important. And that's why not running away from either is critical.

Wilson: yeah, that's it. When you. Talking through it in an initial response to Kevin's prompt there. I thought what I wrote down was stability. Not for comfort. I think Kevin or Julius and I were tracking too, as far as where we went with, um, where we went with, where you went with that prop was thinking like, in our context, stability can start to seem really attractive.

Right. But because we want to run away from the challenges of. Like, I mean, uh, we. I mean, you're more Northern California, but in Southern California, there are lots of people running away because they want a different kind of stability. Right? You don't want, you don't want to face the challenges of dang. I just, we just had a raise and I thought that was gonna make us financially stable, but now everything else doubled and, and it's still a challenge.

Um, it, that it's. Stability for that sake of, I don't want disruptions. I don't, I, I want the comfort. I want to know, like the world will stay out there and I can just have my little island of peace that, that, that actually what this kind of vow of stability is, and, and you just named it. What you're really chasing is becoming the kind of person that can enjoy heaven.

And one aspect of that is the stability of heart. Um, That commitment. So there to, to actually live this out, you're gonna have to work through, uh, the challenges that come up and the most difficult ones are gonna be the ones inside the internal challenges. This is what, you know, in the way that Shama is trying to incorporate this in our daily life so that we could hopefully share that with some other people.

That's exactly what I've been talking about every morning. This week is like circumstances and demands. Are are pulling all of my time and energy to these things. But, but if this is gonna be something that makes me a certain kind of person, this is where I need to give my best time and energy too. And so I need to tell you guys that, and I need you to hold me accountable to it, to become a stable person is to, to face the things inside of you, um, that make that impossible for you at this point in your life, that would make you want to run or find a different way out or avoid what it takes.

Nathan: Yeah. One of the biggest misconceptions about monastics is that they are running away from the world. And, and, uh, as though it's a cop out, um, as though they're taking the easy way and, um, and I felt that position for a long time, but you're right. They, they are dealing with the most intense. Um, battlefield, which is, which is the battlefield within.

And this one brother that I met there was he, we were talking about this. He said he had to surrender everything to Jesus. And I was like, thinking marriage and you know, the commitment to celibacy and things like that. And he said, I had to commit the desire to win souls. I was like, wow. He's like, yeah.

Cause he was a priest. He was a Catholic priest. He said, yeah, I wanted to. Thousands of souls. I had to submit that to Jesus. I had to surrender that to Jesus. I was like, man, this is incredible. Um, yeah. Yeah. They would say also that the vocation that we have chosen least those of us who are married is, um, is the harder one in some ways, because of the constant, like the com our vow.

assumes a constant, like pull to care for another. So there's Al now I have two, I have two and Paul wrestles with this, right. Um, I have devotion to Jesus and I have devotion to Carmen and both of those are vowed through my baptism and my marriage. I've made two, I've made two vows and, and sometimes those go right in hand and sometimes those are, are in, in intention.

Kevin: of talk about, uh, um, I'm a fan of theology here. And so what is like the, in terms of the stability, how is, how is God a stable God? What is the theological ground for stability? Uh, cuz I know this is not just something, oh, we're gonna practice this cuz it's a nice practice, but there's actually is that I think it's grounded in the very nature and being in character of God.

Well, what did you say to that?

Nathan: I think you're right. I think you're absolutely right. I think that, um, he, God is, he's not, he's, there's a couple of things. There's a couple, the couple of the doctrines or a couple characteristics of God he's Omni present. so the idea that you could go or that you need to go somewhere to experience, God is a false idea.

If, if I can't experience God here, where he is, then I can't expect to, to that's to change somewhere else. And yet we have grown up in a culture that says, I gotta go be with God, or we even use things like we say, God showed up. Um, God is not somewhere else. God is omnipresent. God is always here now. So here and now is where I need to be.

And, uh, it it's. So, so at some, in some ways this whole thing of stability is rooted in the Omni presence of God, in some ways, probably both. And this is rooted in, um, in, I wanna say the stability of God, the constancy of. Uh, uh, sometimes people say the faithfulness of God and I like that, but I don't think it's, I don't think it quite gets there all the way.

It's more than it's more than that. God is faithful. God is also like, um, this unchanging nature so that I would like, I like the word constancy better than even faithful. Um, and we see this in, so to put it in like biblical terms, we see this in Jacob running away after he. You know, cheats his brother outta the birthright, falling asleep, having the vision of the stairway to heaven, and then realizing surely God is in this place.

And I wasn't aware of it. And he's terrified about that. He's terrified that God's with him there in that place. We see it in David's Psalm 1 39, where can I go from your presence? Where can I flee if I go to the depths you're there. Um, and now, and that's more of a, of a truth that David. Celebrating. It seems so we see this like always constant presence of God.

And I think Kevin, that's a really important piece from a Theo, like in terms of a theological root of, um, of stability. And then it gets expressed in pastoral terms by Jesus who says I'm always. um, my piece I give to you, I'm never gonna leave you, forsake you. And, and so I don't think that we can divorce the character of God from the conversation of stability, cuz I do believe it's the root, but really it builds, it begins with the, it begins with the nature of God.

And we have to talk about stability in terms of who God is. And then the next layer is potentially stability as it relates to my own sense of who I am and my sense of settledness, the war of being a restless wanderer. And then we talk can talk about stability in place and we can talk about stability in people and stability and purpose.

And I ultimately think stability is the way to, to affect change. So, um, but I would, I would agree 
with you from the, in the sense. Ultimately, this goes all the way back to a God who is not doesn't change. Like shifting shadows.

Kevin: Yeah, I was, uh, reading your book. And one of the, my favorite quotes was, uh, you were conversing with a brother and he was essentially saying paraphrasing that in order for me to like commune with God best, I need to be stable and present here. And so it's almost like stability is an avenue of communion with God.

That I need in order to be, for me to know God more, love God more. I need time in that time, I need to stay put right here for like years and a lot of times we would have the, yeah, the grass is greener on the other side. God must be over there. You know, my purpose is somehow over there. My Destin's over there.

It's like, actually, no, it's right here.

Nathan: Yeah. He said I need a time and a place to unpack the reality of the omnipresence of God.

Kevin: Yeah.

Wilson: know

Nathan: yeah.

Wilson: uh,

Nathan: Yeah.

Wilson: And that unchange, it makes me so, uh, anecdotally it makes me think about a couple years ago, I was doing my in, in trying to incorporate some of these Benedictine habits of prayer. I was praying in the morning and it, my prayer went to my kids and just what my boys were trying to

My boys were trying to learn as they were also forced to share a room. Um, and, uh, and, uh, there were, there were times where I would come. And they'd be yelling at each other. And if I didn't get worked up, they would both get mad at me cuz they took this as like, you don't see how important this is. Don't you know why this matters it almost like I need to know that you know, that he's a jerk too, you know, I need, I need to see you affected by this.

Um, and I, I, I think that that is. I mean, I have some colleagues here that won't like this, but here we go. I think that's the temptation of like process theology is like, we want a God that is like, man, dang, you guys are right. whoa. You know, and I think really the instinctual drive there is, you know, is that like, we want.

We want to know that we really do have a case here.

Julius: Mm-hmm

Wilson: we've got something to say, you know, but, um, but I, I just felt a very, very clear leading that like my calling for them to teach them with that, it's no lectures right now. There might come a time to help explain to them what's happening, but, but it's not gonna lead with lectures, but I need to be centered and present in Christ.

And so that the most important thing is the presence I bring into the room. When I walk into the conflict. That I can bring that centeredness and that presence, and even a sense of humor in the midst of their fear and their anger, and that would open the door for them, right. To learn what they need to learn and then open the door for conversations that could point to.

An unchanging, like their present knows deeply, but also, uh, the, the theological term is impassability a God that, that knows that can, but can do something about it because isn't affected by it the way that we are, you know, and that's

Nathan: In other word.

Wilson: monastic practice making us those kind of people that that's what flows into saving souls, giving something to the world.

That's that is mission is becoming that kind of person.

Nathan: So I hear you saying that your role as a father is essentially to reflect reality to your boys,

Wilson: Yeah. Yeah.

Nathan: Right. Um, yeah. Which is what the monks would say is their ultimate calling is to, to set an example for the church. So the church can set an example for the world.

Julius: Hm.

Kevin: So stability is a vow of, uh, stability helps us remain stable in God and stability is valuable to the church.

Nathan: Mm-hmm

Kevin: so my question for you Nathan is kind of like the, the thesis of your book. What's wrong with the church, what's wrong with the north American church, uh, and, and, and terms of like how you related it to stability.

What's wrong with the church and why is stability a ReMed. the healing of the church.

Wilson: Just just an easy softball. One to start wrapping

Nathan: No doubt. Yeah.

Julius: you know, a brief one.

Kevin: yeah, but, but why, why stability? Why, why did you write about this? And you, you highlighted this in your book. I just wanna

Nathan: That's a little bit easier to the wise stability. Um, cuz there's so many things probably that are wrong with the church. Sadly. Um, my, my mentor said that the, and he probably got it from somebody else that the church is the last great humiliation of Christ. Um, and, and also the instrument of restoration too.

So it's, it's crazy. So one of the things that's wrong with the church in this state is, uh, and, and nation is we're addicted to consumerism. We bought it, we're swimming in it, we're breathing it. We celebrate it. You know, we're dropping, uh, donuts outta helicopters and calling it Easter Sunday. I mean, it's crazy town.

It's entertainment. It's not. Formation. Um, it's not Christianity in any, um, in any honest sense of the testimony of the early church, it is consumerism wearing the cloak of, uh, of Christianity. I think you pull off the cover and you have just another sort of quote, unquote baptized version of consumer. And it is really challenging to point a finger at that without realizing that I'm pointing a lot of fingers at myself as well.

Um, but. Uh, I, I feel like, so what do we do? Do we just say like, so it's the whole, thing's jacked. Let's just ditch it. No, there is a remedy and that's stability. That's stability. Like that is the, that is one of, if not the primary antidote to just completely being swept away in the current of, um, of selfish self-centered consumerism.

Um, and it, it takes the form of, I mean, it, it impacts almost every element of the church from personal to communal to like even corporate and methods of evangelism and expansion and that kind of thing. So, um, was that close to what you were kind of shooting for Kevin?

Kevin: I just wanted to, I wanted you to say consumerism and also how, how that looked like in the church and just to call it out, cuz uh, That. I mean, I can imagine people are, are hearing and, uh, us talk about stability and kind of the question is like, okay, why is this important? Why, what, what, what's wrong with the, with the church?

And I think consumer consumerism essentially makes us unstable. We, we, we, it's all about, uh, you know, it's. Envious gluttonous , uh, you know, desire for more and more, more entertainment, more pleasure. More of

Nathan: first stuff. How does this impact me? Mm-hmm yeah.

Kevin: yeah. Going to churches for, you know, that benefits my, uh, you know, self-fulfillment my, you know, whatever.

And rather being stability says, like, I want to commit myself to this people. Even through like harsh trials and the people are bickering and people are like getting angry with each other and we're having fights stability says, I, I wanna commit myself to this people, you know? So that's a

Nathan: right. Yeah. For the greater end. Right. It's helpful for me to understand another big topic, really fast that the all of American Christianity is really influenced by revivalism our tradition's influenced by revivalism. So the, the gathering ends with a call to response, and now it's personal and it's about me.

And it's some really good stuff about that. There's some really important stuff. Salvation is a personal thing. Um, but it's not an individualistic. Um, and it's, it's easy to see. It's easy to trace the thread back in American Christianity and see how just the Western expansion and the industrial revolution just kind of walked right into the church and, and took residents there.

Um, but, um, yeah, if we, if we don't make that distinction and we don't start calling it out, I don't see us having anything to bring to the table. That's any different from any other self. Alternative out there. In other words, this is what we have to offer the world an alternative to this meaningless movement.

That's everywhere and it's worse than meaningless. It's actually destructive. It's destroying families. It's destroying personal peace cuz nobody can stand still and it's destroying the environment. I mean we just use and abuse and move on. And so, uh, one of the most interesting dynamics that I discuss in the book, at least it's interesting to me is the.

The different motivation behind why we do move because we're always, yeah. There's movement. There's, there's good movement and there's destructive movement. And it, it's really hard to tell the two apart, but essentially it comes down to the difference between leaving and being sent. If we can go into a, a village or go into a city and take up residents there and say, I'm gonna be part of the fabric that holds this place together, that's a kind of movement that leads to healing.

And restoration, um, the, the trend that has been institutionalized in some Wesleyan traditions where they literally are moving spiritual leaders every two or three years, it's just baffling to me. It's like, how do we expect any lasting work to be done, uh, with that as kind of a baked into the pie kind of method. So, and maybe I could summarize it with this and then Julius let's please, please say what you're gonna say. Um, there's always a reason to leave. There's always reasons to leave and, and stability invites us the tradition of stability and the Christian tradition, um, invites us to prioritize the reasons to stay.

It's not to deny that there's reasons to crabby people, alternative options, great opportunities, but it is an invitation to just prioritize the reason to stay.

Kevin: Well, thank you so much for that, Nathan. Um, it gives us a lot of good. Um, things to think about and ponder. And, uh, last question to, to conclude this episode is just to give us some, um, simple, basic practices on how non monastic Christians or local churches, pastors, leaders, anybody listening to this can practice stability.

Um, how do we grow in it? And what are some like practical ways that we can participate in this in our daily

Nathan: Okay. Yeah, I think we grow through practice. It's it's essential to practice, not just to learn about it's, it's essential to know stability and that comes through practicing. And so if we can't push it to the practical, I think we, we are just talking about a concept. So here are a few ideas and there's so many, um, and I love talking to people about this personally, but in, in this context, A big overarching kind of rule would be when conflict comes, what is the value of pushing through it?

Why should I stay when I'm in an argument with, with my wife and I can be, and what's clear, what's most clear is the reason to walk out or the reason to fight or the disagreement. Can I, can I move closer to the, can I become more radical and less extreme? Can I get closer to the root of what I'm act the source of.

Which is, is not gonna be achieved if I bail out the source of life in any conflict requires me to, to draw in and ask the, the, the deeper questions and not just react, um, and, and respond like most of our culture does so pressed into the practical. It includes things like this. If we could celebrate the, the root.

that really leads to the fruit. We're really good at celebrating the happy ending. We're not so good at saying, and I had a really dry season when my son was sick and I didn't sense the presence of God for nine months,

Julius: Oh,

Nathan: but that's a good thing because I pressed through that. And there's things I'm gonna learn in the dark that I can only learn in the dark.

What if, what if we could generate, um, Christian worship settings or family meals? Where part of what was good about the day was the hard part of the day. And we could say, yeah, that was a really difficult thing. Um, and I'm grateful for that end of story. You know, instead of, and then it led to this happy ending.

We're scared of we run away from difficulty because we, we rarely celebrated. We only see the good stories told and the happy ending. So one, one idea is to celebrate the root and there's so many hard things in conflict. You know, you guys shared before we recorded, there's some difficulty here. So I would say celebrate that, like, make that a point of I'm gonna experience the presence of God here and I'm gonna celebrate it.

Another thing is valuing the permanence of people, which is essentially just a hardcore commitment to community. Um, really valuing friendships that are multi. Decades long and doing the hard work of living through many seasons of life with the same people. I think that's a really practical way to experience stability.

There's a richness that comes, um, through 15, 20, 25 years in relationship that there's no shortcut to this kind of richness. There's just no shortcut. I live in a town of 50,000 people, almost everywhere I go. I see somebody I know, and the church is only a few hundred people. It's like 500 people. And so I'm knowing a lot of people from different contexts, but almost everywhere I go.

I see people that I know, and that's a kind of richness that comes in valuing the permanency of the people in this place. Um, and a third idea is to develop placement practices of placement, which is a kind of a, a way of saying that traditions can. Meaningful, uh, on our days off, we go to the same river.

Often we go to the confluence of the American river and that place has now become deep and rich and, and full of spiritual significance for us. Our kids were ball baptized there. Um, some things like that. So there's that doesn't exist the first time you go to the confluence that what I'm talking about is the richness that comes that that 700th time you go to the confluence, you know?

Um, and so. Practicing ways to be placed to, to be rooted and grounded. And to know yourself in association. I go back to my parents' house where I they've lived since I was four. And there's a level of groundedness that I experience when I walk onto that property. That's unparalleled. I know who I am. I was, I was named first there.

I was cheered on first there I was embraced and accepted as who I was there first. And then a final thing that I would say is, uh, I went into the monastery thinking, let's talk about church and monastery church and monastery. These are the two things I wanted to talk about. And they said, you know, Church is important, but a better comparison is family and monastery, family and monastery.

So, uh, they would, they would encourage me to see the family as the principal, community of formation.

Julius: Wow.


Nathan: Um, so those are some prac-I hope those are practical enough. Stay put let the, let the place you're in teach you reveal who you are, what you need, what irritates you. um, let the people be the, the mirror and the reflection and the sanctifying agents that help you become who you really need to become. And, um, don't just say, I want to be here.

I'm gonna embrace stability cuz it's cool, but I want to embrace stability. For what reason? Like what is the hope that I have so that when things get hard and I have 900 reasons to leave, I can choose the reason to stay and I can prioritize. I can be a fruitful tree. I can be like the tree in Psalm one that is, um, that is bountiful and even is healthy when I'm not producing fruit, um, in and out of season, um, I can be like the tree planted by streams of living water.

[MUSIC TRANSITION TO MEDITATION]


MEDITATION

[PAD AND MELODY  SWELL AND FADE THROUGHOUT] 

So for this meditation, we're going to give the last word to our guest, Nathan. We'll simply insert some strategic pauses to give you opportunity to really think about how you might practice what he describes, or live into your responses to the questions he poses.  

[END]


St. Benedict 4 - Discipline and Grace


STORY:

[MUSIC BEGINS/CONTINUES]

What I'm about to say might sound odd, because we are often not aware of what's actually motivating us with each action we take, moment-by-moment, but everything you do is aimed at some goal for the future. Our motivations are often instinctual and expressed in habit - it's not like we move through every second calculating each move like a chess player. And our aim might not be far off in the future - usually we're reacting, trying to get a little quiet so we can think, or escape a conversation that might turn uncomfortable, not moving strategically toward retiring and dying happy. But we would never do anything if each action were not for something.

So, if that is true, and it is, then where are you going?

It matters a great deal, because whether you say a kind word, or a critical word, or straight up--hit someone--the purpose, the end, the future you're aiming for, is what gives the act its meaning.

If I were to say to you, "I love you," but the purpose of that address is so I can get a piece of your California burrito, then that intent gives the actual substance to the words, "I love you." Even a phrase like "I love you," quickly becomes self-serving; it really has nothing to do with you, it's all about me ... and that california burrito.

This works with superficially negative words and actions, too. If I were to say a critical word -- a word that stings, yes, a word that may hurt your feelings, yes -- but if that critical word is truly, substantially aimed at your good, then it gives a different, positive meaning to the superficially negative word.

If the end or purpose is clarified and I know the person loves me, I can receive a critical word with humility and respect. Words can hurt, but this is why it hurts differently when we know the words are true, and that the person speaking is someone we deeply admire and respect because of the way they love.

[MUSIC]

This is critically important to remember if we are going to glean the wisdom available to us in the section of Benedict's Rule that has been dubbed the "Penal Code."

This section deals with Discipline, Excommunication, and Grace. But it's easy to forget that last one when the Rule gives instructions on what to do with people who fail, mess up, neglect their daily tasks, have wayward hearts, and who refuse to amend their ways.  For example, Benedict instructs that if a brother is found to be stubborn or disobedient or proud, if he grumbles and complains or in any way despises the Rule of Life, and then intentionally defies the orders of the leaders, that person is to:

1. Be warned twice privately by leaders according to Jesus' words in Matthew 18:15-16.

2. If the brother does not amend, he must be rebuked publicly in the presence of everyone.

3. If the brother still does not amend, let him be excommunicated, which means thrown out of the community.

The rule even goes on to say not to associate with those who have been excommunicated, unless you are authorized by the Abbott.  Now if you're like me, then in words like those you can't help but hear echoes of legalism. Such actions are immediately associated with being extreme, overbearing and, ironically enough, coming from a Saint, "unloving and Un-Christlike."

So, was Benedict actually a brute, who loved legalism and imposing burdens on other people? Is the Rule a tyrannical imposition on my individual rights as a Western Modern civilian? Another example of Christians being oppressive, legalistic, fundamentalist, and devoid of grace?

Both Christianity and the Rule of Benedict can - and have - certainly been twisted into this when we don't remember what we said about Love directing our end goals. If we forget this, the penal section of the Rule will not help us much on our way to becoming Christlike in dealing with our rebellious children, toxic friends, withdrawing lovers or unmotivated coworkers.

But when love is remembered, it unlocks a much better interpretation, that when practiced, unlocks something like redemption -- not just for our understanding of this section of the code, for of the moments of conflict we all face.

[MUSIC] 

The key to interpretation is always context: historical, cultural, literary, and theological. First, Benedict was a monk in Nursia, in Italy, in the 6th century (a little over 1,500 years ago). This is before the U.S.A, before the Protestant Reformation, before the Western-Eastern Church schism in 1054. Before so much of what makes our world and our own understanding what they are.

At the very least, let's give Benedict the benefit by acknowledging that he thought and worked in culture and time that are immensely different from our own. 

Second, Benedict was a Christian who set as the end goal for his own life to become a person wholly devoted to following the Son of God in accordance with the holy scriptures, and to do that in a voluntary society of monks.

This personal goal helps us appreciate the end purpose for his monasteries. Why did he create them in in the first place? To reform and heal the human person toward the image and likeness of Jesus Christ.

So all of the discipline -- the so-called penal codes –- and the excommunication are in service to that goal. The purpose, the end, of these disciplines is to reform and lead people to a future characterized by healing. Benedict took the intimidating task of reforming human desires that have twisted in such a way as to make people who despise order, discipline, vows, structure, and authority; How do you reform a desire that cares only for its own protection, safety, and individuality? Put people in situations that give them opportunity to learn to love bigger things. How do you heal someone's propensity to care more about what the Self says than what the community needs? How do you reorient Someone's desire to enter a voluntary society and to expect this society to conform to the individual desire? 

Therefore, for Benedict, discipline was defined by questions like: "What will save my brother or sister? What is needed for their healing, their growth in Christlikeness? Do they need to rest, to eat, and to recuperate? Or, do they need to have a fire lit under their pants so they can get to work? 

[MUSIC]

Far from being a Christian "devoid of grace," Benedict inscribed radical grace for wayward hearts into every line of his Rule. St. Benedict understood to truly care about the person, you must also care about their role and place within the life of the community that gives them dignity and purpose.

He respected the freedom of the person, sure. He even says in his rule, paraphrased, that New members of our monastery, are completely free to leave at any time; brothers who have left the monastery, you are welcome to rejoin our way of life, even up to the 3rd time of leaving!

In 6th-century culture, this was a radical way to embody grace. The common assumption of the time was: "Once you're in, you're in; Once you're out, you're out." The possibility of extending grace and care for those who faulted was counter Benedict's culture. Therefore, the intriguing question should be: given his context, what enabled Benedict to envision a wedding of discipline and grace?

The anser is Christ. 

In chapter 27, Benedict encouraged Abbots (that is, leaders of monasteries) to remember that our Lord left the 99 in search of the 1 lost sheep, and that Christ said: It is not the healthy that need a physician, but the sick. The one trusted with enacting his Rule was also called to instill care and concern for those who have grown sick and tired. The Abbot was expected, like Jesus, to journey toward the lost sheep, put them on his shoulders, and carry them back towards God.  Benedict wanted to arrange a way of life so that the strong, mature, and wise in Christ may have something to yearn for AND that the weak, the new, or the babe in Christ may have nothing to run from.

That tension is one that is incredibly difficult to maintain; it would be far easier to be an exclusive place for the strong (you're in only if you can bench press 250 lbs, or if you've already attained Sainthood) OR to be a place where practically anything can happen (you have a pulse? Ok, come on). 

How do hold this kind of Benedictine tension? By keeping the end goal in mind. That way, you can both be patient with someone's failure, and hold expectations that name their potential strength and to honor this potential by giving them opportunity to actualize it.

So, holding this tension and chasing this goal raises some serious questions about authority and power. So in the conversation that follows, Kevin, Julius and I discuss some of the ways we can recognize true authority, and experience the power of healing.


DISCUSSION [Auto-Generated Transcript]

Julius: Well, welcome back to All Things, listener. Um, we're picking up on this series on Benedict's rule and we're kind of taking things topic by topic. And today we've kind of laid out, um, this topic of discipline as it's found in the, in Benedict's rule, in his, in his communities. And I, I don't know if you mentioned it explicitly, but we're, we're kind of like gonna start this conversation, talking about the relationship between discipline and grace, which I think that for so many of us, we can see those two things as always in competition with one another, especially in Christian language and in Christian leadership.

So Kevin, today, if you could talk about the relat. Of discipline and grace in Benedict's rule. And how does the guidelines that he sets out for these communities? How can we see discipline and grace as not in competition with one another in the way that Benedict sets out this way of life? 

Kevin: To frame the beginning of this conversation.

I wanted to look at the word discipline first, and then we can look at the word grace mm-hmm . Um, for me personally, when I think of the word discipline, my mind immediately goes to like practices or habits, like disciplines. Mm-hmm things that we are disciplined into, but sometimes the word, perhaps when you've listener, heard the word discipline.

You thought of like the teacher in second grade school. Sure. Where like, it's like stop doing that. You go back in the corner. Yes. Time out. You know, you're gonna look at that and dunks capital, the Dunns cap. Is that a real thing? That's just cartoons, 

Wilson: right? It had to have been, I dunno, like 

Kevin: but like that's when the teacher's disciplining you or like a parent disciplines, you know, their child.

Yeah. And they go. You know, have to do, go to the room and just cry alone or something like that. think about what you've done. Think about what you've done. And so like when we think about like disciplining children, disciplining students, disciplining people, uh, this is what we mean in this episode by discipline and grace, particularly because in the section that we're covering and Benedict's rule, there is a quite a bit of.

Words and instruction on what people have called the so-called Peno code. Hmm. And there's like penalties or things that need, uh, required discipline in case. So, and so happens. So we have like examples where Benex says, like, if a person defies the orders of their Abbot or leader mm-hmm , then they should be confronted, uh, privately.

And they're only given like, Two two strikes. Hmm. You know, and then if they're, if they don't correct themselves or kind of back off, then, uh, that person must be rebuked publicly. Right? Like being brought before the con. . And then even after that, if the brother doesn't like mend their ways and just, you know, recorrect themselves, then after that they're excommunicated no longer mm-hmm, allowed into the community and thrown out.

And so this is where it gets interesting when we talk about discipline, because immediately when we hear those, that act or instruction, we. Immediately put it like opposed to grace. Yeah. That how somehow Benedict is not being gracious or full of grace. Like shouldn't we not discipline one another, should we just always be full of grace and, um, you know, be kind and, and so forth.

And so that's why we're asking the question. How what's the relationship between discipl discipline and grace? Are they in competition with each other? And if not, how? Um, the way I would answer this and to begin a conversation is that every discipline. Every act of discipline and every act of grace has a tell us.

That's a fancy way of saying that every discipline and every act of grace has an end or a goal towards what they're pointing towards. So if we are disciplining somebody and the. The goal of me disciplining, let's say Julius is just to hurt him. Sure. Or to make him cry. That's the goal then I wouldn't call that disciplining, right?

No, I would call that. Just you being mean yeah. just bullied. Just me being mean and being bullied. Uh, um, but then that becomes interesting. I'll say, okay. Okay. I could call it disciplining, but then you can call it like no you're being mean, but we have to look at the end, the intended end, right? The intended goal for that.

Yeah. And so with this, what Benedict is after is a healthy goal, a healthy end, an end that seeks to reform and to, uh, refresh, renew the person. And that is what we mean by discipline. And there's a, a interesting relationship between discipline and grace.

Wilson: okay. That was, um, I found it a bit of a struggle to respond to that. Um, not because I disagreed or anything, but because it was just very concisely and well put mm-hmm . it's, it's almost like the, the mental picture forming my head is like, you just gave us the menu. And when I, when I go to the order, I always have like two or three different things and I just wait till.

The, uh, the server comes up and like, so what do you want? I, I don't think I know until I, I have to choose improv it's improv. Yeah. So you, you laid out several good things and which, which way to take, I guess it would just be the leap and see where I land. But, uh, I think it brings up some important other questions or, or points like, uh, The person is given two strikes.

That's not two strikes period, right? That's two strikes before it is brought to the whole community. Um, and some context, I think that's helpful is one, uh, even the Abbot has been chosen by the community. Mm-hmm , um, it's not just, it's not like by blood. Um, and I think there's something probably at several points throughout this whole series.

We'll talk about. Uh, some of the, the ways Benedict talks about the qualifications for people who are given mm-hmm, kind of power and responsibility over, I mean, power and responsibility period, whether it over the resources of the monastery and the, um, in the seller or the, just the overall leadership of the Abbot.

But Benedict has some really good things to say about that. The qualifications of people who are given that power, but so the. the Abbot is chosen by the community. And so the Abbot speaks quietly and that's, that's like the opposite of public shaming. Mm-hmm that's the, the first is going directly to the, and that also cuts off.

So don't miss the, that, what that cuts off is the kind of, well, here we go. Uh, uh, there's a, again, there's a, there's a big old fat toe right there, and I've got heels on and I just want to step on it. and excellent line there's um, we, we so often come at like our initial reactions are, I mean, as, as wisdom and patience prudence, like our, our first step should be to evaluate our initial reactions, prayerfully and wisely, and not just run with them because so many of our reactions to something like this are born out of inherently many, not all, but many are born out of like an inherent arrogance that like, obviously we do it better and look how ridiculous that was.

But think about. How much, because we don't have, and don't follow and, and follow in the sense of like obey. We don't treat this as this is authoritative and this is a way to do it. Mm-hmm because we don't have that sort of authoritative way to handle this, like day in, day out in our everyday communities.

Mm-hmm . Um, that's why you have so much passive aggressive. Mm-hmm, just weird gossipy nonsense where you, you don't go to the person about something that has offended you so often you don't clear up. Like what's really going on and how much you go and you start like building your little tribe against this person through insinuation, through gossip, through half truths that you don't even know that that's the full thing, but you're now talking to other people as if you know exactly why this person did that.

Yeah. Right. Um, and that, that leads to the kind of divisive, passive, aggressive nonsense. Yeah. And so really, if, if you would. take this as, oh, dang. This is gonna suck. Like nobody, my stomach churn at the thought of like looking this person in the eye and being like, so, Hey, this what was going on with that?

Hmm. But if you would do that one on one before you go before people, right? Yeah. How much, how much of that would it cut out? And how often, and this, you gotta thank most of the time. Yeah, I bet. I bet that cleared up more than half of the problems by simply going, oh, there really is no problem. Right. We just didn't really see where each other was coming from.

And now that I understand, yeah, this is, these were your intentions. I can share this with you. right. And we can just now put this behind us and both of us can do better. Um, so the, and the other piece is this is a community that's come together over an agreed to tell us. Yeah. Maybe we'll put a pin on that and talk, talk more about what that agreed.

Tell us is right. But that's what has formed his community before the Abbot took the responsibility is like the charter, the founding, like the assumptions and what, what brought this community together as a community was, and agreed, tell us to pursue Christ like. Um, and so because of that, they've chosen the Abbot, according to certain characteristics, they've chosen other leaders.

They've adopted a rule because this is our, our shared agreement. Mm-hmm and this is a chance, one where if it's been done person to person on that level and that didn't resolve it. Yeah. This is a chance for the community to come together and a. Hmm, right. It, it's not just a clear case of a hundred percent of the time in front of everybody.

This is just the chance for the Abbot to shame, uh, the, the person, this is kind of like, here's a chance for us to really hear this out. Yeah. And if something, if the Abbot's missing something. Not seeing something, then this is the chance for the community to say that. Yeah. But if the other person really on that really is at fault and is breaking the unity and is, and is making it difficult.

Yeah. For everyone to come together for the purposes that they agreed to, to come on. Yeah. This is, this is the chance for the community to, to say no, no, like this is what holds us together. This is what we're about. And you're instead of acting as my brother or my sister in this, you're making it difficult for us to be that kind of 

Kevin: place.

Yeah. What I find fascinating is that. Christianity literally touches everything about our way of life as a people mm-hmm . And I think that's what St Benedek is after and realizes is that you get a bunch of people in one room in one like campus or whatever. Mm-hmm, one household and you're like, let's do life together.

It sounds great romantically. Right. And it sounds great in the head. And as an idea, let's live in a commune, let's live in a house let's like share each other's like bathrooms and like food and like dishes. And then it get to a point where like somebody pisses somebody off yeah. Or 

Wilson: even, even at a certain point in you just saying those sentences, it stops sounding so great.

Exactly. 

Kevin: The more you get to the specifics you're like, does it? Yeah. And so, but like a lot of the times we like to romanticize ideas and like, oh, let's live together. Right. Um, but I mean, this is what amongst did and same Ben Benedicte amongst did let's let's live together, but took it seriously. Yeah.

Okay. What happens when somebody offends somebody else? What happens when we. Someone is like causing mayhem. Like there needs to be order and a, a structure and discipline, not in an like authoritarian kind of way or disciplinarian kind of way. Right. But in a way that is for the common good of the community in a way that, um, where the discipline is aimed at, we are here to flourish.

Mm-hmm and we're here for the health of everybody and we're here AF and we're after Christ's likeness mm-hmm . So that doesn't mean we dispense. With grace or exclude grace? No, grace is, uh, shown throughout the rule. Um, but it's Al it's always intentional. It's always a play between mm-hmm , you know, being, uh, discipline and gracious.

Hmm. Uh,

Julius: I like that. Um, It's important. Like what you just highlighted there that these measures of discipline found in Benedict's rule are not there for, um, maintaining who like power for, for keeping, whoever is in power is in power in power. Just for the sake of that, just for the sake of like exerting one's authority and exploiting authority.

Right. Yeah of exploiting it, but that the, the end goal for these, um, practices, these disciplines for discipline, I guess, um, is to, to maintain like right standing and communion with one another, as they're seeking to be this community that is deepening their communion with Christ and with one another mm-hmm and that like, um, I love that the ways that you've kind of like highlighted, um, The like their way of kind of addressing conflict.

It sounds to me a lot, like they're, they're just kind of like what we've said before. They, they're kind of just really taking the words of Jesus seriously. When the disciples ask Jesus or like when Jesus is teaching about how do we handle conflicts? It sounds like they're pulling exactly from that oh, yeah.

Of like what happens when a brother or sister sends against me and then this like, It seems like that's the basis for the way that they're handling conflict here. That's 

Kevin: Matthew 18, 15 through 16. There you go. 

Julius: had the reference pulled up. Um, but so I, to, to kind of move this conversation even further, um, I like one of the things you said in this story portion was, um, that the, the aim for these monasteries, for these communities being created in the first place was quote to reform and heal the human person.

Toward the image of, and likeness of Jesus Christ. And so these practices in the rule of like, of discipline and the way that grace is involved with that, like are to serve that purpose of like we have as a community, like agreed to do this. And like our, our aim is for everyone in here like that, their reformation, like for, for them to be reformed into the likeness of Christ.

So can you talk to me about like, cuz that, I think that's such an important thing in like. Like maybe like shifting how we understand discipline kind of like when you, uh, how you opened up. Um, that first question was that we can see discipline as purely punitive most of the time, but this kind of reminds me of some of the discourse on like, um, like punitive versus like restorative justice of like, how do we take in mind, like the human person and what's best for their like, reformation.

So how, how then can we pull into this? Um, Like the conversation of like how this addresses sin and desire and how we can kind of orient those towards Christ and like to, to rightly orient those together as a community. 

Kevin: What is required is. Perhaps a more robust definition and understanding of what sin is mm-hmm

And I think this will help illuminate and open up what St. Benedict is after there is language of things like punishment and Benedict, but he uses it in different ways than perhaps what we used to. I think a lot of time when you hear disciplining or punishment or things like that, we immediately associate it with.

Sin is a criminal act of wrong that needs to be punished or kind of like you need to retribution retribution. There's a penalty that needs to be associated with that or time that, you know, you did the wrong. So you got, or you did the crime, you gotta do the time. You did the time, kind of like that aspect.

Um, and there's elements of that in same Benedict. But what I think the heart of St Benedict is, is also included into that, is that sin is seen as that, which needs to be heal. inside a person that there is. Inward bent desire towards the bad. No, not the good, um, the way I like to put it is like, imagine like you're, you're trying to change my, my desire for cheesecake in which I love cheesecake by the way.

um, but. Let's say you're trying to change my desire for cheesecake. And you're like, I wanted to change Kevin's desire from cheesecake to like carrots or some of carrot cake, at least carrot cake, at least the middle, but something like, you know, just like, how do you, how do you change my, my taste? Right?

How do you change my desire for it? How do you change like that? I no longer want that inwardly and change it to something else. Uh, how has that come about? Is that even possible? Well St. Ben says, of course it's possible. Mm-hmm by and through the grace of God, mm-hmm, like there is something that can happen.

And within the reformation of a person that they no longer desire to wrong God or neighbor, they no, no longer desire. Like I would really wanna sin. You know, there, there is this, this journey of healing that takes place inside the person where they in St. Benedict says we can change our desires to love God and love neighbor with our whole selves.

And that's where the disciplining acts come into play is that to see these as opportunities and moments where our, my cheesecake desires can be reformed to be changed into more healthy desires or my desire to not obey authority, because I, you know, I just resent authority. I am resistant to it. Nobody can tell me what to do.

Yeah. But these acts are like, okay, maybe that. Aimed at the wrong direction. What if it, what would a healthy, uh, desire towards like respect of authority look like and how can that change me? Or like, I don't wanna wake up so early in the morning, like at 4:00 AM to pray. How can I, how can my inward desire change to be like, no, I desire that that's actually good for me.

And I need that habit in my life. Yeah. You know 

Julius: what. What this all makes me think of right now is just that, like, we have to remember that these, like, are communities of people that they live. Like, all they do is like live with each other. They're not like just coworkers. They share the space, but so embedded within that is not just like, like zooming out.

It's not just like they work and then they kind of like go to their rooms or whatever. And then do you discipline them when they fight or whatever? Like. Prison. Yeah. They, they have times where they. They share meals and they sh they do joyful things together. And so there's what, what is what precedes these active discipline when conflict comes is like, hopefully ideally, right?

Like love and trust. That's built like these aren't strangers who are correcting you. These are people who lived with you. Good point. So they see what you need. Yeah. Like they see the kind of person that you are. And so like for me, like, Whenever I, I need like a hard correction. I'm more likely to receive that from someone who I know like who I trust and who I know like loves and trusts me.

And so like for us, just outsiders kind of just, just looking at words, like maybe some of these things can seem harsh, but we have to like look in and be like, No. Well, these are community like they love and trust each other in this community. And that's a huge part of them like walking into the discernment process of like, what does my brother need?

If he's falling asleep in morning, prayer, do I have to slap him in the back of the head or just let him rest on my lap? Right. That, that requires knowledge and love. Right?

Wilson: That being that like some brothers. A lap to rest in, and some brothers need a slap in the back of the head in that case. And, and it takes relationship and discernment to know the difference. Mm-hmm, , you know, it's not just a, an abstract universal principle, right. That can be applied the same way in all situations in all times.

Right. You learn that. And that's, um, there are places where I, I mean, over and over this, this comes out in our podcast. It's part of the whole, like the whole Shama thing is mm-hmm, a, a lot of. Of what is good and right. Um, if you really under, if you, if you take like one piece of God's creation and you really look at what's good and right about it, you're gonna see how it's connected to other things.

Hmm. You you'll find the, this stuff flowing in and out of each other. Mm-hmm um, which is why classically so many like philosophical and religious schools talk about their being like an ultimate unity in a convergence of all these things in the creator. Mm-hmm um, so wherever you find the goodness, if you.

Chase. What's good. Trace it down. You'll find it connected to other things. Right. So if you get a good definition of discipline, you'll start asking questions about grace. A good definition of justice. You'll start asking about well retribution or punishment, right? Mm-hmm the whole, you'll start talking about, tell us and endpoint, right?

Mm-hmm and if you get a good definition of, um, Uh, sin, that's gonna lead you to a better understanding of what grace is, which will lead to a better understanding of what discipline is. There are two points I wanna make on that based on what you laid out, Kevin. Yeah. So one of the places where, um, this can flow in and out of each other, but our world has so fragmented it, which by the way, that's like, that's one of the, I mean, that's deeply tied to one of the words for the devil.

Right. The Greek Diablo, which comes to what's diabolical or the devil mm-hmm is really one who fractures breaks apart and scatters that's like what evil does, that's what the devil does. And so there are places where we can still today. See if you, if you know where to look, there's places where you get a fragment of this truth, where you understand that.

And one of those places is people and I talk more and more about to some people that are really, really good at building cultures and hiring people. Mm. One of the biggest things they talk about is the people that really learn are the people that have been in these environments before just going to school and having all kinds of info in your head from textbooks about it.

He's like that's only one piece, but what I'm interested in is talk to me about your friends. Yeah. Talk to me about what you guys did when you weren't in the classroom. Talk to me about how you live when you weren't taking a test yeah. About organizational culture. And that's where you start to see the, the people that know how to do this, have experienced some of it.

And so if you wanna reform desires, what do you do? You put them in a place where that is the case where you give them a taste of it. And you, you get to taste the goodness of it, but if you're not acclimated to it, just like, if you've been like dead asleep in pitch darkness and someone flips on the lights, right.

Initially there's often gonna be reaction. And so there's gonna be a need for discipline. Yeah. There's gonna be a kickback because. Our tastes have not conformed. Yeah. Our eyes have not acclimated. And so there's gonna be a need for that kind of discipline, but that's exactly what allows you to keep like on letting them taste what's healthy until they start to recognize, yeah, this is healthy and good.

And then they start to desire it. Right? So discipline is part of this grace that allows them to actually come to love mm-hmm and, and acclimate to what is good and healthy. And so that's what leads to the other thing that I wanted to do. Mm-hmm from, you know what I said, initially, in response to what Kevin just laid out, um, about the interconnectedness of what's good.

If you come to a better. Definition of sin and understanding partially how you come to a better understanding of what sin is, is you experience a, a community that's being sanctified. And, and as you come to see, what's good, you get to recognize what's genuinely not for this kind of life giving community.

And if you get to see what sin is, that it's a desire for death. It's a taste for things that ultimately it might give a good sugar rush. Mm-hmm , it might be instantly pleasing, but ultimately it's gonna lead to something unhealthy and death dealing. Right. So that's why as the drive you talked about, uh, cheesecake carrot, cake and carrots, um, But the, I think I like to think of it as like, just playing on the word drive mm-hmm if you're, if you're like, if all of us are in a van and Kevin gets distracted and drives the van off a cliff, mm-hmm right.

If that's something, a picture of what sin is and, and it is, it's not perfect, but that's, that's pretty good. Like sin is the something that leads to ultimately to death. Yeah. That leads us to understand that grace has to be more than we typically think of mm-hmm because usually it kind. Reactively now we think of grace as just pardon?

Yeah. Um, and it's not just pardon. Like that. I mean, if, if Kevin drives the van, you know, everything slows down in these sorts of like life and death situations. Yes. And so Kevin looks at us and he's genuinely repentant. Like, I'm sorry guys. Like I drove the car off the cliff and we're forgiving and we pardoned him.

We forgive you, Kevin, we're still gonna die. Right. Like, and, and grace is not just pardon? Pardon can be a piece of grace, but it's not the full thing. Grace is actually divine power, the divine power for life that can, that can correct our death drives. And so if you see that grace is again, not just pardon, not just permissiveness, but grace is divine power actively coming to us to correct our drives away from what's deadly to what is life giving mm-hmm

Then you see how then grace sin leads to a better understanding of grace, which then flows organically into a good understanding of discipline. But if you have, if you really are a gracious community, you're gonna be a disciplining community. 

Kevin: Almost like to highlight the medicinal side of grace and sin.

I, I said, sin can be interpreted as that, which needs to be healed. And grace is the healing ointment, the bomb that heals, cuz we're all, we're all diseased, right? We all have symptoms of this stuff and it's almost like we're all sick in the hospital. And grace is that which heals. and so discipline in that sense, I think recovers and rejuvenates that I need discipline.

Right. I mean, it may be painful. It certainly will be painful. Yeah. But I need it for my healing. 

Julius: Yeah.

So given all that, as we're moving towards this more like healing, uh, understanding of discipline and grace and how. Interact. Um, there are, I mean, I there's measures in here about like, if all else fails that like people do get excommunicated from these communi, from these communities. Yeah. How, um, in light of everything that we've kind of just said, um, how can we begin to understand something as drastic as even excommunication as something that can be.

Kevin: Gracious or, yeah. And I mean, that's the reality. I mean, it's in scripture as well. Um, Spread throughout, but also in Benedict's rule of life, there is mention of like, what I had said before that if a brother commits this, these things like X amount of times, then the last result is they're excommunicated from the community mm-hmm and they're thrown out essentially.

Like you're not welcome back here. And , it sounds like very incredibly. Difficult to redeem and it seems unnecessarily. Have you ever 

Wilson: blocked anybody on Twitter? 

Julius: that is good. 

Kevin: Yeah. There we go. Block somebody on Facebook, basically. Yeah. Why? Because they're, they're being kind of a creeper. 

Wilson: Yeah. Have you ever like set boundaries with somebody in your personal contact in intimate spaces?

Mm-hmm like 

Kevin: we all. 

Wilson: We all know it's good. Yeah. We all know it. I mean, not good as in like, yay. This is fun, but we all know it it's sometimes necessary. Yeah, it 

Kevin: is. And I wanna highlight, put some weight on that sometimes. Um, I would say, and I think Benedict opens gives this, you know, allowance that this should be like the last resort.

Right. It's listed as the last thing on. The instructions. Yeah. Like this is, oh 

Wilson: shoot. Not the first

Kevin: Ooh, I'm getting there. Okay. uh, if it's the first and that's why I think a lot of our reactions. Stem from, because like let's not be exclusive. Right. Let's be inclusive. And then immediately we hear excommunication like, whoa, whoa, all the radars go off. Right. Um, I do wanna name the abuse and the bad that excommunication has been used.

Um, if it is the first thing leaders, people, politicians, pastors, mm-hmm Christians, CEOs, CEOs, CEOs. Sirens rulers police yes. The list goes on. The list goes on. Um, if it's the first thing, then that's abusive. That's harmful the end towards, I mean, you can, there's so many ends in Deloy that that can, that is aimed at, but, um, so that's the helpful metaphor that comes to mind is to think of excommunication as a.

Mm, um, a sword, you know, just think of that. Mm-hmm and I believe it can be used in so many different ways. Um, it can definitely be used to hurt somebody to cause someone to bleed and even kill somebody mm-hmm and there have been moments where excommunicating throwing somebody out has like, probably literally, but even like spiritually killed people.

Um, but a blade cannot. It's not, that's not the only exclusive use a blade can be used. Mm-hmm , you know, to cut a watermelon, to cut coconuts, to cut mangoes. It, it can even used in the me, uh, medical area where it's used to literally for, uh, surgical purposes, mm-hmm, , it can be used to heal and to defend, um, and to guard and to protect yeah.

In those ways. And so in the same way, I like to propose that we need to think of excommunication like that to see it as a way to, um, Protect the good of the community and also to protect the person, the brother that is, you know, essentially being excommunicated out, cuz they're for whatever reason at a place where they can no longer, actually them being part of the community is causing further and further harm to them and to others.

And so that perhaps we can bestow this person. In the hands of God to even greater healing that this actually in some counterintuitive way, that this is actually for the good of the person and the community. 

Wilson: I mean, it's in the word X communicate and communication there in the, in the deeper like etymological, like roots of it is not just communicating information.

Mm-hmm , it's like, really? What are you communi? And excommunication as the last resort is it's merely meant to be. And this is the thing, the way Benedict, lays out the whole process, the way it's talked about in scripture, it would be, um, through, through the whole, the whole process from person to person, face to face to community like discernment.

Yeah. To that place where it is. It's been clear. Um, now that, that. That whatever the community is found, founded on sharing is not happening. That kind of communication is not happening. Mm-hmm and what is being communicated is something else. Hmm. You know, just like a diseased organ can be communicating the disease to the rest of the body.

Right. And so the that's where you said, even as the, the end goal, there is protection to, to surgically remove and protect the communication. And it's done only when it's clear the communion is broken mm-hmm . And so now, as a part of clearly communicating in action, the truth mm-hmm the communi like the communion is broken now.

Let's make sure that that is visibly communicated too. Mm-hmm that that's clear through this. Right. It makes visible and outward. What is already like the case. You don't communicate someone that isn't struggling, but is still genuinely sharing the communion, even in their struggle. Um, you're, you're making clear what is already the case, and that is for the person, because it's, if that keeps going, if that happens, if you really do carry out the process, the way scripture and Benedict lays it out.

Mm. and it gets to that point, then what's also clear is the person that is spreading, whatever division, whatever, like is breaking the community. Mm-hmm , they're not communicating in the grace. They're not communicating with there. They're getting, they're getting something else out of exactly the role that they keep playing.

Mm-hmm and it's not good for them to keep getting that. Right. Instead of, instead of thriving in and longing for the grace and the communion with God and with the community, what they're getting is some sort of like sense of identity out of being whatever the problem. And, and it's feeding something in them.

That's why they keep doing it. They may not even know what they're getting at that they keep coming back for, but there's something. Like somebody addicted to a poisonous substance, they keep coming back and there's something that they're getting out of that, that, and that's why it's even for their good, they need to be severed from whatever you know, is giving them the fix whatever's giving 'em the adrenaline jolt whatever's giving 'em that sense of like identity in being the rebel or the black sheep mm-hmm or whatever that is right.

To, to cut them off so that they start to hunger and then you can feed them the right thing. 

Kevin: What that brought out to mind was that the, the person, their, their, their direction, the, the end, the tell us towards which they're pointing to. Is misaligned with the communities. Mm-hmm, that loss and their own true.

Tell us. Yeah. And in their own true. Tell us. And now, now that doesn't necessarily mean that they should be excommunicated because like all of us yeah, true. Are not all completely aligned with the community, but that person has also refused the willingness to at least make, you know, inch ever, ever closer towards the communities.

Tell us, they're like, no, I have my own. Tell us. And nobody else can tell me what my tell us. My end. And so at that point, it's like, then you have to, you can no longer be part of this, cuz our ends are completely different. Even for myself. If I find myself here, at least I hope and pray that I haven't openness and willingness to be like, okay, I'm not there yet, but please help me like take steps in that direction.
And there St. Benedict would say, you're welcomed here.

[MUSIC TRANSITION TO MEDITATION]


MEDITATION

[PAD AND MELODY  SWELL AND FADE THROUGHOUT]

It's incredibly easy to conflate mercy and grace. But grace doesn't just alleviate or remove consequences.

It heals. It restores. And more than freeing you from the past, it sets you toward a better future.

And we want to help you experience grace in as many of the infinite numbers of ways God can deliver it as we can.

But, often, in preparing these meditations, we run up against the very real limits of the podcast medium.

So before we make any suggestions here, we want to acknowledge, there is abusive and dysfunctional authority. And there are unhealthy communities that are not genuinely lined up with a good end. And we know nothing about your contexts.

So you'll need to use discretion in the ways you seek to find grace delivered through discipline and obedience.

And, let's not forget, that you'll need to use discretion in the ways you seek to help others find grace delivered through discipline and obedience.

The key, is whether or not love is the final goal.  

So, if you can honestly say love is what is motivating you, what's one bit of feedback you could give someone that really could help them that you've been holding back on sharing because of fear or insecurity?

What would be the most loving way you could share that with them?

Picture the setting, and hear your words but also your tone, see your posture.

Imagine what good end it might lead to.

Can love lead you to deliver it?

And what's a bit of difficult feedback or advice you've received from someone you really could believe genuinely does have your best interest at heart?

What's a bit of difficult feedback or advice you've received that really could help you become more Christlike?

What would it look like to trust it?

See the outcome, the difference it would make, in you, and in your circumstances. See the good end that it could lead to.

Can love enable you to let someone else help discipline your wayward desires and direct you toward greater well-being, and healing, as you receive their difficult words with the same respect, grace, and love in which they were given?

[END]


St. Benedict 3 - Rest and Statio


STORY: 

[MUSIC BEGINS/CONTINUES]

Imagine you're from Southern California, and you went for a hike in Mountains around Big Bear on an unusually warm February morning. Most people would have hiked in shoes, you know, like hiking boots, but you are a distinctly Southern Californian Southern Californian. Your job contract at the local co-op includes weekly time off to make sure you can dance in a fiery hula hoop at the Ocean Beach Farmer's Market where you purchase your locally farmed hand soap, so of course you are also adamantly opposed to shoes since they distance you from being truly grounded and connected with the earth.

And for this thought experiment's sake let's also just say you've asked your friends to call you Bilbo.

{hiking noises}

Your hike starts wonderfully. You're able to dig your toes into the dust and when your bare feet grip the rocks you can even sense Mother Earth's heartbeat in the magma below...

{heartbeat lub lub lub lub}

When you reach the summit of the first hill you look out on the horizon and see some clouds. They look like they could be storm clouds, but you've heard rumors that there's a wild gnome in the woods, and you'd like to see him, but he only appears when it's cloudy, so you take your chances and continue deeper into the woods.

{stormy windy noises}

Unfortunately for you, the rumor about the wild gnome is entirely untrue. It was actually started by a serial killer to lure tourists into the woods. Thankfully for you, the aforementioned serial killer lived during the 18th century and isn't around anymore, so your biggest issue is that the clouds on the horizon are indeed a storm, and so, because of, you know – circumstances – you find yourself barefoot in a raging blizzard.

Also unfortunately for you, even though your friends call you Bilbo, you do not have weather resistant hobbit feet. For the first few minutes you feel ok. It's cold but you'll survive. But soon you begin to feel a growing tingle in your soles that slowly spreads through your ankles and settles into your calves. (Knees and up you are okay since you made sure to wear your lederhosen). Then your feet go numb. You can't really move your toes anymore and you realize that you are in danger of developing a serious case of frostbite.

Now, fortunately for you the tall, bearded, elderly man wearing a gray overcoat and pointy hat that yelled "YOU SHALL NOT PASS"

at you at the trailhead decided to follow you up in case a storm blew in. Turns out he wasn't a Gandalf impersonator looking for tourist tip money, he's the park ranger and that was his raincoat and his dermatologist recommended wearing a total shade hat. He arrives with a pair of shoes and socks to, like Gandalf, rescue you from your profoundly bad idea.

... And this concludes a ridiculous intro to talking about how in our hectic and non-stop society what we call rest is more often than not a  form of numbing.

We've all been physically numb before. Maybe you got caught out in the snow barefoot and your feet went numb. Or maybe it was the last time you went to the dentist and they injected novocaine before filling a cavity.

We end up numb due to overexposure to a stimulus. In the case of Bilbo stranded barefoot in the cold, it was an overexposure to the cold that caused his feet to go numb. At the dentist, the numbness is from an intentional (and medically approved) controlled overexposure to novocaine. In the first scenario, Bilbo's numb feet are an unintended reaction, whereas in the second scenario, your gums are numb after an intentional preventative measure. 

It's worth distinguishing these two types of scenarios because intentionality and the lack thereof is important for how we live, and while keeping this difference in mind, it's also important to notice that both the reaction and the prevention function in the same manner; whether or not we intended to, once we get numb, it prevents us from feeling the pain and/or damage that is taking place.

And this is also true in our emotions. You may have also experienced an emotional numbness from an overexposure to something difficult or painful. Maybe you've been working in a downtown area for so long you're numb to the poverty you see. Maybe you're numb to violence and death from movies or from experiences you've had. Maybe you're numb to the hurt of the world and pain in the church. 

Maybe you're numb to being numb.

Other times we choose to numb ourselves through some activity to avoid some sort of emotional discomfort or pain. Maybe it's drugs, alcohol, gambling, sex, shopping, food, technology, sleep, distractions, or, more likely some folk cocktail of several of these.

What's interesting is that all of the things I just listed are also things that–at least on a shared cultural level–are understood to be "restful" leisure activities. And some of these are unarguably restful, like sleep. So we aren't saying that these activities can't be restful. We are saying  we cant just assume they are. It takes discernment to know what is bringing genuine rest and what is just numbing us.

Real rest can bring about healing, numbing just masks the pain. And since we live in a culture that never stops we're almost pre-programmed to confuse resting and numbing, our ability to discern between them is crucial.

{music}

We, English speakers, think about time as a limited resource that we can turn into a commodity. So we spend time, waste time, and even save time. If we can easily spout off the phrase, "Time is money" without pause for thought, it makes sense that the way we think about valuing our time might be the same thing as idolizing  efficiency.

With this in mind, our lives seem to be characterized by a constant vacillation between hyper-productivity and hyper-disengagement that leaves us (intentionally or not) numb and disconnected instead of well rested. Rather than knowing what it means to truly rest, we've absorbed a cultural anxiety that drives us to ignore our limits and keep up the illusion of always being "busy" and using our limited time "efficiently" until we reach the point where things just start shutting down. This is what idols do: they promise more life, but then just numb it. 

In terms of short term costs, numbing is a much more efficient use of our time than resting since it enables us to continue to "do" more. When we're numb we can accomplish more, watch more, buy more, and do more. Keep on producing. Keep on walking on the rocks though the snow, not knowing we're bleeding and parts of us are turning necrotic. 

Sometimes we find ourselves numb and confused as to how we got there. What started as a once in a while decision to take the edge off the stress has unconsciously become an evening ritual.

But other times it might be outright intentional. We absolutely know it's going to cost us an arm and leg to reach that goal, so we just swallow the novocaine and get the amputation over with.

But there are other ways. So in the conversation that follows, Julius, Kevin and I talk about how Benedict's Rule can help us imagine something different. And give practical guidance to help us experience a truer rest that fuels fuller life and work.

[MUSIC  TRANSITION TO:]]


DISCUSSION [Auto-Generated Transcript]

Julius: Well, welcome back to All Things everybody. What you don't know is we have just spent two minutes while rolling the tape, um, making jokey ways of how to get into this conversation. 

Wilson: They were all so much better than I, how we're actually gonna, how we actually gone. And we just can't do it because it's distracting. 

Julius: It is distracting. We really wish that we could get into it, but we're just going to get into it. Um, the last episode that we were talking about, I mean, this series where. Uh, taking a good look at, uh, Benedict's rule of life and the way that these Benedictine communities, um, have, and still do embody, um, like a way of life that we.

W we are inspired by and that we feel is very, um, integrated. And so the last episode we were talking about, um, Benedict's theology of study and work and how that is, um, interconnected with a life of prayer. And, um, and now that's connected with like the incarnation of Jesus, the kind of life that Jesus embodies.

Um, and so the kind of last element from that is, um, or I guess the. The natural next element after talking about work is, um, talking about rest as a practice. It's a practice that, that, um, in Christian circles, I think we talk a lot about Sabbath, especially as the church in America. I think that like we, um, coming from a very hyper productive.

Driven culture. Um, and kind of hearkening back to like, uh, in contrast to kind of some of the, maybe more robust and Christian definitions of work that we talked about in the last episode, I think that, um, we have a problem with knowing how to truly rest. And so just getting right into it. I think some of the distinctions that we started to highlight in the intro story is, um, the difference between the true kind of like.

Um, wholeness that comes from like a Sabbath rest, um, versus the kinds of things that we might call quote, unquote rest, but are really just like tactics of numbing and avoidance that actually leave us maybe feeling more tired because we haven't addressed the thing. And, um, w we believe we're convinced that like chasing down these practices of true rest.

Um, cultivate in us, um, a sense of what the monks called , which is like, um, uh, uh, I guess, a quality, a quality of life, a quality of being that is present, prepared and prayerful and how to cultivate that we need to practice, um, really, um, good ways of resting. And so what does that look like? Um, first of all, Can you flesh out what that looked like in the Benedictine communities so that we can kind of, um, once again, have our imagination expanded of what like true rest can look like in community 

Kevin: St. Benedict was after simple Biance of weave. That's a thread that has been highlighted throughout this Benedictine series is just, let's take. The commandments of God and just live them out in everyday practical life. And w last episode, we talked about work, um, and how work and the Benedictines were taking seriously, their, their habits of work, which actually in the ancient Roman culture would have been quite counter-cultural since, uh, the elites do not work all the peasants and slaves and all those bottom people, they work, the elites do not work and the peasants.

Wilson: Don't not work…
Julius: It's not dissimilar from today.

Kevin: Exactly. And so, so work was counter-cultural. People intentionally do that. I think nowadays it's probably —

Wilson: fun fact. This is infringed culture. This is why it was very manly in like the 17 hundreds to wear like really frilly white stockings and stuff, because that showed you can, it's not going to get dirty.

Look, I can, I can walk around in this

Kevin: Yeah, work was counter-cultural for Benedict. And I think nowadays, like you said, Juul is Julius. Uh, the Sabbath is counter-cultural for our days. And so they took a rest, uh, work seriously, but they also took a rest. Seriously. They did not see themselves as we're doing this because it's our obligation and duty to just do work and hard work and hard labor all the time and just.

Fast 24 7 and beat our bodies and completely, you know, just to run ourselves dry. They actually, they required rest. And even it would be seen as sinful if you were to do any kind of work during rest time. And so one of the cool. Practices, they did a, it's not a chapter 48 in the rule is after the six hour, which is around noon.

So midday prayer. And after their meal Bennett, it says that the brothers may rest there on their beds in complete silence. Uh, essentially what he you saying is nap time. Love it. And so there's like a, an ancient story of like the Saint Benedict invent nap time, or the siesta siesta in the, in, at noon. And.

Yeah, 

: calling it, we're 

Kevin: calling it. I would say I would push this. I would say this. He definitely, uh, is, uh, codified and made it into a rule. That's tight. This is. Uh, to have that time. Um, but he says essentially after midday prayer in their meal, and essentially he gave, if a brother just did not want to take a nap, if you want to just read privately, then let them do so.

But without disturbing the others. Um, and so the essential thought behind this was in the middle of the day, let's rest, our bodies. So that the work in the afternoon, and even the evening, which included prayers with P uh, and praying the songs and going through the liturgy and also washing dishes, sweeping floors so that those activities can be done with our entire selves, our entire devotion.

And so rest is, is, was seen as a way of just rejuvenating the body, or like a way like to put as rest as renewal of just renewing ourselves. Um, and our hearts, our minds, souls and bodies. Um, and this is essentially what the nature of the Sabbath is. It's supposed to be life-giving, it's supposed to be a moment where we practicing God's presence is not supposed to be a time where we're numbing ourselves out or distracting ourselves, or just trying to, you know, escape this world through digital means trying to, you know,

Julius: Yeah. That's that, that's where my question was going to go. Like before it would Benedict say. Well, can we, before we 

Wilson: take it there, I just point out like a marker Ford and why Benedict again. And again, rises to the top as, as a model or a mentor potential mentor example in, in finding healthy rhythms and structures is when you find a good one, you don't, you don't.

And when you find a good. Or a structure you don't long-term have to choose between the individual or the community or the person or the group, right? Because in the long run, if you act according to this structure, yes. It allows the person to come to prayer, to sing the Psalms with their whole being. But also think about it that, that cultivates a healthy community, because if you're going to be part of it, do you want to work with a group of a bunch, with a bunch of other tired, grumpy people before you write and think about how, how energy.

Well, like feeds, right? It can go negative. You get caught up in group think, but it can go super positive to where the, the cumulative energy and engagement of the group bright, like catches you up and raises you up to another level. And so if like, right it's so this is, this is long-term benefits, the person and the group and the work and the art and the culture of the whole community.

Julius: So, yeah. Tell us why 

Wilson: the digital stuff doesn't. 

Julius: Yeah, that's exactly it of just like. Um, in, I mean, there are a Benedictine community, so I wonder how they do. I mean, I just, I imagine this is how they do it, but like what do you do? 

Wilson: Instagram usage at prince 

Julius: of peace. I know we should ask them. Yeah. What is your current policy?

But like, yeah. I mean, those are always at like 15 minutes or something in the middle of the day, or was there a prescribed time? How long is this? 

Kevin: I don't think Benedict. 

Wilson: Wow. That ties into one of the great things about his rule is there were many things that in other previous monastic rules were very rigid.

That Benedict also had an instinct for where to leave. Like exact time periods or even dress, which is part of what allowed, you know, a Benedictine monastery to flourish, like in like really wet, cold. Yeah. What's now England and a very arid desert climate somewhere in the Eastern

Julius: Canadian tuxedo robes. 

Kevin: But the rule is meant to be. Um, contextualized in whatever we're keeping it in 

Julius: mind or the way that like the rule of Benedict is contextual. Exactly. Like we already were kind of joking about like, yeah. What is Instagram usage like at the prince of peace, Abby? Um, it seems like, um, maybe, maybe how I'm hearing it is.

Like rightly rigid, is that the two things that you can do are nap rest for your body or to read, right? Like where does, like, if I were, if I were a Benedictine monk, what would my Abbott have to say? If I was like, I'm going to scroll on Instagram or, you know, like why those two things and how like, um, 

Kevin: What I hear in Abbott asking, cause there's always this play between the Abbott and the, in the, the monk of like a question and kind of like a response.

And so what I hear at Abbott, uh, inquiring about Instagram usage is tell me how that practice reminds you of God's presence, or tell me how that, that act or event or doing that. Delve deeper into the presence of God. Right. And that's what, essentially anything that's renews you are gives life to you. I mean, that's can be categorized as rest, you know?

And so like even just going out and, uh, looking at the beauty of creation. Looking at how the leaves change, color, looking at a frog in a pond, uh, looking at, or being reminded of the blessings that God has given you, your friends, the family, your local church, your, you know, health or et cetera, et cetera.

Like anything that produces moments of renewal, uh, delve deeper into God's presence than I think an Abba would say than do that. And so I, I would buy Instagram outearn. That would be an interesting one. 

Wilson: And in that as the job of an Abbott, as a spiritual advisor is also discernment. And so I think would probe questions about why are you go, why are you going, what are you looking for there?

And. Like our language, totally obscures what we're actually looking for, because we say we're looking for a break from whatever the world from anxiety, from the things that are weighing on us and you don't get that there, you get more, you get, I mean, and this is again, just, there's been all sorts of stuff all over.

Yeah. If you haven't done this on your end listener, like watch the social dilemma on Netflix or read some of the, the studies that have been done about exactly what drives the algorithms that, that put whatever is in front of your face, in front of your face. In these, in these ads. Because what the algorithms are for is to actually increase anxiety.

Cause increasing fear and anxiety keeps you there because you keep looking for, and then every now and then, and they even tailor it. The, the, the rhythm, they have a very tailored to your scrolling, clicking, liking. They'll send you this much stuff that they know is going to make you anxious, and then they'll give you something.

That's a little, Jilt the positivity. And then that, that tricks your brain, like the mouse going to the, to the feeder to think, well, if I keep scrolling, then I'll find the positivity. If I keep scrolling, then I'll find the break and you're not going to find that it gives you more and more of like what the opposite of what you're going for.

Right. And, and honestly, it's in this case where this is actually happening, not. A hundred percent of the time that a hundred percent of the people open up Instagram it's idolatry. But I am saying it's probably idolatry more than we're aware of, because if we're going there looking for a genuine, what we're going for implicitly is with something bigger than me that can get me out of my head and out of my emotions and carry this.

Help me hold me in this tension and encourage me in this tension. What you're looking for is God. Transcendent. And so rest, genuine rest and prayerfulness will give you what you're looking for. Not, not the distraction, not the.

Julius: That's interesting. I think, um, what you bring up there with algorithms makes me think of. The concept of design, design instructors. Right. I, uh, a friend of mine is a product designer and I've talked to him about this where he's like, yeah, he's like, it's not necessarily as. It's not necessarily, always as much as like corporations are like actively trying to like corrupt the youth or whatever, but like the tell us to which these things are designed are more clicks and more time on the app.

Right. And so that is like built into design, built into the design as a certain ends. And that ends is like consumption. But, so I'm curious, you might, you may or may not have an answer to this, but what it makes me think of is I wa I wonder what the, um, The actual day of Sabbath, like Sabbath day looked like in, or looks like currently in the monasteries, because I think a lot about I'm struck by like how, um, speaking of like guidelines in.

In the scriptures is particularly like in the old Testament, how much like detail there is into the work that goes into preparing for the day of Sabbath, that there is like an inextricable relationship between work and preparation and rest. And how like that is a design that is oriented to kind of like form a people who could have the discernment to know, like, is this rest, um, Or is this like numbing?

Um, so I guess like just spring boarding off of that, like, um, what does that make you think of and like how, um, Let's flesh out. Yeah. What, what practices that has looked like for y'all and what practices that could look like for y'all to, um, experience this rest. Um, for those of us who aren't in like a strictly monastic community like this, um, what are the moments that you've experienced to rest that isn't numbing and what did it take to get.

Wilson: So you, you pointed out nothing is right to name it. The algorithms are the structures that shape, they structure your Instagram experience or your Facebook experience. And, and they are very they're anti monastery. There are structures that lead a way toward the Telus that you pointed to. Right? And it, it, there may not be some in like conscious nefarious motive to corrupt, but when that is the conscious and highly.

Like highly sophisticated in that it's seeking then the corruption and the anxiety is the by-product. Yeah. Um, and so the, the thing that leads to experiencing rest does this is you, you touched on it. It's. Interrelated integrated larger structure of life. Yeah, I was really, I was really torn for a while when we were laying out this series, like, do we do what we did the last episode and show the connection between study and work or do we do work and rest as one episode because, and we had to make a choice for the structures of a biweekly podcast and time constraints and everything.

We should understand that. What, what structured the monastery for a healthy Sabbath and punctuated like moments throughout the day of rest is deeply tied to good work. Like one of the things I had to learn to get to that place where I felt like I could experience Sabbath rest or to even be even out of, you know, we can drop the religious word for a second to just experience rest.

I had to learn a lot about work. Um, and the, in hindsight, the way I can articulate it now is I used to feel like stressed out overwhelmed. And so I would need a break. And what I'm actually doing is just retreating. Right? So in college, you know, I would look at, oh, in the next two weeks I have what that's unreasonable.

That's just ridiculous amounts of work. And so I would spend two days watching movies. Totally. Um, and then it's just too much. Right. And that I did not, at the end of those two days, feel rested at all. I felt more anxious, more tired and more resentful of my situations. And I started getting, I started getting bitter and I started blaming whoever my profs or my girlfriend that wanted time.

And like any, and it's still, it's still carries on when I look at whatever family finances or Shamal workload or whatever it is. And I start to feel overwhelmed. There's a part of me that wants to retreat and I've, I've even been conditioned to call that I've been, I'm tempted to call that rest or self care and see it's actually not.

That, um, because when you, when you hide from or run from the thing that you cannot run from, that gives it greater and greater power to weigh on you, and you may not be actively engaged in working on the problem. But the problem is, is it's got its claws in you now and is affecting your emotions is affecting your interstate.

And, and like, you're, even though it's in the back of your mind, it's weighing heavy on every single part of you. But to name that and to carry out a healthy stroke, this is like the structure of work to dedicate these hours to go. Like, I even still, I can sometimes flip it in my head and use like nice Christian language.

Like, oh God, I don't want to take it out of your hands by engaging. And sometimes you're like, no, no, no. Like this is go time afraid. You've discerned. And now it's time for you to get out there and do your work. I realize you're not going to conquer this on your own. You've done what you can do now. Rest, if I have genuinely given what I could give to it, my rest is a thousand times more re rejuvenating and I can, instead of having it sitting there in the back of my mind, weighing on every part of my being, I can genuinely set it aside for a time.

Take a good nap or get a good night's rest or take a whole day off and enjoy my kids. But if I haven't like engaged in the work, then the rest doesn't. And so some of the more concrete things is a healthy patterns of work and rest built into the monastery, or also like the day before the Sabbath, what are the preparations?

Like? We cook a little bit differently. We prepare the spaces a little bit differently to be ready so that tomorrow it's not like, you know, dang it we're hungry, but Chick-fil-A is closed. What did we do?

Kevin: I have probably something just like super ordinary. I don't know.  That's all we want. 

Kevin: It's just like, I mean, that's the point? Isn't it? That the monasteries are. Not extra ordinary, but like super . 
Wilson: Well, it's ordinary it's yeah. It's not extra soup bro. Ordinary. It's just ordinary reworked. Re-imagined re-imagined ordinary.

Kevin: Yeah. And so when I think of rest or Sabbath, uh, for my wife and I, I think of, uh, a plane. Or like games and there's obviously you can take it out to the extreme. Like there are some games, like definitely stress me more than her, but there's, there's, uh, the notion of play of just, um, uh, I think, I mean, I think children and kids know how to rest it way better than adults because when we're children, like we see the world in such a.

Ah, in splendor and beauty and they're just like, everything is just like, wow, look at that tree. Like, why isn't it purple.

And all the S all the ordinary things are just like, wow, it's green. Why is it green? Yeah. And even just like playing and just, uh, going outside. And literally, you ha you were playing, I don't know, on dirt or grass. And that's like a form of just having life enjoying. And so for me, I find that, uh, If I were to be asked the question, how have you taken Sabbath?

Or when's the last time you took Sabbath? I will look like, look at my, my week. I was like, okay, well, when was I actually just let loose, let go have fun. Play ancestry with my wife. Or like, when do we have friends over and engage in like this, you know, fun time of laughter. And those are the moments for me that are like, Ultimately life-giving and I find myself afterwards, like, wow, I spend time with people.

Um, it was not agenda driven or had business aside. And so that was, I guess, when I think of. 

Julius: That's beautiful. I, um, it makes me think of I'm tempted to link. I probably will. Honestly, I wrote a blog post on this, um, on shamaz website, like a couple of years ago, we're talking about that exact thing of like the, um, the relationship between work and play in that sense of like that play is, um, it's.

It's delight. It's delighting in something, it's doing something it's engaging with the world. It's a, for me it's often creating, but just for the sake of creating that this isn't for, like this doesn't have to be shared or anything. This is just simply like, um, It's delight and that's, I mean, that's where I've experienced a lot of arrests these days.

I've been really excited about like, I've, I've set up like my pedal board and my guitar and amp. So it's easy, like to it's easy access. Yes. But the past couple of nights, I've actually like when I'll, when I'll get home, that's the first thing I'll do is like I'll plug in and I'll literally just play for like an hour and that stuff, like, I haven't recorded anything for.

Like, they're not necessarily songs, but it's pure just like delight in the instrument and delight and like a whoa, like this is, um, I'm participating in something beautiful. And like, it's, it's a different kind of like, certainly it can spawn ideas and like, there are things that come out of it and there's like an interplay, an interplay between play and work and like where that.

There can I, ideas can come from that where then I kind of like, can whittle it down and that's the work part. And then like, it takes work to kind of share it into something, but like, I feel like, yeah, that there is an aspect of, um, freedom delight, wonder and humility that comes with like, trying to make space for those, for those moments of play of like childlike play, which is like, um, I don't know, just like a.

It's a freeing way to engage with.

Wilson: And consistently doing this again, a theme that I do not want to be missed. And so I don't want to pass up a opportunity to restate. Can I guess like in a song when they is, this is the time to bring it, bring back in the main theme. Is consistently doing this makes you a certain kind of person that there's, there's a reason why, when we really start to talk about this, we also find ourselves talking about work and find ourselves talking about the end prayer and finding ourselves, talking about these other areas that are like key to a healthy life.

And that's, again, the integration learning, learning to rest and play regularly. It does something to you. And it does something that expands your capacities. It expands your perception for goodness and beauty and truth. And so it makes you a better kind of worker, not in like the hyper modern puts you in a factory and make you a better worker kind of stuff.

Isn't just strictly more productive, richer. And when, when we say better worker, the kind of soul that the work you do better reflects the glory and the goodness and the care of God, which is. All of the things around it. And so it will flow into and enrich your prayer life, which will enrich your work, which will make you able.

And especially when you work like full on, when it's time to, you will rest better, which will enrich your prayer life, which you right. And in and out of each other. Because again, it's, it's a life brought together in the kingdom of God. And these are, these are the structures. And what Benedict lays down in the rule is.

Uh, pattern, right? The thing that you laid down next to your patterns to just see is this integrating, pulling us together into a life of communal flourishing. 

: Love 

Julius: that. Yeah. I love that. Um, I guess as the wrap-up thought is I've always been moved by how, um, the Sabbath was introduced to the people of Israel, um, after their Exodus from Egypt, that this is a people who were formed in like for, for generations where there exists.

Was to Liz for the profit of, of Egypt of like laying down bricks. It was labor and toil and the Sabbath was this counter-cultural practice to like, so that in their bodies, they know that like you're not in Egypt anymore. Like Pharaoh is not your God. Pharaoh does not control your time. The per like the story that you're a part of is the God that creates and rests and delights.

I think that's the kind of rest that I experienced when I play guitar is like a life is bigger than just what I'm able to produce 

Wilson: and that learning that this God is with. Like I w I was just in a conversation where somebody was kinda kinda hard on the people, because they're out in the wilderness, God gives the manna and God says, gathered on this day, gather enough for two days, because there won't be any tomorrow.

Don't go out together tomorrow. Yeah. But then on the Sabbath, people still went out and gathered and they're like, look how stupid and disobedient it's like, well, yeah, but you have to understand why it's trauma. Like they're terrified. They are scared because they, they. I mean, yeah, they're out of Egypt and out of that enslavement, but now they're in the wilderness and exactly what the practice of Sabbath is.

Teaching them is you can rest, you don't have to be afraid because I am with you and I'm holding you. I'll still feed you. You  can still eat. 

Kevin: Yes. But there's still life, even though you're not working for it, we're looking for the money we're going for the bucks working for security. It, I mean, to tie in, uh, Jesus to this, I mean, that was the, uh, one of the few places.

I think there's probably multiple where Jesus gets like legitimately angry and upset. It's in the gospel of mark where, uh, there's a man with a withered hand. Um, You guys a question, should I heal this man? And it's a Sabbath and people didn't know how to answer him. And he's like, and just say, Jesus grew angry that this practice of life giving day, this, this day where you set aside where, uh, you don't have to work for life, life has given to you as a gift.

And you can remember that. And there's a man who has a lifeless hand, um, and he asked the question, should I bestow life on this hand? Jews didn't get it at that point, but that is precisely the point. Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath. And so he gave life to the man with the withered hand.

[MUSIC TRANSITION TO MEDITATION]


MEDITATION

[PAD AND MELODY  SWELL AND FADE THROUGHOUT]

Pain, our body's alarm system, lets us know that something is wrong. We can't heal from whatever is causing the pain by numbing it, by hitting snooze on the alarm over and over again. Healing and restoration aren't nurtured by morphine but rather with consistent and real rest.

Now, being honest with yourself, what are your go to fixes for numbing whatever pain and discomfort you feel? Social media? Other's approval? Working longer hours? Shopping? Sex? Drugs?

pause for reflection

In those instances where we find ourselves choosing to numb ourselves, what's the root cause of the pain and discomfort we're looking to alleviate? 

Pause for reflection

With that hurt in mind, we want to help you imagine what restoration and healing in your life might look like by engaging your pain in Statio.

Statio is a way of life that is characterized by being present, prepared, and prayerful. As a practice, it's something that we both aim for and participate in. It rejects our non-stop culture of multitasking and values moments of prayerful preparation in the present. 

Statio helps create margins and rhythms for healthy and real rest, as opposed to numbing. But to be able to live in alignment with Statio requires a certain kind of ordering. It requires a lot of saying no. Genuine opportunities for rest come as a gift, but even as a gift we might still have to put some effort into being able to receive them well.

What are some things you tend to say yes to because of your hurt? What are the demands that you need to say no to? Who's insisting that those are worthwhile pursuits? Someone else or yourself?

pause for reflection

Where in your life does your own desire need to be told no in order to be able to embrace a way of life that is present, prepared, and prayerful?

pause for reflection

In our culture that is constantly on the go, and finds identity and value in that, it takes faith to say no, to embrace some inefficiency, and pause. It also means finding the courage to say yes to moments of facing your pain head on. And this is why Statio helps cultivate hope in us; to even desire Statio takes faith that facing your hurt will be worth it because there is a way of life that is more abundantly full of Life.

[END]


St. Benedict 2 - Work and the Depths of Our Souls


STORY: 

[MUSIC BEGINS/CONTINUES]

If you've ever gotten bored, then found yourself in some very dark corner of the internet and noticed at least some connection between the idleness and the trouble. Or if you've ever started some controversy or spent money irresponsibly just for entertainment. Or, if you've ever looked back and mourned because the period of opportunity for you to chase some challenging dream is forever gone, or I guess since we're really after a principle, and not just calling out particular behaviors, we could just say if you're human, then you are primed to feel part of the truth of the line St. Benedict's wrote to open the chapter of his Rule dealing with work, quote: "Idleness is the enemy of the soul." 

But before we move on, let's clear away a potentially deadly misconception. When St. Benedict talks about "idleness" here, he's not talking about genuine rest, as we'll see more fully in a later episode that will be completely dedicated to his teaching on down time. For now, let us just point out that when Benedict outlined a typical day, he suggested more, and more purposeful, downtime than most of even the hippest young corporations will allow their employees. He suggested significant time in the middle of every day after lunch for his monks to lie on their beds. And a good power nap will rejuvenate any mind and body more than an hour of doomscrolling at your desk. 

So when St. Benedict says "idleness," he doesn't mean rest. He's naming a spiritual condition that will show in both our emotions and our actions. It's the hind of internalized lack of hope that robs us of the vital energy that makes life purposeful and makes us into the kinds of people who can really contribute to good in the world. 

And this idleness – especially when extended into weeks or years – can be such an enemy to our souls, Benedict says, quote, "the brothers should have specified periods for manual labor as well as for prayerful reading." We should treat it as such a dangerous enemy that we are willing to actually habituate and structuralize a regimen for work that will guard our souls from this threat. 

So the Saint lays one out.

[MUSIC FADES OUT]

Now, as I describe it for you, remember that this was written in the 6th century, way before electricity and air conditioning. So Benedict and his monks and nuns lived and worked with the natural rhythms of the days and seasons. 

So from Easter to October 1st, or in the warmer months with longer days, Benedict says to work from sunrise, or about 6 am, until 9 or 10 am. Then to dedicate a couple of hours to reading before the midday prayer, meal, and rest. Work should then resume at about 3 pm and continue until dusk. 

Then from October 1st to Lent, which comes in late Feb or early March each year, or in the colder winter months with shorter days, Benedict says to spend the first few hours of the day reading. Then, when it begins to warm up, to work from about 9 am to 3 pm. Then to dedicate the later hours again to reading. 

Adaptability is one of the key features of Benedict's Rule that distinguishes it from earlier, more rigid monastic Rules. But it's not just the daylight and weather that leads Benedict to adapt his rhythms for work. He also shifts to conform our habits according to the life of Christ. So during Lent, which is a season of 40 days dedicated to self-examination and repentance meant to help us experience something of the 40 days Jesus spent fasting and praying in the wilderness before he began his ministry, Benedict says to spend the first 3 hours of the day in reading and reflecting, then to work until about 4 pm, extending the time of the evening work in months that still tend to be cold as part of our penance.

Now, not only were there no phones and social networking to disrupt their focus, but there was also an Abbot or some other monk assigned to make sure people were using the time as they should. So, in contrast to much corporate culture, understand that those hours assigned for work are actually used for work, and that's a lot of time each day not wasted on idleness. Which is indeed a decent guard for souls.

[MUSIC]

But, please note, in the opening lines of this episode I said you're primed to feel part of the truth of Benedict's line, "Idleness is the enemy of the soul." Because Benedict wasn't just trying to reduce the negative effects of idleness. If he were, he wouldn't have much new wisdom or insight to give us – because we've all already felt the shame that comes after we've abused or squandered time. We know the negative. And, on the other end, most of us have felt the tyranny of working somewhere that's obsessed with productivity to the point that their structures for work don't really provide anything better than our idleness could simply because they run people ragged. So how does Benedict offer us something genuinely new and better?

To see the fuller truth of Benedict's words, we must remember this Saint wasn't primarily about upping profitability or calling out bad practices and people. Benedict was about making good people. So he wants to help us see that this kind of idleness doesn't just lead to something bad, it restricts us from something good. 

And in leading people to work this way, he wants them to experience this greater good. So if we come to understand and actually follow something of Benedict's advice, he can help us come to know the positive benefits of consistent work, not just for our minds or bank accounts - for also for our bodies and souls. 

Benedict's Rule can help us achieve productivity and sustainability, sure. As St. Benedict says in this chapter, "living by the labor of their hands" allows the monasteries to sustain themselves. And this sustainability made them very attractive options during seasons where political and economic realities were tough and stable food and housing were hard to come by. 

But, don't miss what being part of this kind of community and structure does to the person's heart, body, and mind. On the personal level, Benedict's Rule can also aid the development of our own character and extend our capacity for seeing and participating in the good. Because following Benedict's regimen for work makes someone the kind of person who can mentally concentrate on a task for hours at a time. And habituating this kind of rhythm gives a person the physical stamina that enables them to make good on their deeper inspirations and dreams. 

And just like a future athlete drilling the form of their jumpshot or a future musician running their musical scales or a future scientist repeating their multiplication tables expands their ability to comprehend movement or music or natural principles,  this kind of repeated exercise makes the monastic into someone who is able to reason more fully about their labor. It makes them into someone who can Understand what they are doing, and commune with the materials they are working with at a deeper level. 

[MUSIC BEGINS]

This is why you hear people who really practice their craft say things like, "I don't build tables, I facilitate connection." Or, "If you listen to it, the wood will tell you how it wants to be cut." It's only nonsense if your labor hasn't extended your senses and understanding to make you into someone who can make sense of it. 

And this, is really good work. But, it's still not the fullness of the good that Benedict knows is available and wants to help others come to experience.

So, in the discussion that follows, Julius, Kevin, and I talk about why Benedict wove this routine for work with habits for study and prayer, so the monastic could gain more than mental or instinctual insight into theology or their craft, but could experience God flowing through and uniting all the moments of their days.

[MUSIC  TRANSITION TO:]


DISCUSSION

Julius: Alright, good day to you listener.

Wilson: That's your best opening in, in maybe like 20, 30 episodes. 

Julius: Thank you, I tried to switch things up. “Good Morrow to you fine listener."“ We're trying to reclaim a tradition, right? Old English is what I'm going for today, but, um, all the silliness aside, um, thanks for listening to all things. Um, once again, this is Julius will and Kevin not going to do the round table thing cause I did that the last time, but we're a well into the series on St.

Benedict's. Now the last one, we talked about prayer and. As is fitting for the Benedictine motto of ora et labora, we are in the “labor” portion, which talks about, um, the kind of. How Benedict's theology of work and study, um, is central to the way of life that Saint Benedict, um, uh, the way of life at St. Benedict, uh, tried to practice and in these communes, So getting right into it. Um, how can we talk about, um, how do we understand the Benedictine approach of study as distinct from other just intellectual pursuits and how does it connect with prayer and flow into, as we talk about laborda right. As, how does that connect to work?

Wilson: Th the short version is study was just considered part of work. There was a. All around like that. The key theme here is, is integration. Um, and what, what Benedict understood from his theology of creation, his understanding of God as creator and the incarnation in Christ. You know, I mean, Jesus worked for 30 years and, um, Implicitly understood for like centuries and the best streams of Christian thought.

Wasn't just like the first 30 years were kind of a throw away or a, or a musical rest. And then the cross did all the work. The F the 30 years of Jesus's life made the cross. What it was. Every moment of Jesus' existence is integral is Ooh, that was good. I like, we're talking about integration as that was integral to our salvation and it's what made the cross.

What it was cause I mean, thousands and thousands of Jewish people were crucified. What, what made this different wasn't that a Jewish body was tortured and killed on a cross. It was who this was and the life that, that culminated in that kind and that kind of sacrifice. And so each and every moment of Jesus's life is, is key to our salvage.

This is the story that shapes Benedict. It's the story he's trying to reconnect reintegrate the whole life of the church in. And so like, you just wouldn't see Benedict going, like kind of like we do, Hey, take four to six years to just study before you go work. The study was part of the work. And so while some people might be.

Actually hoeing rows in the fields and others would be picking the fruit and others would be clearing out, you know, trash and preparing the food for dinner that night, others will be laboring over a text. I gave, well that's, I think something key to tease out. The whole thing is why is that kind of labor just as important.

And, and, and I'm trying not to use the word integral yet. Again, you got one more. So central to not just, and again, don't just think like hitting a certain peak of productivity or even like a consistent increase in just productivity, but in a much larger sense, uh, that sort of consistent daily. Work in study being key to allowing a good, the good human work to expand and flourish.

And, and as, as we're more integrated in this to allow us, you know, through activity through the work that we kind of do to become the integrating agents that bring larger and larger portions of all of creation into harmony with. 

Kevin: My mind went to, uh, what was it in physics class that we learned that like energy plus something else he goes, work 

Julius: work is, uh, F uh, force times distance force, times distance, something like that.

There's something 

Kevin: scientific. Remember 

Julius: not a science podcast, 

Kevin: but I remember it was a energy was included in that. And even in the scriptures, when Paul says like this, the spirit is at work within you, or even work out your salvation, the ener the Greek word, there is like energy, energy, and kind of essentially.

Energy is what produces and makes work possible. Oh yeah. And so it's this, uh, so even just thinking and pondering about the question of what is work and we'll kind of tease it out for us is, is this integral aspect of our lives that somehow, also God is involved in that that work is not just merely human participation and action that coming from, oh, I'm doing this for God while I'm doing.

To serve somebody else, but actually I'm doing it in God and God is working with me and in me to make even worse. 

Wilson: Yeah, you were pretty close. It it's force times displacement, displacement, but there's, I, I see why your head goes there. Kevin, because of what I was trying to begin to visualize and articulate was that treating regular study, that like the, the increase of your mental capacities, the expansion of your mental abilities, uh, also it allows us to expand the certain kind of work, uh, and you know, and so it, it allows.

If, if a central part of our work is like our energy and that's like just the purely, like the calories we're burning, but a huge part of that is we're burning those calories to even think, you know, our mind is one of the biggest and like engines burning that fuel that if, if we're able to think better, if we're able to think, and this is especially, and you know, this wasn't just like, Hey, just go chase down.

Anything you're interested in, right? This is why every it's understood. In a monastery, there might be some with particular giftings. And so they clear they lead the way in theology, but everyone's at theologian. Right. And that's something, again, one of the there's a it's tangential, but that's another soap box that it's right here by my feet, but it's a good thing I'm sitting so I can launch up all the way on it.

But. Yeah, everyone is a theologian. The number one place is local pastors. Please, please do not think you're not a theologian. And please don't get up in the pulpit and tell your people, well, I'm no theologian, but, but in a implicitly, everyone is the way you assume things. Matters of ultimate worth and the final goal, the whole purpose of what you're doing and why that's, that's a theological question.

So cultivating that each day and expanding your ability to think theologically allows you to farm. Christianlly allows you to write Christian the allows you to take the barrels of oil to town and trade for some goats, more Christian. 

Julius: Yeah. If only if only that was the economy still, maybe. I mean, I love that.

What you both have mentioned already, um, Where it's bringing in my mind to. And the connections that are happening is that this theology of study and work is so rooted in the incarnation in the life that Jesus lived. Uh, it made me think of that passage in Luke, where it talks about how Jesus grew in wisdom and stature.

So Jesus also, he studied under rabbis. Like in an intellect and that was integrated as he grew in wisdom and stature. He, and that you, you mentioned Jesus like committed himself to a trade. Like that was part of his life was working like with his hands, with wood, working with the earth and making something.

And so it feels like this is. Benedict is kind of just like, uh, this flows out of Benedict chasing down, like keeping what's important, important, and he's looking at Jesus and he's looking at Jesus studied and worked. And how do we incorporate that in like an actual way of life? And I'm one of the things that, um, that I really loved.

Um, I was listening to another podcast on Saint Benedict and they pointed out that, um, in the Latin that aura at LA Bora, that it's kind of like a word play that. Or, uh, like prayer right. Is, is, is in that latter word. Laborda so as if to suggest, like we pray and then we pray again through working.

Kevin: No. I love that Ora, et labora, that even prayer is found in the word work where, I mean, English language is kind of sucky in a lot of ways, but you can't really see the connection convoluted, but perhaps, I mean, it is a side note. The way we speak in our language does have an impact on the way we think.

Maybe that's a side note and I wish, I wouldn't say

Wilson: that's not like a big fatty right down the middle of the plate, but we're not playing baseball right now. 

Kevin: but Andrew, anyways, uh, perhaps Latins, uh, can see that connection with oral Lamara. But seeing also as a will mentioned that work included reading and also just studying, uh, one of the cool. Uh, aspects of the rule of St.

Benedict is in chapter 38, where Bennett, it gives instructions about lunchtime. And I just love this. And so he says whenever, so every day the brothers are living together doing life together. And so there comes a time where you have to eat because you're living in community and at lunchtime, he gives these instructions.

He says, quote, let there be complete silence, no whispering, no speaking. Only the reader's voice should be heard there. And what he means by that is so essentially the brothers come together in community around, uh, you know, probably multiple tables, eat something together, and there's a designated. That reads as the brothers are eating.

So no one speaking it's complete silence, but you're eating and someone's reading, maybe irony is says against the heresies or Augustine's confessions or something about the fathers or a piece of scripture. And it's just literally the whole entire time of lunchtime, which is. I assume we all agree that lunchtime is like a break time.

It's like our, we call it our lunch break. It's 

Wilson: eating Tai.

Kevin: Ooh, there 

Wilson: you go. What all are we 

Kevin: chewing on? Exactly. It's a feeding and in multiple dimensions, but even there like lunchtime to see that this is also an opportunity to feed our souls, to feed our minds, to beat our hearts. And also literally. 

Wilson: The marinade it to steep. They think about like all the, all the cliche metaphors we use for studying a text.

Now I want to steep myself in the text. I let it marinade before I preach it. Right. 

Kevin: But even the, the notion. I mean, I don't know how you guys eat, but when I eat, I'm paying attention to my food. I'm not really paying attention. That's a good way to do. If someone's like reading over me, I'm not necessarily hundred percent attentive to that.

But what I mean, well, I think Benedick would say, like, that's not the point of it. It's like, as long as these words. In the environment being steeped, you're steeping yourself. And even just like indirectly, you're hearing these words, it's almost like an indirect way of working as you're eating as you're paying attention.

And so it's almost as if at the subconscious level, this, these words from the fathers become, you know, inserted there. 

Wilson: I think a huge, uh, maybe another helpful strand to lay down here is to look at, um, Benedict is seeking to reintegrate stuff through prayer study work, um, and in his monasteries, in the common life there that he's providing structure for with his rule.

And that does lead to slowly arduously, uh, period of reintegrate. And then w we sit at 2022 on the tail end of a massive epoch in history called modernity, which would be we in the last series that we call disintegrated. We traced in some key ways, things that had been tightly held together largely as a result of Benedict and the work of people like him and largely across the board monastics as like the soul and conscience of the church through all sorts of ups and downs for, uh, um, A good long while.

And then as it begins to disintegrate, a big part of this was even like the shift of the end goal from overall flourishing to wealth and productivity. And when in maternity, and this is you see this, uh, mirrored in all sorts of different sectors of society. When this becomes the implicit philosophy, the driving goal, this is what shapes our understanding of ourselves and our desires that you start to see.

It shapes our businesses. So here's the invention of factories. Here's the industrial revolution. Here's an, a more and more. A picture on the human side, we start to think of humans more and more like machines. Right. And so different parts of our bodies are treated like the engine, the cog, right. The conveyor belt.

And now, you know, we think of our brain as a computer, which again, another soap box, but your brain is not a computer. Uh, take your brain out and. Connect everything perfectly to some other electronic system and your brain will not think without your body it's. Um, so we, we think of people in more and more, uh, mechanistic terms.

And then we think of work and productivity in the same way. So you have factories with conveyor belts and you have people plugged into these machines with the goal being productivity and efficiency and profits. And so this is, this is where you first really get. Just totally the kind of menial work we're talking about, like sure.

I think of like brother Lawrence, like, would this, would this have been when he, when he just went to the kitchen and did his dishes right, right. Is that the, that's not the same as the menial work, because there, that was his kitchen, how he moved, how he arranged the things, how he, you know, even from, from dirty to in-process to clean, to drying, that was his, he had agency and, and he took in actually paying attention to what you're doing.

Struggling with that. He learned to do it more and more found more and more value. And that was integral to how he came to commune with God. And he writes this whole book, a great book called practicing the presence of God, talking about communing and praying, even just in the act of Washington. That's so different than sticking someone in a factory where their brain is.

I mean, for it's for their own sanity, their brain has to like disengage and go somewhere else as their body just re just repetitively goes through the same action over and over and over again. This is like the picture here. It's like. Uh, it mirrors the move and how we come to understand things and study things in maturity.

This is when dissection becomes like so much more, it plays such a central role. And so in junior high, you dissect a frog. And I was like to point out to my students. When you dissected a frog, you learn things about the parts of a frog, but you learn very little about a frog because the frog had to die for you.

To learn about the parts right now. If you were, if you can conceptually put that back together, carry what you learned about the parts and go watch a frog in a pond. Do what a frog does. Now you're learning about a frog. Um, and so from the advent of the industrial revolution towards moving that we push that experiment.

Just, I mean, obviously not as far as you can because we're, we're still seeing if we can get to like totally destroying the planet, but we we've pushed that like to a place where more and more people are going, whoa, something is unbalanced here, something's off track. And I remember I read a book about.

12 years ago now called joy at work by I believe his name was his last name was Becky, uh, B a K K E. I believe his first name was Dennis, but in enjoy at work. Uh, a whole, like a large, the whole point of the book was how do you keep your employees? Not just happy. Right? He was trying to take it beyond just the F like if you're still thinking mechanistically, and in terms of efficiency, you're trying to think about employee retention, but just like, if you can have a cog that doesn't break and runs for 20 years, your machine stays more efficient.

That's still thinking about people mechanistically as a cog, but he was driven. And he, he admits it, not in the book itself, but because of his faith, he was saying, I'm trying to, to think about beyond just having a profitable, sustainable company. How do I create a company where the people find joy in the work where the people come alive?

And so he he's searching. He chases this question down for a long time, writes this book called joy at work, and a huge part of that, that he's as a central piece of what he learned is people have to be, they have to be challenged. They have to be given enough where they've got to learn something regularly.

And given that, um, the, the agency, uh, to, um, to, to make their own goal, to be something that requires them to learn more than they knew yesterday to, to consistently have to grow intellectually was integral. was integral to creating a, a workplace and giving them a job where they actually found joy in the work.

Right. And so, and again, I think this is yet another place where, uh, in, in the turns and the. Coming some, some of the stuff maybe has been broken up that could create an opportunity for us to rediscover what people like monastics people that have lived deeply integrated lives before already knew. And then from that to learn how in 2021, can we creatively reappropriate that, that same sort of holistic picture of life and flourishing.

And that is like, we've part of that is don't just think of it as study is for college. And then, you know, everything you need to know and you just need to go work. You know, instead of just a season of preparation and a season of work to think about pulling those things that we've pulled apart, you know, put the pieces of the frog back together and how do we find, uh, a work that could, or, or job labor that could lead to joy?

A big part of that is it's going to be a job that requires you to constantly learn. And so the learning, the study is part of your labor is part of your work.

Julius: Did he start to kind of move towards the close of this conversation? I want to carve out some time to, um, kind of, so to speak, zoom out and, and illustrate what watching that frog looks like in, in real life, in the flesh, in the S in the slimy flesh. 

Wilson: But this is a, this is a pious Christian frog, right? 

Julius: It's a monastic frog.

Kevin: I think I just found the name of our neck. Uh, what do you call it? Coffee, bean, 

Wilson: coffee beans, thinking, minimize the frog. Avant garde album title, 

Kevin: no cooking through the hours. Coffee beans that are named after animals. And so. Like 

Julius: crooked. Yeah. So what helpful 

Wilson: thing are you trying to get a stump 

Julius: anyway, watching the frog?

Yeah, I w I wanna, um, just give some time for fleshing out. Like, what does that slash what has that looked like for you, for you both and for myself, I guess, um, can we flesh out what it looks like for, I mean, for the listener to kind of have, um, Yeah to connect that so that we together can have our imagination expanded for what that kind of engagement with work and the integration between work, prayer and study looks like, um, in real life, 

Kevin: I can go for a sec.

I or. My mind goes. And my heart goes, when thinking about this question, how is prayer work and how are they, you know, essentially UN two ways of saying the same thing. Um, as in the practice of being a pastor there's many times where you're meeting one-on-one to people and you're doing counseling sessions or spiritual direction, or even practicing confession and hearing people's confession, there's a certain sort of.

Prayerful posture that is required in all of those circumstances. And for me personally, it was like, I don't want to say like a bad thing, you know? And so in my heart I'm like, Lord, would it, when the world do I say, uh, pay attention to this person? Uh, helped me extend words of grace and love, um, and help me also just be fully present in this moment.

Like nothing else. I can't think of anything else. I can't worry about anything else. Like I have to be here for this person who is bawling their eyes out for whatever circumstance they're going through. Relational hardships, they're going through a crisis in their, in their lives. And so you are face-to-face with this person, and this is where for me, prayer studying work.

Come together at a forefront for, because in order for me to have a prayerful posture, I would have to have, uh, practices and times behind me already preparing me to be in a prayerful posture and this person, and it was. Just to even extend words of grace and love, like you need, I would need theological training and study to even say like, okay, how does Jesus feel about this person?

Or what does Jesus think about this person who has just committed this sin? Um, or, and so all those things are kind of floating in this one act of counseling direction or even a confession. And so that's for me, how kind of integrates. 

Julius: Yeah. Um, yeah, I throwing to you will, but kind of framing, um, specifically what, what that makes me think of on the other end of the spectrum for people who aren't in like pastoral ministry or whatever.

Cause I do feel that those of us who are like pastors and artists have a certain, um, privilege of an opportunity. To see those integrations more, maybe more easily in our work. But what about like people who are working like nine to five jobs? What does it look like to engage in work that like, maybe we don't care about?

Or like, honestly, like what does it look like to engage in work in a job that kind of just sucks. 

Wilson: I was, I was right. I was right on with it till that last one. I was like, no, there was a season in my life where now, but this is the, for me, the job didn't suck. I was actually, I was in, I was in a pretty vulnerable place and, and the job was an incredible blessing to me, even though I knew it was not my long-term vocation, but also know a lot of this would, this, would this anecdote, this personal story would, would connect with people that do feel like man, I've been stuck here for 10 years and this job I.

I'm going to hate it. Yeah, that's what I mean. Um, I don't know if. You guys, I know you guys are, but listener like going to college and spending over a hundred grand to get a bachelor's degree in Bible and theology, doesn't exactly put you in like the best place in the marketplace when you know, when you're, and especially when you're like 23 years old and have no experience and you suddenly need to figure out housing and health insurance and everything.

I had a very gracious person, give me a job at a mortgage company. You know, so working on the tail end of processing loans for new home buyers and all of that, and my job was pretty repetitive because entry-level, and I was not trained in finance or mortgage or real estate or anything. So gave me a job there, but this person also knew I had a vocation and my vocation was not to sell loans to larger banks.

So, what I would do is I would carry a book with me. Um, and I had, I had recently made a commitment to read at least 25 pages of a challenging book every single day. And so whatever that book was, I took it with me to work and I kept it up and like the shelf of my cubicle. And whenever I had a 15 minute break, I would go to the London.

The lunchroom, uh, I would eat my snack and I would read a few pages of that book. And then, because my work was repetitive work and once I had it down, I could, I could do it and let my mind run on something else. That is how I learned to read slowly and actually learn to read a hard book because I couldn't sit down and blow through my 25 pages to just check it off.

I had, I had a 15 minute break back, right. So I would read for 15 minutes and I would try, I would do my best at the end of that. Try to say to myself, this is what you just read. And then I would let that sit for a couple hours while my body was moving through the motions. And that's when stuff started to click for me.

Right. And that also is what I would even now point that as the place where my, my real desire to learn birth, because it came with, you know, the desire was there, but that was when I started to finally get the confidence that dude you could in, in small chunks, if you work at it diligently, Uh, in a, in an intelligent way, dude, you could, you could read it.

And you can have something to say about it. This is, this is the first time I really started to believe, like I could actually do what I felt like I was called to do. And that was through taking. And that was one, it's just getting a little bit of clarity on what your vocation is, and then using the time that you do have to, to grow yourself, to expand and to, to know like you are, you are expanding.

You are plastic. And so your current capabilities say little to nothing about who you can be 15 years from now, but if you've got that desire and you think, well, that's exactly how through that kind of labor laboring over a text or laboring over whatever it is. That's part of being and doing like who you want to be and what you want to do that you're not yet capable of that's that's the work that gets ya.

Julius: I resonate with you a hundred percent. I mean, I've grown to love. I've, I've re I really love coffee, but like I was when I was, when I was working shifts that like, um, entailed all the difficult parts that aren't. Um, the fun parts for me of like dialing in an espresso shot and like getting the taste new coffee of just like sweeping and mopping floors.

I was a closer, so I always had all the closing desks. 

Wilson: How many boxes of filters do we have 

Julius: all of  that 

Wilson: stuff. He's got to answer that question. 

Julius: I actually, well, actually one of my favorite parts of the job was, um, when I got to go to the back and wash dishes, cause it was like, uh, it was like the quiet space.

Um, but there was something that. I feel like in some of those moments, like of just where, where I had to sweep and mop or like, uh, wash dishes, there was something happening. And like that's where a lot of ideas clicked for me either like musically, creatively, or theologically, there, there is something to like physically with your body, moving through the world and moving through your emotions and working through it that like, I think it's part of being human, where we're not just meant to just sit down in one place and think about ideas, but we are to move through the world.

And like, I feel like even this past week, some of the, some of the most fruitful moments where like a lyrical click for me, or like an idea for a song is like when I'm sitting with something, but then I have to drive and like it's in the car that when I'm moving through something or I'm walking, like taking a walk, putting away dishes, making my bed, like there is something to integrating that part.

That I feel like, um, I think it's probably just about being a whole person. 

Wilson: Put the frog together.

[MUSIC TRANSITION TO MEDITATION]


MEDITATION

[PAD AND MELODY  SWELL AND FADE THROUGHOUT] 

Getting to the depths of anything requires love and attention. And paying attention isn't just a tool we can use  whenever we want, for as long as we want. Its a skill that must be developed through practice. And expanding our ability to pay attention expands our capacity for love. 

There are studies that have shown that the ideal time frame for a human mind to focus intensely on one challenging subject is at most 90 minutes. This is a sweet spot for human attention.

And St. Benedict's rule and those who keep it helps us see that work, especially work done in these kinds of blocks of time devoted to one thing are about so much more than productivity. They play a central role in who we become, and what we can know. You can say that Albert Einstein became Einstein and Mother Teresa became Mother Teresa during intervals like these.  

But not all of us have total, or even a lot of say over how we spend much of our time. So this exercise if for those of us who cannot regularly implement every bit of Benedict's regimen for work, but who still want to know something of what the monks and nuns know about it. 

First, grab your calendar or a notebook, and fill in your schedule with the events and commitments that you cannot change. Since you have not control over these, we'll work around them.

Now, prayerfully think about the week ahead of you, and as you think about your time, also think about who you know God to be ...

... And who you desire to know God as ...

... And your primary relationships and commitments ...

... Now name some things that make you curious or passionate ...

... And finally list some of your biggest dreams, and then your actual opportunities ...

Now, holding all these things in the background, what is one thing you'd like to explore in greater depth?

And start listing tangible things you could do or work on to explore this. 

Once you have a decent list, look for spots in your where where you have an open block of time ranging from 50 to 90 minutes. And dedicate a few of those to doing this work. 

Who you can become in Christ might seem like an overwhelming and unattainable goal. And 90 minutes might not seem like a lot in comparison. But a block or two like this, carried out regularly over months and years, won't just help keep you progressing toward who you were created to be. They also make the journey rich.

And as you taste more and more of that richness, you also begin to lose your taste for idleness.

[END]


St. Benedict 1 - Prayer, the Seeds for Renovation


STORY: 

You could imagine a set of circumstances that would lead you to hunt down, and even pay someone, to mentor you in your finances, right? Or circumstances that would set you off on a search for a coach that would teach you how to eat well, or manage your time. 

Sure you could. You could even see how it might become desirable, or even necessary, for this mentor to not just give you sound principles for these areas of life but also to show up and make sure you actually live by them day in and day out. 

You can make sense of this kind of commitment and effort, because with things like your money, nutrition, and time, you feel the seriousness of what is at stake.  

So if the thought of finding a mentor to teach you sound principles ... for how to pray, seems odd. And if desiring to have someone hold you accountable for praying this way, day after day, seems unthinkable -- as I'm sure it might for many today -- then perhaps we need to appreciate prayer's urgency.

[MUSIC BEGINS]

In the first episode of this series we introduced St. Benedict, who lived in Rome during the 6th century. And most historians will say that by Benedict's time, the Church and Roman Society had been internally fragmenting a good while. But then in 410, outsiders named the Visgoths sacked Rome, and suddenly the people felt an urgency for renewal and stability in every area of life. 

In this period people needed guidance in economics, politics, philosophy, law, even producing and distributing enough food. So of all the places someone could step in and make a major impact by serving as a mentor in things that matter -- St. Benedict developed himself into someone who could mentor others in prayer. 

Now, compared to the needs connected to issues like law and farming, we might see his decision as naive, or even irresponsible. We might ask, "Couldn't his intelligence and energy have been put to a more urgent matter?" But we'd like to suggest when Benedict did this, he placed himself at the very hart of the matter.

[MUSIC]

See, when early in his life, Benedict visited Rome, which was the heart of the church, it's certain he saw and felt the issues everyone saw working in the body politic - violence and lawlessness, hunger and poverty. But he also saw or intuited deeper issues like infidelity, inauthenticity, fear, despair, and idolatry, things that festered in internal environments not already filled by the stronger virtues of faith, hope, and love. 

And he knew that if the heart continued to be ravaged by these diseases, the larger body would never be healthy, no matter how many mentors set how many people off on who knows how many projects for self-improvement or societal reform. 

So Benedict also recognized one of the most urgent treatments needed was a renewal in prayer.

So, instead of allowing cynicism and frustration to paralyze his own soul, Benedict decided to go live in a cave and pursue God. This solitary pursuit initially looks like a move in the opposite direction of becoming a mentor to others. But Benedict's life follows a pattern similar to that lived by so many who contributed something of enduring worth.  Those who really help others change tend to begin with themselves.

So Benedict went to a cave and learned to pray for real.

But make no mistake, he was after not just a personal connection with God, but a larger Renewal of Christian Spirituality. And Benedict wasn't just seeking this Christian renewal for the sake of the church.

He believed that the world needed political revival and better food supplies, for sure. But he also trusted that if people were going to do good things in areas like those, then someone would have to help those people learn to commune with God.

A spiritually bankrupt church is of little to no good for the world. But if Benedict could help people plan their communities and plant their food and build shelter and administer justice out of communion with God's abundant wisdom and mercy and love, how good would that be for the world?

So, in risk of pushing the running metaphor scheme a little too far, we say when Benedict moved to his cave to learn to pray, rather than wasting his time and energy in such an urgent time, his cave became the new location for the heart of a church that would live for the good of the world. 

[MUSIC]

Now, when talking about the concrete good of either a single life, or of the whole world, saying "St. Benedict wanted to facilitate communion with the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit," can sound, to contemporary ears, very abstract. We'll even admit we can understand how this might seem like an unattainable, otherworldly goal. 

But this is part of Benedict's genius. In the Rule he developed to guide his monastic communities, he offeres ways for people to discover precisely that transcendent communion in everyday things like study, obedience, and community.  

And when it came to prayer, Benedict saw that the Psalms offered real world, everyday words, for communion with God.

In chapters 8-20 of St. Benedict's rule, he provides daily instructions on what prayer should look like. These instructions are often called the "Daily Office," and were based on "the liturgy of the hours" which the Church of Rome had already formulated.

Essentially, it is a guide to praying 7 times a day, with specific Psalms and Readings listed for each day. People, especially Catholics and Orthodox, still use this kind of prayer guide, but it's also catching on in Protestant circles. You could even pick up a copy of Benedict's Rule from Amazon. But know, the point of this book has never been to be merely read it. It's always been meant to be lived and performed in the life of a community. If you do pick one up, think of it more as a exercise plan than a textbook. You wouldn't just read 50 pages on the principles of nutrition and cardio and lifting routines then expect your blood pressure to drop because new info was in your head ...

So Benedict required that any person who desired to be part of his monasteries would take a vow of consistency and stability in praying these Psalms every day within a community. It is an outline of Benedict's way of mentoring people. So, if you get into praying this way, you might want to think that you've also taken on Benedict as a mentor in prayer, who'll show up every day to check on how you're doing and give you feedback.

[MUSIC BEGINS]

Finally, there is a beautiful play between structure and movement in a Benedictine life of prayer. Because the structure Benedict gave to prayer tethered it to the biblical Psalms, and these Psalms are songs -- so they offer more than just concrete words for communion with God -- as songs they also provide prayer the movement of poetry and music. But this means more than we might think. In 2022, we might be tempted to say "praying the psalms is just a movement of poetry and song" but with the problems we're facing we need real action. Just like we might say Bob Dylan's "Blowin in the Wind" or "Maggie's Farm" were just songs that spoke of the concrete problems of his own time and place, while people in other fields actually did something to engage them. 

But if we appreciate that the form of doing squats and the structure of a nutrition plan, when combined with the energy and movement of actual food and exercise can facilitate bodily health, we might also see how Benedict's structure for prayer, wed to the energy and movement of poetry and song, can be a practice that helps the soul cultivate virtues like obedience and discernment, courage and perseverance, faith, hope, and love. 

And if this poetry and melody fueles virtues like wisdom and charity and fortitude, there is no "just" about it. 

This is why Benedict understood prayer, rather than just being some private spiritual boost, was training for revolution. The necessary engine for renewal. And if this is what prayer is, can you justify doing it in any way other than with discipline and rigor? 

Can you imagine the Yankees training only when they felt like it, or the military drilling only when they all happened to feel particularly inspired, or a symphony never rehearsing together?  

St. Benedict desired to form a people that would serve as a critique for the church, but even more than that, he wanted his monastic communities to be a positive healing presence, for the sake of that very same sinful and sick Church. So the church could again be something capable of living for the good of the world.  

So in the conversation that follows, Kevin, Julius, and I talk though some of the common barriers we might feel when approaching prayer this way, and what we might do about them. 

[MUSIC  TRANSITION TO:]


DISCUSSION:

[MUSIC TRANSITION TO MEDITATION]


MEDITATION:

[PAD AND MELODY  SWELL AND FADE THROUGHOUT] 

For this meditation, we thought we'd give you a chance to listen in on a Benedictine Prayer office to get a feel what it's like to pray in this way. If possible, I recommend a comfortable position and some headphones. Then try to let the words carry your imagination somewhere. Though, if you would like to do a little more and actually join in, there is a transcript of the liturgy available on the podcast page of our website, shemasd.org.


This is the Little Office of the Trinity, one of the earliest surviving Benedictine Little Offices.

--

V: God, come to my assistance.

R: Lord, make haste to help me.


Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit. 

As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen. 


Antiphon: O beatific and blessed and glorious Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: to you be praise, glory, and thanksgiving.


Psalm 54 - Kevin


Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.

As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.


Antiphon: O beatific and blessed and glorious Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: to you be praise, glory, and thanksgiving. 


Psalm 118 - Wil


Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.

As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.


Antiphon: O beatific and blessed and glorious Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: to you be praise, glory, and thanksgiving. 

Psalm 8 - Julius


Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.

As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen. 

[MELODY]

Hymn: Te Decet Laus

It is right to praise you;

It is right to sing hymns to you. 

Glory to you: 

God the Father and the Son

With the Holy Spirit, 

World without end. Amen.


Antiphon: O beatific and blessed and glorious Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: to you be praise, glory, and thanksgiving. 


Reading: 1 John 5:7-8 - Kevin


V. May God our God bless us, may God bless us, and may all the ends of the earth tremble before him.

R. May God have mercy on us, and may God bless us, and may all the ends of the earth tremble before him. 

[MELODY]

Hymn: Veni Creator Spiritus


Come, O Creator Spirit, come,

And make within our heart thy home;

To us thy grace celestial give, 

Who of thy breathing more and live.


O Comforter, that name is thine,

Of God most high the gift divine;

The well of life, the fire of love,

Our souls' anointing from above.


Thou dost appear in sevenfold dower

The sign of God's almighty power; 

The Father's promise, making rich

With saving truth our earthly speech.




Our senses with thy light inflame,

Our hearts to heav'nly love reclaim;

Our bodies' poor infirmity

With strength perpetual fortify.


Our mortal foes afar repel,

Grant us henceforth in peace to dwell;

And so to us, with thee our guide,

No ill shall come, no harm betide.


May we by thee the Father learn,

And know the Son, and thee discern,

Who art of both; and thus adore

In perfect faith forevermore. Amen


V. May the name of the Lord be blessed.

R. Both now and forever.


Antiphon: We confess you with our whole hearts and our mouths, unbegotten Father, only begotten Son, and the Holy Spirit the Paraclete, holy and undivided Trinity; we praise you and we bless you, and we give you glory forever. 


Magnificat - Amy


Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.

As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen. 


Antiphon: We confess you with our whole hearts and our mouths, unbegotten Father, only begotten Son, and the Holy Spirit the Paraclete, holy and undivided Trinity; we praise you and we bless you, and we give you glory forever. 


Lord, have mercy on us.

Christ, have mercy on us.

Lord, have mercy on us.


Our Father ...


The Nicene Creed

I believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,  the Only Begotten Son of God,  born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end.I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets. I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.


V. Let us bless the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

R. Blessed are you Lord; teach me your statutes.


Prayers: May the exalted and undivided Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, bless and guard us and drive all sinful deeds far from us. Holy and undivided Trinity, relying on you we ask that you blot out the shame of your servants and preserve us in your service. 


May the all-powerful God, who made heaven and earth, the seas and all they contain, bless and guard us. 


May the Holy Trinity and undivided Unity be blessed, may we confess him, that he might show us his mercy. 


O beatific and blessed and glorious Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: praise, glory, thanks, honor, power, and strength be to you our God forever. 


Exalted and only Deity, we ask that you might absolve us of our sins, remove our faults, and grant peace to your servants, so that we might give you glory in all things forever. 


Psalm 143 - Julius 


Concluding Prayer: Almighty and eternal God, co-eternal majesty and only Deity, you who persist in Trinity and remain in Unity: Grant, we beseech you, that we who are weighed down by our sins might obtain pardon through your swift kindness. Through Christ our Lord. Amen. 


[END]


Disintegrated 5 - The Reformation & Morality: Virtue, Subjective Interpretation, Objective Law, & The Common Good


INTRO 

In this series we will look into the distant past to see how a famous Religious movement unintentionally helped marginalize God and fragment our contemporary lives. 

Over the course of 500 years, we will watch theology and money, power, science, and human creativity drift apart, then go to war with each other.

Not just because tracing this disintegration helps us understand contemporary conflicts.

Not just because of the strange beauty that can be found watching things fall apart. 

And definitely not because we think some long-lost glory days held all things in perfect harmony.  

We do this to give you permission 

to pay attention to the deep intuition telling you the things we seek to understand and use when we do things like science and politics, economics and art, really do want to belong together, to help you see that we cannot know and use these things well if we continue to ignore their desire for belonging.

We do this to fuel an imagination for wholeness.  

So for us, this peek into the distant past is not really about the past,

but a future integrated in Christ. 

This time - how it became nearly impossible for us to reason together about moral issues ...


STORY

Before the Reformation, when European Christians thought through issues of right and wrong, much turned on the practice of virtue. And they had a specific way of determining just what a virtue was, and how a person could attain it. 

The guiding focus was a vision of the common good, or of human flourishing that was much bigger than the individual. This larger vision was inspired by the Kingdom of God as pictured in the Christian Scriptures and idea was actually to work toward this end. A virtue then, was precisely the kinds of dispositions and habits that a person would develop if they devoted themselves to helping their community move toward that goal. 

They even had a list of virtues - which was the positive inversion of what is today the more famous list of the 7 Deadly Sins. The 7 Cardinal virtues were temperance, charity, chastity, diligence, patience, kindness, and humility. Anyone who helped society along toward the common good, it was thought, would necessarily become a person characterized by those virtues. 

This whole system, called Virtue Ethics, was adapted to a Christian context from the work of the ancient Greek philosopher, Aristotle.

But, in the 14th and 15th centuries, when virtue was key to the theory of ethics, it seemed many of the clerics were more interested in honing their practical expertise in the vices. And if the practice of virtue was thought to lead toward the common good, what do you think the widespread practice of vice led to for common life?

[MUSIC] 

The pain and frustration caused by this moral gap between the theory and teaching of the church, and its actual practice, is precisely what Brad Gregory, in his book -- that we've used as a launching pad for this whole series -- titled, "The Unintended Reformation" argues sets up the radical shifts that would take place over the next 500 years in Western ethics and morality. 

But it's not like this gap went unnoticed up until the Reformation. For the Reformation to spread, there had to be more than just frustration about the problem. For the new ideas of Luther and Calvin to gain real traction in the hearts and minds of people, there also had to be widespread frustration about the inability to find a solution to the problem. 

Gregory names 3 initial attempted solutions that ultimately failed. One came from Humanists like Erasmus. They believed if people had better resources to the original texts that helped source the Christian faith, these sources would inspire a greater love for what is good. There were also the Canonists, who were experts in Church law. They -- well before Tomas Jefferson -- were the first to conceived of "natural human rights." The Canonists devised this in hopes that endowing people with rights might help protect people against the vices of others, especially those in authority. Then there was Machiavelli, who was a forerunner to those who eventually sought a way forward by attempting to abandon the Faith altogether. He drew from pagan thought in an attempt re-inject a sense of sacredness to the brute exercise of power.

But, as we said, none of these were able to fix the problem.

So the Reformers came on a different tack. They said the gap was not just a result of the failure of virtue, or lack of power or protection, but because of faulty doctrine. In reacting to the Catholic church's abuse of indulgences, which taught that virtuous action can lessen the suffering of others in the afterlife, Reformers like Luther came to view the whole problem as an either/or between works or grace, and began constructing a theology that pit their understanding of grace against the Catholic Churches' teachings on works. 

So Luther looked at Aristotelian Virtue Ethics and saw something that was, quote, "Completely opposed to grace" unquote. Others followed his lead and began to argue that, if the ultimate Good is Salvation, then good works, in and of themselves, contribute nothing in helping us toward this goal.

Now, none of the Reformers were intentionally trying to do away with a shared conception of the common good. If fact, their goal was to repair public morality. But what they did, time eventually showed, was unintentionally undercut our ability to work toward a shared conception of the good. 

In a way very similar to what happened with their understanding of Sola Scriptura - as we've outlined in earlier episodes - they found that when you leave the questions of just what the common good is and how we might attain it, up to the interpretation of individuals, the interpretations are legion. 

So the few options we saw earlier for correcting the moral gap between belief and practice, spidered. Into a plethora. And by the end of the 17th century, no viable alternative moral community that could capture widespread admiration and serve as an example emerged. 

And Ethics and religion, like politics and faith, and economics and Jesus' teachings about money, grew further and further apart. 

[MUSIC]

Eventually, with all the conflict and religious and political wars, a group of thinkers who came to be part of what was called the Enlightenment said, "Hey, if religion or our allegiance to our kings can't serve as a basis for building a unified society, what if we tried centering it on human rationality?" 

It's true, we do all have in common the capacity to reason. But saying, "Hey, let's all use reason" is kind of like saying, "Hey, let's all use hammers." It's not necessarily going to unify us in any important sense. 

Reason is like a tool. It does help us do stuff. But it can help us do a lot of stuff. So just like someone can use a hammer to help build a house and another can use it to tear one apart, and a third person might use it as a weapon, without some shared end goal, just the fact that we're all using hammers doesn't mean we're actually working together. 

Right now, both Russian and Ukrainian leaders are using reason.

So once we shifted the center of things to human reason, people got really good at chasing all kinds of conflicting goals. So the social splintering continued. 

And once Enlightenment reasoning could not come to an agreement on what constitutes human nature or the common good, the one thing we did end up agreeing on was to stop striving for some conception of these things we could agree on. 

This  led to the altogether abandonment of Virtue Ethics. And the abandonment of the pursuit of a Common Good, unleashed  us to produce and chase an infinite number goods. 

And the less and less peoples' understanding of the nature of life and the world was shaped by the Christian story, the more divergent our individual goals became.

And the one thing we came to agree on as a moral imperative was that it is necessary to protect the individual's ability to chase whatever they choose. And our most shared ethical maxim became, "Do what makes you happy, so long as nobody gets hurt."

But in the conversation that follow, Julius and I begin to name some of the shortcomings and pain points of our current situation. Then we evaluate in more depth the options that have been presented, and imagine a way forward for Christians.  


DISCUSSION

Julius: Thanks for listening to All Things—this is Julius and Wil, and today we're picking up and we're making the claim that during the Reformation, there's a couple of key moves: I think there's the, I think the splitting of the body and the soul,  and the splits and the institutionalization of doctrinal disagreements led to a fragmentation that we feel even now, like on a personal level in our inability to truly engage with each other as a community.

Wilson: We are lonely. Thanks, Luther. 

Julius: [laughs] Dang really. I know, but it— thanks, Luther. But also I think in this story, we're a little generous to, to… Luther didn't mean for it to get this bad.

Wilson: Definitely was not his intent. And it was definitely much larger than him for sure. But, but…

Julius: Totally.

Wilson: You can't come up with a… you can't tell the full story and be quippy. 

Julius: Yeah, it's true. Nevertheless, so we've already kind of covered in our story, talking about stuff like the loneliness epidemic and how we're facing, just like on an unprecedented level, in some ways like just a growing experience of loneliness in our culture, especially during the pandemic, but not exclusive to just this time.

So outside of that, what does this— I guess the way that the Reformation ripples out and inhibits our ability to engage in community— how else does that look and feel like, and maybe ways that don't seem as apparent to us as like this loneliness epidemic thing.

Wilson: Right. Yeah. It's like, if we've, if we've given the bird's eye view or the centuries summary of, of the ripples and the effects. 

It's like, okay, maybe… but like, but does that really shape how I live? And I think w- I see it every time we go to Starbucks or any kind of coffee shop, or just about… so we used to, you know, we lived in kind of a neighborhood that, where like the San Diego Union Tribune, and even the LA times named at one of America's best—that’s that's quote “best” their category “hipster” neighborhoods.

Julius: Oh my gosh.

Wilson: And just like that, you could not, you absolutely could not calculate how many stores as part of their marketing used the word “community.” 

Julius: Community. Yeah.

Wilson: is. You know, you moved to this neighborhood because you want community with your kind of people. You want, you want, you know, the same sorts of, you know convictions or whatever, and then you'd go, you go shop and you… and you visit these stores because you want community and, and every place it's like, if you just looked at that, at their marketing, you wouldn't know if they sold clothes or handmade journals or organically-sourced dog food— these are actual, these are, these are not random. I have specific places in mind right now. 

Julius: I know which ones you're talking about, dude.

Wilson: …or coffee, like you wouldn't know from their marketing. If I were to go in this store, I would find clothes or journals or pet food or a coffee shop because all of them are marketing “community."

W-and this is one of those where I think the way we feel it is we feel this strong need for it, but our, but our structures and our institutions can't provide it. But, but we all know we want it. And because we all know we want it. And this is what consumerism does, is it taps into our desires, right?

And this is a very strong felt, need, and desire is for community. And. tap into that with our marketing, because it gets attention because we want it. And I don't think they’re… I do not think these places are being like intentionally manipulative. I don't think this is a bait-and-switch. They're not sitting here going, “Yeah, I'm really just about profit and dog food, but I know people are going to buy community.”

Now, I do think there are a few corporations that that's absolutely what they're doing… but these, but these places I don't, I don't think are bad people intentionally doing that. I think they really would love to help provide community. But what we don't see is you- as much as we might think conceptually, about the difference between our ideas in our, you know, our thoughts about individual freedom and and our local grocery stores and our local coffee shops— as much as we can conceptually separate our ideas and our institutions, you can't actually separate them.

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: What drives so much of what actually happens is how we do things day in and day out. And the structures, the institutions are set up for buying-and-selling and fragmentation and loneliness. And so I don't think people are, are being manipulative with their marketing. I think they're naming a desire.

They want to do something to combat it. As long as we keep doing things day in, day out the way we've done them, it’ll-it'll remain nothing other than, well, at this point, this is maybe with, with Shema in our, on our like business side of the org-organizational side of thing, we've found it super helpful.

We took this from a guy named Patrick Lencioni, who’s a, who's a consultant and a, you know—you’re always have to have a core value, and core values drive who you are, but he was super helpful saying I think, each, each group needs to be really discerning and honest with itself about what's genuinely a core value—meaning this actually shapes what we do and how we do it… this is, this is core and to integrate. How we think and how we act pulling those things together. What we do with our spirits and what we do with our bodies are integrated in genuine core values…

But he says, but you also need to name your aspirational values. Meaning we long for this, we want this, we think it would be good for other people, but we have to be honest, we're not nailing it.

We have to figure out how to believe in this, think about this, and practice it—and that becomes a goal for us to strive for. And I think what we need to name is: across the board, at best, community is an aspirational value. Like we want it, we long for it, but we've got to close the gap between what we long for, how we think about it and how we actually set up our structures and our institutions for day in, day out life.

Because how we do life day in, day out is implicitly, you know, at this point, it's going to undercut any sort of desire or, or longing for actual community. 

Julius: Okay. Yeah, that's that's spot on. I think that's, that's exactly one of the things I wrote down in preparation for this was talking about that commu- I mean, you… you just said it verbatim almost, that community, I think, especially in a lot of the way that organizations/companies/brands and stuff, like they’re… they are touching on a very real need and a hunger, especially like on this side of like, a couple of years into this pandemic that just like highlighted our isolation…

I think we're all hungry for community. So I know that that's like a real thing. But yeah, at best it is aspirational, and the— just to name it, these institutions that have formed us, are institutions of like of capitalism and hyper-individualism and leaving too much to the privatized choice… and to connect that straight back to—we kind of hinted at this in the last episode too, is this, on this side during the Reformation, like as a church, we kind of institutionalized these doctrinal differences and kind of forced to look for what does the past tense of forsake, “forsook”? “Forsooketh”?

Wilson: That's that sounds borderline dirty. 

Julius: Oh man. Well, it is because… but forsaking, the kind of commitment to work things out together we, we decided to institutionalize: “well, we're gonna, we're gonna draw the line and this is. This is our side. This is like our camp.”And we like habituated fragmenting and splitting-off rather than like trying to work things out and see the harmonies…

And so here we are on this side of that, like centuries after that, and that has become ingrained into the institutions that have shaped us, the cultures that have shaped us. And as much as our desire for community is, like, maybe real and genuine… I think so many of us grew up not knowing how to, how to truly embody what it means to be a community and to be in relationship with people on, on deeper than like these surface levels of… I think at best how we understand community is like, it’s it's only as good as our shared interests.

Like, that we build community insofar as we share the same interests and viewpoints on stuff. And so, as long as things are good on that surface level, it feels like community because it all feels good. But I think that we're missing a step. And part of that gap is, so many of us haven't been shaped in how, what happens when we start to disagree.

What happens when the- the more that you deepen in relationship, that like intimacy calls us to confront these differences. And I think so many of us don't have that training and that formation to know what to do with the disagreements, especially now that we're picking up from a tradition that was like, “Ooh, I don't think we can harmonize these… Let’s just keep splitting off.”

Wilson: Right.Yeah. Community takes virtue. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: Another one of our key ideas— aspirational values— is cultivating virtue, you know, and here at… and community absolutely takes that, community cannot simply be aspirations. You know, aspirations are not virtues. Aspirations might lead to… but, but virtue is the actual ability to carry out.

So. Good, you know, it's something internally good to, to what we're doing. And so community requires of us certain virtues that, you know—so think of it this way. There are certain virtues involved in any skill that we may not—I think this shows a fundamental misunderstanding of “virtue” and the role that actually plays in how we feel and act that we don’t immediately recognize that virtues are involved in things like playing an instrument or a sport. 

Like there there's a virtue to guitar playing, that there's a level of virtue that Julius has that I do not. I aspire to be able to do some of the things on the guitar that Julius can and to, and to do things in a band with a guitar that I can't, because I don't have the virtues… because I don't understand like what holds the band together as far as the music and how to just jump in yet. 

And now that's one of the things I'm, I'm remedying by putting myself in an uncomfortable position and saying: here's a really good band… will you guys let me play with you regularly? I can get up to speed with that, but it takes that kind of practice. It takes developing the abilities, same thing with like basketball. It's one thing to aspire to be able to move like LeBron or Jordan. It's another to be able to get on the court and play the game with nine other people on the court. 

Julius: Yeah, 

Wilson: Once you have nine people on the court with one ball, if everyone's going in, in their own direction, there is no game. Right? And that's actually a pretty good metaphor, right? T-to get together and play a game, takes virtue. 

We're just, we're not going to develop those as long as we just keep saying—well, and this is where it gets tricky. Those are virtues and skills that involve your heart, your spirit and your body. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: Right. We talk about music is such an ex- as a, as such a spiritual experience is, but there is no music without physical bodily activity. And, and if the, if the mo- like I've got all the, I've got all the passion and I've got all the inspiration, but I, I do not yet have the ability to express that in music, in a way that others could connect with, because I don't have the virtues yet.

And so, as long as our thinking shapes institutions where the—and this is a tricky word, maybe we'll unpack this the second half of this conversation— where the authority is totally severed, totally… separated between the spirit and the body. Then all we will be left with is certain aspirations, but no value. No virtues that we'll be able to enact them, right.

Just like I've gotta… I’ve gotta be able to involve my body in the virtues of God, I've got to, I've got to learn how to take that and put it in my fingers. Right? And be able to plant myself in a place and, and, and think about how physical it is to just… physically to, to, to poke or, or prick some strings and make them move so that the air moves in a way that's in harmony with six other musicians, and in time with six other musicians, and in a way that will tap into the desires and the hearts of the people listening it's body and spirit.

And as long as we're severing our thoughts are our thinking our practices between the body and spirit, we're going to be left with this sort of like deep longing for, for things that really are good and it matters, but none of the virtues of the abilities to pull it off. 

Julius: That’s, that's great. I think that that makes a lot of things click for me of… I think what we're, what we're talking about here is that a disembodied Christianity leads to like, a shallow everything… but especially like community of like… it's like, if, if, if we, if we start to think that Christianity only involves matters of the spirit and the abstract, it’s like— to bring it to the, to the music analogy— it would be like, if we only focused on like theory, but never picked up the instrument, and we don't know what to do with our hands.

And that's what we're left with as the church is that like… we love to talk about the spiritual and abstract “Forgive one another,” like… you're like…

Wilson: “Bear another's burdens…"

Julius: Yeah. Hmm. 

Wilson: “Care for the sick and needy.”

Julius: Yeah, on an embodied level, we don't know literally what to do with our hands. And I was, and so I’m— 

Wilson: You raise them when the leader tells you to… 

Julius: It may be not even that [laughs] oh man, that's a-another, a side thing… but I've been thinking a lot lately, I think last week, praying through the hours I, I found myself midday praying through the Lord's Prayer and was really struck by the “Lord forgive us as we forgive those who trespass against us…”

Or, “Forgive us as we forgive our debtors.”

And there was something in praying it that day that made it click that the way that— first of all, the way that, that’s spoken, like kind of the tense of like, forgive us as we also forgive, like it's, it's like assumed that it's a part of… it’s habitual, it's habituated. It's it's a rhythm. It's it assumes that that's something that a community practices regularly… 

And At that moment, I realized kind of what you're talking about, how that's such an embodied thing and that forgiveness. I think I'm learning the more that I kind of dive deeper into relationships and friendships and learning how to be vulnerable and pursue like true intimate relationships with people is that I think I always used to receive that line of like, “as we forgive others” as kind of like a really shallow, like… “Just like let it go. It's, it's fine.” Kind of like, I'm ignoring, ignoring the hurt without kind of addressing it kind of forgiveness.

And I'm, I think something in that day, praying through it. Pulled me towards maybe a deeper understanding of like, maybe as we forgive those who trespass against us doesn't mean just like a shallow letting go. But that is sometimes it takes the really hard conversations and having to work it out. It's the stuff that Jesus lays out in the gospels of talking about like, if a brother sins against you and then talks about like embodied steps of like talk to them or like talk to And I think that that's something of like what forgiveness looks like.

And that's a virtue that we, that virtue itself is something that as communities, we don't really know how to engage in that. And that is such a bodily thing. Like for me, I feel emotions super, very strongly, and it's a palpable embodied thing to like, To sit someone down for the sake of like wanting deeper communion with them, like, and moving forward from, after being hurt or after hurting someone that it's an embodied experience to sit with a person, to look them in the eyes, to feel the things.

If you're either, if you're the one who is hurt or if you're the one who did the hurting that… there, it brings up a lot— like your heart races, your palms, sweat, you feel the anxiety in your body, you feel the tension.

Wilson: Body and soul, yup.

Julius: And you have to— we have to embrace that. But I think as our, our understanding of community, I don't think so for so many of us, I don't think it gets down to that deep level of embracing that kind of stuff…

Wilson: Okay, so circling back around and trying to, to pull some of the threads together, we started off by telling a story about a certain abuses of authority leading to, I mean, some sort of necessary action, some sort of necessary reform— but that reform turning into a rebellion. Right. And then pretty quickly the reformers Luther exemplary exemplified in his own secular authority starts to realize, okay, Rebelled against that authority, but also have set the framework for like our own authority and, and actually really all authority ever to be totally undercut, but that we don't, they're not intending to create total anarchy.

So they try to back up and, and create some sort of framework for understanding. Now on the other side of this rebellion how do we still hold some kind of authority? So he sets up these spheres between the body and the soul. So we're talking about like bodies, souls, and authority and, and how this.

Idea of this separation. Right. See how it, how it mirrors, how it, the, the severance and the disintegration is. And then that getting institutionalized is a pattern that is mirrored in every topic that we talk. Right throughout this series, we're going to look at, and there's a lot of overlap here with economics.

We can look at that here and morality, you know, but looking here in community, just like it used to be, there was this authority that it was, yes, let's be honest. It was imperfect. It needed to be reformed, but still for a long time, it was the thing that kept people in the same room and made them work it out. And so now when, when the actual institutional split happens between Rome and the Protestant churches, what's now been institutionalized there. W-w-what, what is embodied in the practices is the thinking of like two separate words. 

Instead of understanding, no, there, there has to be in, there is one. We be, we better learn to live into it. They now institutionalized. No, let's just set up different worlds for us to live in. And you see that move mirrored when Luther realizes, oh shoot, we've got a problem here with authority. What do I do? Well, let's mirror that same move and just set up two different worlds. And that sets the pattern for how we handle conflict.

Let's just set up different worlds, set up different worlds. And so now instead of the virtues of community, we have, you know, this. What's now like just, it's almost in our DNA, right. It's, it's definitely in our institutions. It's definitely in our philosophies and it's in our bones to just this instinctual move now to like, well, let's just set up different worlds and those worlds just keep getting smaller and smaller.

Right? So the piece here, that's the scary thing, but I just think this is, this is what good community does is give us community and some encouragement and a safe and encouraging and challenge. Place to, to face the scary stuff. And what we've got to look at is authority. And in some way, a huge piece, if there's going to be any kind of recovery, if there's going to be a move towards genuine community, we need to find a kind of authority.

That's a healing, good, healthy authority. And what we've set up in other episodes. And again, not that I'm the perfect dad. Definitely not the perfect dad, but one of the places where I look back on something that was scary for me and hard, but I look at it and instead of feeling like, “Heck yeah, look at that. I nailed that as a dad,” I look back on it and it's like… that was really good. And in my reaction is gratitude or there's moments where I'm able to be that presence that keeps my kids together and they actually work the problems out instead of just going to their own rooms, literally, and metaphorically and harboring the resentment for. 

Julius: Sure.

Wilson: And so we need some kind of, and that's, that's the picture we're putting up there. And I know it's scary because we've seen bad authority and there is, there are plenty of authorities that it's Right, and good to rebel against to critique. right.

But that, again, they're another part of our aspiration.

Needs to include a healthy kind of authority. The kind that is strong enough, that is healing enough, that it loves, that loves all of us enough to hold us together, to hold the tension, but also create an aspiration for life together. That would be a strong enough desire and love that we would work through the difficulties to develop the virtues, to actually be able to live together.

Right. And So,

I think what we've up to this point and maybe the best thing I can think of. Is no, I don't think the answer is just to go back and, you know, institutionalized religion from the top down it's to name. No, no, I mean, this is, this is what good healthy religion does. And this is what a good healthy authority can do is hold us together.

It creates the conditions for us to be able to become the kinds of people to practice and in practicing to become the, kind of like a musician you can play to become the kind of people that. Participate in community and there's gotta be some authority that pulls me out of my frustration, my anger, my fear, and my immediate desires Right.

now that might work against that.

And so, no, I don't, I don't think we'd go back to just getting the church in the state totally in bed with each other and, and having someone, you know, claiming the authority of God and just telling everybody what to do. But. Maybe maybe a good first step is for those of us who consider ourselves Christians to open up our aspirations and to long for that healthy kind of authority.

And for us to, instead of looking for some external source to be the thing that would enforce it. How about we collectively as a community open up to the idea that, that this authority could be internalized in that. And so from within us, we could submit to it an authority that is, that is big and strong and loving enough to hold us together and teach us to be people that could live together. 

Julius: Okay, got two questions. 

Wilson: Yeah. 

Julius: One of them is kind of just like a clarifying… this authority that you speak of that can hold things together… I have a hunch what that might be, but in my head, I'm like—I think that's, I think that's just, Jesus?

Wilson: That would, I mean, yeah, that would be the ideal. Right. And, and this is, I mean, look at our story again. If claiming to be Christian, it's not a personal kind of piece. Look at our stories. What did Jesus do? W when the expectation was as Messiah, you're going to gather an army and go fight Rome, but he doesn't do that. He gathers together the Jewish community.

That can't be a community together anymore. Instead of going and fighting Rome, he gets people who keep fighting it. And breaking each other apart from the inside and says, all right, first step is you all come around me, the zealot, you that you've stuck a dagger in tax collectors, but because they're collaborators with the empire and the enemy, you and zealot and tax collector, both of you Pharisee and process. right. The one, the one that has been stoned and the one who has thrown the stones, you guys get together and fight. And this is what he does for the first several years of his ministry is just teach the people of God to live together in community centered around him. And if we really have internalized Jesus as our savior, Lord Messiah, I mean, how can we not internalize that kind of authoritative call to learn to live together?


CONVERSATION

Julius: Well [clears throat] okay. [Chuckles] Let me check this audio file… All right. Levels are looking—oh, that was oh, no, it was, the clapping was loud. Okay. We’re—

Wilson: Do you consider yourself an audiophile? 

Julius: [Laughs] I’m like, a… whatever, whatever the level below “phile” is. 

Wilson: A dilettante.

Julius: There you go, that’s really specific. [laughs] Um, well, thanks for listening to All Things. This is Julius and Wil.

Wilson: Are you listening in Hi-Fi, listener?

Julius: Potentially, potentially “medium-fi”… most likely through iPhone speakers. 

Wilson: AirPods? 

Julius: Or AirPods. Yeah. So we're well into this series now on the disintegration that comes from the Reformation, and… today we're talking about morality

And it seems like we're noticing the common thread here is that there are, like, separations and disagreements that become, like, institutionalized and formalized in the relationship between the church and society… and in talking about morality, it seems like… whatever happened with like these little squabbles on how to deal with authority, we ended up in a place where the church is kind of just… relegated to, um. A quote-unquote “moral” sphere and feels disconnected from like an embodied way of life.  And the state is then tasked with like, “What, how do we actually live with our bodies?”… what policies govern, like, how we do life… And then the church is relegated to quote unquote “the spiritual,” which is just kind of like what we believe on like a… on like a pietistic level.

Wilson: And can I, I just want to, I want to point out at this, at this juncture—So I think it's the quickest way to do it, and then you can, you can finish your prompt, but. We, we’re at a— to name— we’re at a place where it's like, “in general authority is bad. And so there should be no authority over me, over my body, over my behavior,” but to enable like… to make that possible, you need a very strong authority, on that point. Like, and so the state has the F the, the authority, the power coercion to protect the right for no authority. And so there's this odd kind of like reliance on a very strong authority to make sure that there's not authority. 

Julius: Yeah, no. Yeah, exactly. And so I think part of the task today and the conversation is probably just naming that for people of like the whole thing that we talk about. A lot of the naming the waters that we're swimming in. The thing about like when you're swimming in it, you don't know that it's called water.

And so taking a step back to, to realize like, oh, this is the stuff that we're kind of taking for granted. These are the philosophies, the ideologies that are at play that we might not be aware of. Because to me, it seems like we kind of just don't really know what to do with morality. It feels like a taboo subject that is like like on par with like,

Wilson: of one to 10. How nervous were you this week before recording this conversation? 

Julius: Currently currently sweating and for fear of being misinterpreted, talking about what to do with our bodies as communities.

Wilson: Yeah.

So, I mean, now that now that that's been named as we're, as we're just naming things, we'll then follow up with the, the point of this conversation is not to pick fights on specific disagreements, but it get to like understanding at deeper root causes what's happening and maybe, maybe presenting something that people would, would willingly choose to share a desire for something to do. 

Julius: Yeah. Yeah. So exactly. And I think that it feels like the default is that morality becomes relegated to something that we, man, I think the bummer is like, it almost feels like we relegate it to the same sphere as like. What your favorite. Team is like sports team or like favorite color. Like it's a matter of preference.

And as long as your understanding of morality, isn't imposed on mine, we're fine. Like, we're, we're good. But on the lived level, like there's gotta be something that holds it together to govern, like, what is like acceptable or like what, where do we step in and say, Hey, don't do that. And I think that there are like, there definitely are ideologies and systems at play as to like, what kind of.

 Shared conception of the good we're working from, because as much as we can try to do away with like, oh, like the question of what's good is like an irrelevant question. I don't think that we, anyone actually lives that way. So let's, let's let's name. It is my first question. What's going on?

Wilson: we can talk like what is the good beyond particular individual? Subjectivities is irrelevant. We can talk like that, but no, nobody can live that way. 

Julius: Yeah.

If, if that is the case that we can't really live that way. Well, how can we put a name to like how we. The different ways that like our culture society, government, like does deal with something like the good and does deal with something like morality and perhaps why that is insufficient as like a shared conception of goodness and morality.

Wilson: And so how's it sound, we, in this story, we, we gave just the outline from you know, just previous to, just prior to the reformation, the reformation down to now how, how we ended up where we did with this, like with this very strong state authority That works to protect the individual rights. And so we've got the the, the feeling or the, the de facto moral agree or agreement on morality is there is no, and not just, there is no agreement on morality.

There should be no. And so the right.

thing is to which. You're making a, a borderline universal claim. When you say the Right.

thing is to have one power that protects the individual rights of anyone to do what they want, what they think makes them happy so long as it doesn't hurt anybody else. So we we've traced how we got here.

So maybe what if we start there and work backwards and we could say like let's say. Talk a little bit about the tensions and the problems with that, that thought do whatever you want, as long as it makes you happy and doesn't hurt anybody else back through some of the other moral systems, because there's still like echoes of it.

And some of us, like when push comes to shove, like re when something happens that you are severely unhappy with, right? And you, you try to appeal to. When you go to the authority, right.

That's that you say, I don't like this, it should change. And the authority says, well, why now you have to give an appeal.

Right? And so some of these you'll find echoes of some earlier schools of moral thought that still hold some sort of influence and then come back to what it might look like to, to re-imagine a, a more ancient to, to reappropriate to creatively use a more ancient one. So, so the, the technical. Name designation for the common, th the widespread held assumption that what's right, is for me to do what I want, as long as it didn't hurt anybody else, It's called a motive ism.

 And I've, I've lived that because I swim in the same waters. I'm shaped by the same culture. Oh, I've a rebellious, selfish streak. And so I want to do what I want and I don't want somebody else telling me what to do. One of the biggest conflicts I had in the first year of our marriage. Was over money because it was like, I wanted a Gatorade.

What's the big deal. that's what I wanted, you know, but we had these, these other, but these larger common goals, we wanted to be able to get our own place. And we wanted to have as much stability as we could before we brought a child into this world so that we could actually care for that kid. And.

That's a very small instance. Well, actually, maybe it's not that small because there's a recurring theme there. When I get, when I get stressed out one of my go-to moves is.

to buy something. And, and that's pretty, I, I feel like that's one of the reasons and the feelings might be quite different, but that as far as behavior, I think that's kind of the, the one bit of medicine and I'm pretty sure it's a panacea. Yeah. Or no, not panacea. Well, Yeah. we treat it like a panacea, like, oh, this is what will solve everything. But 

Julius: Yeah.

It's a placebo. It's, it's not actually dealing with the disease at all is, Hey, buy something, that'll fix it. But that's when, like, when I feel, when I feel tense, when I feel stressed out, when I feel like I'm in a set of circumstances that are unfair, there's part of me that just wants to go buy something.

Wilson: Like I just recently, Julius and I were talking about it. I just recently bought a really expensive guitar pedal. And in the moment I was like, this is rad, that helped. But a week later I'm like, dang it. I, that hurt my family. And and I've, I've just myself seen more and more one as I've matured and, and trusted certain things.

That, honestly, when I was like 18, 19, 30 was really still very hard to trust, but I've trusted it long enough to see that part of what makes life really rich and good and worthwhile is to make big commitments to things that matter. And over and over and over again, the emotive is tendency about what's Right. and wrong has come into conflict with those bigger commitments.

And I realized out of one side of my mouth, I'll say, I care about. And what's good for you is what I care about. But then I'll, I'll do something different and realize that if I just live out of this, like, oh, well, I guess what I'm saying is it's really a lot tougher, so much tougher than, than. I think it is to not hurt somebody else. 

Julius: Yeah, exactly. Yeah.

Wilson: and it's, and when that, when all we have is do what makes you happy, as long as it doesn't hurt anybody else, it puts us in an impossible spot. When you're sitting here going, what's the big deal. And somebody that you really, really do care about is saying, but don't you see how this is hurting me? 

Julius: totally.

Yeah. So, I mean, it feels like from that place, The very least that we can do with that. If we're going to operate from that like basis of what to do with goodness and morality is like, that requires a more robust understanding of what it means to hurt somebody. And at a certain point, that's where that, that system just kind of doesn't hold in a sustainable way.

And, and the other thought that I have is like, It feels like such a low baseline to just like, well, just don't hurt anybody that feels like such a low baseline. Whereas like, I feel like maybe what we're called to as the, like, bringing this back to like the implications on the church that the church is called to more than just like, yes, of course let's protect people from harm and like, make sure that we're.

Perpetuating violence and injustice on people. But also beyond that, like what does it look like for us to desire more than the baseline of don't hurt anyone to desiring the flourishing of our communities, the flourishing of the world?

Wilson: And this is we've, we've gone through this with our kids too. I mean, it just, it doesn't give us any real tools to judge about. What's a greater good. And wouldn't it actually be better? Wouldn't it be better for you and the people around you for you to give a better, good, a greater like to, to put some concrete on this?

What I'm thinking about is with especially with our older kids, my, my daughter, she's just, she's not really into screens or video games. She, she, she wants to run and play and do stuff, but our boys, they can disappear into video games. And when, when there's a string of days where they've done. Like nothing in their free time, but play fortnight. Like we miss out on them at their best, 

Julius: Yeah. Yeah,

Wilson: when they do get off, you know, they're tired. They're grumpy. They're not sure.

like as far as like both of my boys in very different ways can be very, very. Right. But even on that, they're, they're not their best. And so when we do get together in the room, they're not sharing their humor.

They're not giving the gift of their insight that makes other people laugh. right?

And when they're there at their best, it gives us, I mean, it makes it that time, such a rich time compared to, I mean, not just that they're, their wits are Dole, but even beyond that, their temporary. Right.

there, patients with other people is less.

And if it's just like, but that's what I wanted to do for that evening. Like I, I get like, it's not necessarily the right thing to be like super heavy handed and totalitarian and like push someone, but also how do we not see, but look, but that is really, really good. And wouldn't it be. Wouldn't it be beneficial for everyone involved to, to move towards that place where we're all living in a way where we're at our best and so can give and receive our best from each other. 

Julius: yeah.

Wilson: mean, who, who wouldn't say that that's better than everyone just be in kind of like gray and dull and tired and dimwitted and quick tempered. 

Julius: Right. Yeah. And I think what we're illustrating here right, is that is why this whole thing matters. If, why we can't just shirk the conversation on morality. Is that like, is that it has implications on what it means to. Pursue the flourishing of our communities is that we have to talk about it. And even if it comes from like the place of distress of authority of like well, the government should decide, then the church shouldn't decide that either even, even tracing that down, like at the end of the day, if you take it out of the hands of those systems, like somebody has to, like, we still have to figure it out.

We still have to figure out what's good for us. And like, what? So.

Wilson: Yeah.

I mean it, even with that on both counts on what, there, there will be. There will come times where it takes a serious discussion and discernment to figure out what it, what it really means to do. What makes you happy? 

Julius: yeah, 

Wilson: And what it means to not hurt someone else. And there, there will inevitably come times where one or both of those things is contested.

And the only way to contest it is to make some kind of appeal to a larger shared good. Right. But if we spent no time working on discerning, what a larger, genuine, shared good might be, then all we're going to do is shout at each other. And have, have no, no way to even begin to work together to understand 

Julius: Yeah. 

Wilson: on with that. 

Julius: I don't know if this is devil's advocate position, but then moving from there, who determines the shared good. What do we,

Wilson: Well that's, w let's let's leave that at, like, that's exactly the question that we're left with, but we,

have no way to even name or engage that. 

Julius: yeah

Wilson: And so maybe by the end, we'll, we'll pick that up, right. Because this is, we'll see, as we move through the system over and over, that's the place we're going to end up with.

Right. And I guess I cat out of the bag. Right. So maybe, maybe start with the end is every, every attempt to come up with some sort of practice, like just here's here's how we'll do it. Right. Or or thinking about what's. About ethics and morality leads us exactly to that point. Right. And this is I'm, I'm just convinced there's no way around naming that question and figuring out how to engage that question together: Who decides, how do we, how do we decide to name what’s, what is the common good? 

Wilson: So moving, moving back up, if what those of us, especially in the west, mainly have, is a kind of a emotivism, which is, you know, do what's right. As long as they don't hurt anybody else. Some of the, the, two of the biggest schools of ethical thought that precipitated that and made this possible, and they made it possible by like not working.

So they were like, Hey, that, that this ancient stuff we're gonna, we're gonna leave that. And so now let's try these things and buy these things, you know, getting a little traction and enough people trying it out long enough and then not working enough. That's, that's part of the story of how we ended up where we are, but moving, moving backwards, chronologically to some other schools that used to carry a lot of weight, one's called utilitarian. That this would be one of those, like after the reformation. And then when we're trying to move towards a more secular understood as divorced, you know, attempting to that's part of the argument is we've attempted to, but we never have actually left behind religious convictions and commitments. And the influence of religion on our, on our thinking in our life.

But in any light moment, when we're, we're trying to come up with a quote unquote, holy. Objective and rational way of coming at morality is called utilitarianism. And that's where you, you try to do what's right. Is so that I, sorry, false start on the sentence. So utilitarian is what is right is doing what produces the greatest good for the most amount of people.

Julius: Huh.

Wilson: So as far as like a pithy short little definition, it sounds pretty decent and sounds understanding understandable. And just on that level, I don't think anyone would disagree with with the statement. You know, that what's right is produces the greatest good for the greatest amount of people.

And that's why he got a lot of traction to this sounds good. But when you practice it, some of the flaws started to show like, Well, the most obvious and the biggest, and I think the quickest wall that it hit is near requires you to be able to predict the outcome. And good luck with that. 

Julius: Yeah. 

Wilson: Cause I mean, it's, what is the assumption that It's built on is that it's a mechanistic universe and like this leads to this always.

And if you do this, this will happen. Always, just like if you drop a rock, it will fall, you know? But the, but the consequences of human freedom and action are not, like if I let go of this rock, will it fall to the ground? It 

Julius: a gamble. It's not as cut and dry.

Wilson: It's, it's not mechanistic. It's not so predictable. And so, so often from the best intentions and the best calculations, okay.

Here's what we're going to do. And this is going to create wealth for more people, and this is going to do this and oh, shoot it precipitated world war one, 

Julius: Yeah.

Well, that's well, that's interesting because you said the goal, there was like, oh, this will create wealth for more people. And that is like, that's a statement of. Equating the good being wealth for all people.

Wilson: Yes there. And they're there, you hit the second massive wall that this school hit on. Is it you still, you're going to come up with, so it's attempting utilitarianism is attempting to come up with an objective way, right. For, for determining ethical. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: But that's where there's no way out of the subjective poll

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: about like what, when it comes down to the possible goods, you start to see there, there are all sorts of different ideas about what is the good that should be sought because sometimes there might be two potential goods.

And this group would value this one, but a different group would value this other good, like the same action might or different actions might bring these different goods. And so who determines which good to choose, that's a subjective choice. And even like, what is good? There's a subjective element to that. Right,

So to take it out of the abstract, make it concrete, like you mentioned money, When, when you decide what good you're chasing Like, would you choose money or would you choose happiness? Because what if in the situation you can't have both. right.

And if you're, if you're trying to produce the most good for both people or for the most people, and you can't at the same time in this situation produce both money and happiness, who determines, which is the greater good that you would actually choose. And there would be people that would say, no, we want the money. And other people that say, no, we want the happiness. And so then you're still, you're still left with this objective pole and with utilitarianism instead of actually coming to terms with this and dealing with it, what would. Historically the way the, the, the dominoes have fallen. We just doubled down on just this objective poll. 

Julius: Huh? Well, what's interesting. I'm curious to hear your thoughts on that. After a spoiler alert for anyone who hasn't seen the Marvel cinematic universe, I guess myself included, but I've been exposed to enough spoilers to know what's going on, but I think it was after the end of, I wanna say it was infinity war.

There was like, I saw someone write an article on. And talking about how a fan knows embody, like what he does with I dunno, I guess the blip or whatever, embodies, like this is what you tell the Tarion Nissam looks like trace to the nth degree.

Wilson: Yeah.

And he says that too. He says that to Gomorrah his, I think when he says it to her, she's not yet his adopted daughter. But she calls him a monster and he's like, no, this is fair. It's cold. It's objective. And in the long run, it's better for more people. 

Julius: yeah.

but

Wilson: So, so there you go. 

Julius: Yeah, 

Wilson: The, I mean, and that's the point is yes, that's an extreme example, but

that's exactly like. And it and trying it out. What we came to find is utilitarianism would give no strong defensible grounds to tell FENOs no, you are wrong. 

Julius: yeah.

Okay. So we've talked about emotive ism. We've talked about utilitarianism. What are, I mean, there's gotta be more than that, right. Especially if we trace it down and we're like, oh, this kind of led to a war. What's the next move there. As we're trying to sit with this question, like, where else have, has that taken us 

Wilson: Yeah. 

Julius: in terms of.

Wilson: The other, the other big one. I mean, we, we mentioned in the story earlier, there's Machiavelli, Machiavelli. That's just like power, right. Separate, separate from ethics and, and you know, that's still at play. Right. But, but what we've done with what we've done with him in our situation is say like, okay, that's kind of true, but only here.

Right? So just with the state, you're the, you have the power and you, you just do that for us. And don't really worry about ethics. 

Julius: Yeah,

Wilson: To, to try to any, I mean, you could see if it sounds like, Hey, that's kind of confusing that's because it is there there's like some serious tensions and contradictions in this, when you say, well, Machiavelli was like, we'll just totally sever power from ethics and give, I mean, empowered in politics from ethics and just give the political religious, all the power and then they just do it.

Right. And so we said, sure, but. Use that power to make sure.

we get to do what we want to do. Right. That's that's the ethic. What we now consider, like the ethical move is allow us to make up our own ethics. Yeah

 So there there's just there's that, you know, there there's rights, there's utilitarianism, there's Machiavelli, and the way that Machiavelli is still kind of at play in this, but then the one other bigger school that tried to do something different is tied to one of the most famous philosophers ever.

 And still super important. It's like, if you, if you want to get into the history of ideas, you're going to encounter this dude at some point, and that's a manual comment. Con the, in his critique of practical reason, which practical reason means like how do you practically discern what's good.

What's, what's the right.

thing to do. So in ethics, he comes up with this this school called de ontology. And what that's trying to do is it's the opposite end of utilitarianism. It's trying to totally sever it from the outcomes. So instead of trying to predict the outcomes, not just because it's impossible to predict the outcomes, but even starts to make the case that it should be totally what's.

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: according to con is severed from the outcomes and is just duty and obligation, Right, So like one of the principles that comes out of this is could you make this a universal law, right,

Your action in this, in this situation, could you make it a universal law? right.

And so, and again, in the abstract, it sounds kind of good.

Like don't. All Right.

So in this situation, should I tell the truth? All Right. Don't lie. Would, would don't lie be a universal law? Oh Yeah.

sure. But until you try to practice that out and you come to situations where you're like, well, hold on, like in this situation, If I tell the truth, it could totally destroy this. It could, it could really hurt this person or it could, it could wreck the ability well here in the Bible, there's the story of the prostitute Rahab, right. And she lies to protect God's people. Right. And in that case, she was considered a righteous. And don't lie sounds pretty close to don't bear false witness against your neighbor, but they're not the same thing.

And there's a different kind of relationality to don't bear false witness, right. That what you're doing there is seeking the good of another person, but don't lie. You know, you can, you can tell the truth for a very, very selfish. 

Julius: yeah.

Wilson: Or you could withhold a bit of the truth because you know, that that would benefit like lead to a genuine good for somebody else, even if it costs you something.

Right. So, so day ontology is like totally severing it from our outcome. But it gives you very little practical guidance in how, in the complex situations of our day in and day out life, what it means to actually like do what's good for somebody else. It's, it's so abstract that you could go through and cause all kinds of harm and good and feel like, but I did my duty. Right. And the question there is like who or what determines your. All right. So again, what's the rational basis for it. But then in our real world, there are always going to be competing duties. So, so, 

Julius: Duties

Wilson: Sorry, I'm getting a little juvenile here in my potential puns, but, 

Julius: duties.

Wilson: But you know, so in, in, in my life, I have a duty as a as a ministry leader and as a teacher, but I also have a duty as a dad.

Right. And this is, this is one of the easy ones. And the critiques of certain generations is you, you were flawless in doing your duty for the company, but you were never there for me. Right. And, and the kind of unintentional harm and good but day ontology gives you no basis for judging between those rival goods.

Right. And, and one person might say you were wrong to choose that one. And that's, it's caused so much harm to me as your child. But it gives no common ground or a way to adjudicate between that and the dad that would say, but my conscience is clear. This was my duty. And I did the right thing. Who's to say that your good is better than my good.

It puts you on the same horn, right? In, in this, in this tension between like the objective reality and the subjective values that are at play in any situation. 

Julius: yeah.

Well, that, that seems to take us into. This notion that for those complexities, those situations we need to know what to do with the subjective that we need to integrate the two kind of like hearkening back to that whole conversation on knowledge that it's not, it can't be a hard either or, but like the complexity of life requires us to exercise.

In an integrated way that doesn't preference one over the other. And that whole thing that you're talking about of like, how do I how do I figure out, like contextually what Julie is the good in the face of these competing goods? It sounds kind of like what, we're, what we're asking towards, or like what we're moving towards as Christians, when we like talk about discernment and the gift of discernment and seeking discernment from the spirit.

So in that vein, what does it look like? To what is a Christian way of imagining a way forward that that holds those things together and to, to pursue a common shared good, or a shared morality that holds all of these complexities together in the ways that these systems that we as just like human civilization have tried, but have failed at.

Wilson: Could, could we, could we do it is like what would be a healthy religious way and then talk about the specific. But in that, because, because that's one of the things about what has made virtue ethics. So appealing to me, what's convinced me of it. Right? So there's some heavyweight people like Brad Gregory and like Alister MacIntyre.

And there's a a woman writing now on, especially on the virtues named Sharon valor that has taken like the, the stream of virtue, ethics and shown, I think totally persuasively how this is the one existing school of. thought that can actually help us engage the super pressing technological issues that that we're facing right now. and, and she points out that this is not just medieval, Chrissy. Catholic thought, but that this is this is a school of ethics that you can find a lot of commonalities in other highly developed religious systems, like, like Buddhism and Hinduism. So that's where I say, like, this is, this is why virtue ethics to me with w you know, having engaged the work of these kinds of scholars is because is showing itself to be a very, very worthwhile. Thing to, to at.

least attempt to creatively reappropriate for our time. And, and one of the big pieces of that is virtue ethics. So, so, so much of the problems have come from our modern assumption that you have to have this hard distinction between, or not even just a hard distinct distinction. The helpful in your brain, right?

In your, in your thing. To, to create a distinction between the subjective and the objective, but it's only really helpful in your. And that's actually the only place you can actually make a hard divorce between the subjective and the objective outside of our own head and our thinking in the real world, when we engage, what we call, what we think of as a subjective and what we think of as the objective are always working together, they're always flowing like the.

Outside of our head. If there is a boundary, it is a porous boundary between the subjective and the objective. And that's one of the things that virtue ethics holds is so much of like the things like deontology utilitarianism. Emotive is the stuff that has come in. Its wake has created this hard divorce between the subjective or the objective and tended to tip the balance of the scales towards one pole or the other.

But what virtue ethics does is try to create a harmony between. T to find a communion between those things. And that to me, is the foundational move. That's so important and seems potentially so fruitful. And even this I'm couching it because like, if, I mean, really I'm convinced that that's right. I'm convinced that that is a necessary foundational move. And I'm convinced that. As a religious person seeking harmony and unity, and specifically as a Christian, because of the principle of the unity of the divine and the human Jesus of Nazareth. And that Jesus's work is to reconcile all things to God. And we named our podcast, all things. And so in the realm of ethics, this, this seeking a reconciliation of all things that, that seems like the right foundational move and virtue ethics is the only thing I've encountered.

 That does that. And it has centuries of traction, centuries of practice. So we're not starting from nowhere. We've got lots of stuff we could draw from that we can, we can creatively appropriate and use to help us along the way. So and w w what that would mean and bringing in, in seeking to harmonize the subjective and the objective and giving us a way to together.

Harmonize those things and discern the common good, because there's no way around it. You're always going to end up having to make some kind of appeal and to, to provide a way for us to do that. That isn't just, well, This is what's right. And the powerful have determined it. So suck it up and deal with the consequences that are terrible for you or no, I'm convinced us.

Right. But you're not going to listen to me. So I'm just going to shout you down or become violent to enforce my will on. Right. It's what it looks like in virtue, ethics to actually seek this kind of harmony is you, you have both, you have rules and virtual. And you have a lot of thought about how to seek the integration of these two things.

So the example here would be someone like Peter Lombard's sentences in one of his chapters, he talks a lot about not just the rules, but also the virtues and a key part in this virtue ethics thing is yes, you need to know the rules, but you also need to develop. And especially in this case, when it comes to ethics, you need to, everybody needs to be.

To develop the virtue of prudence, because sometimes you're going to find yourself in a really difficult situation where the greatest common good, and the best outcomes you predict are this, but duty says this, right.

And you're stuck on the pole or being a truthful person seems like a very important thing, but not telling the truth might make this possible, you know, not necessarily lying, but with. right.

Or even in some instances, in some extreme cases, like think of what people in extreme cases think of what people in like the in the Soviet union, in the middle of the 20th century had to face when it came to do I tell the authorities the truth or do I protect my neighbor? Right. Or in a, I hesitate to go here because it's like, everybody always goes to Nazis, but, but, But.

there's also a reason why this keeps coming up because they've shown us that this kind of, this kind.

Like depravity is possible 

 Actual human beings have found themselves in this kind of situation where the right thing to do was to lie to falsify papers, right? Dietrich Bonhoeffer. One of the, one of the most like outspoken proponents of Christian pacifism found himself in Nazi Germany in a situation where he thought the best thing for him to do was try to kill her.

You know and so in these kinds of radical situations, you you've got, yes, you need the rules and those guide you, and those are bigger than just your thought, but you also need prudence. You've got the subjective and the objective and you need the wisdom and the discernment to, to end those kinds of situations, determine what would be the best case and, and to even have to wrestle with it might not be clear cut. 

Julius: Yeah.

MEDITATION

The false promise of earlier systems of ethics that led to our current cultural disillusionment, was certainty. In this world, the circumstances that lead us to need to make our most important moral decisions will almost always also make us think, "I hope this is the right thing to do."

But if previous schools have failed to deliver rational certainty, giving up on principled reasoning about ethical choices isn't the only other option.

This meditation is designed to help you experience how Virtue Ethics provides a different way to navigate toward the good without having to know everything about exactly what this is, or having to guarantee the external outcomes of our decisions beforehand. 

In short, it helps us practice discernment. And promises that the practice of discernment will, over time, make us prudent people. 

And prudent people are those who can navigate their way through a broken and confusing world toward the common good. 

So, think of a time you made an ethical decision that, with some hindsight, did not lead to the greater good, either for you, or for those around you. 

In choosing, did you lean more on some emotion or feeling, and overlook some objective principle or circumstances that might have been helpful? Or, did you draw more from some rule or standard in a way that missed how something we'd label "subjective," like compassion or charity, could help you to understand the situation and name your options? 

Now, a key element of Virtue Ethics, is what is called the telos, or end goal. It is a larger common good that is bigger than the aim of our personal agendas. It helps us begin to harmonize the objective and the subjective because it simply is good, but because of its goodness, it also taps into our desires and uses them to draw us in. 

And in a Christian context, the Kingdom of God is what shapes how we'd visualize and understand this common good. 

So, in relation to the situation and moral decision from your past that you've been evaluating, name an aspect of the  Kingdom of God that it was possible to experience, but was missed out on because of a lack of prudence.

Now, in light of your growing practice in wisdom, go back, and visualize yourself reliving the situation. 

And if the objective and subjective are pulled together through prudence and into the Kingdom of God, how do you choose and act differently?

In seeing yourself living this way, where do you feel inadequate or afraid and shrink back? Or possibly hesitate because of pride or because your subjective tastes were offended?

Just notice where you would struggle to enact the good, think about why, and without judging it, or condemning it, or correcting it at this point, just talk with God about your reactions.

And ask for the grace that you need to enact the good.

Now, trusting that God simply is good, no matter our feelings, but also takes pleasure in giving good things, so is both faithful to give you the grace you asked for and takes delight in doing so, go into into your life, and practice the virtues that will let the Kingdom of God touch our confusing and unjust world through you. 

Disintegrated 4 - Community: Luther, the First Amendment, and Our Loneliness


INTRO 

In this series we will look into the distant past to see how a famous Religious movement unintentionally helped marginalize God and fragment our contemporary lives. 

Over the course of 500 years, we will watch theology and money, power, science, and human creativity drift apart, then go to war with each other.

Not just because tracing this disintegration helps us understand contemporary conflicts.

Not just because of the strange beauty that can be found watching things fall apart. 

And definitely not because we think some long-lost glory days held all things in perfect harmony.  

We do this to give you permission 

to pay attention to the deep intuition telling you the things we seek to understand and use when we do things like science and politics, economics and art, really do want to belong together, to help you see that we cannot know and use these things well if we continue to ignore their desire for belonging.

We do this to fuel an imagination for wholeness.  

So for us, this peek into the distant past is not really about the past,

but a future integrated in Christ. 

This time - Luther, the First Amendment, and our loneliness.


STORY

Loneliness is deadly.

Nobody likes it. I'm sure you agree it's bad. But you should know we're not just talking poetically or figuratively. We're talking physiologically - loneliness is deadly. 

According to a 2015 study by BYU researcher Julianne Holt-Lunstad, loneliness increases your risk of death by 26%, social isolation by 29%, and living alone by 32%.

Other recent research has explored and developed our understanding of how the causes and effects of loneliness are not just mental, but extend to our larger biological systems. In fact, a study carried out in 2010 established that loneliness is just as likely to lead to an early death as smoking cigarettes or abusing alcohol, and that loneliness is actually more dangerous than physical inactivity or obesity.

And it's not like only  a couple of people here and there are experiencing loneliness.

In early 2021, a report from Harvard indicated that 36% of all Americans - including 61% of young adults and 51% of mothers with young children - feel "serious loneliness". 

Some of this increase is undoubtedly due to factors related to the covid 19 pandemic, like school closures, people working remotely and alone, and social activities taking place over zoom. Yet, the pandemic is not the root cause. It has only cranked up an on-going trend.

So if it isn't the pandemic, and if we've known for over a decade now that loneliness is as deadly as smoking cigarettes, then why are the rates going up and not down, especially when we have so many new technologies and products offering connection? 

Well, perhaps we've been trying to treat the symptoms instead of the root disease.

Our argument is that our epidemic of loneliness really goes back to some theological and societal shifts that took place during the Reformation. And that these shifts unintentionally facilitated the rise of individualism and a radical disintegration of community. For the full argument, make sure to reference Brad Gregory's The Unintended Reformation which we've linked in show notes.

But here are the key points:

Throughout the Middle Ages (pre-Reformation), it was implicitly understood that Jesus did not tell his listeners to believe whatever they wished to believe as individuals, or to follow him only in their private thoughts and feelings. On the contrary, Christianity simply was a shared, social life, one that sought virtues like faith, hope, love, humility, patience, self-sacrifice, forgiveness, and generosity. 

So, Western Christianity was irreducibly communal and social. It was not just another religious option, but rather all of life lived in a certain way. It influenced politics and economics: how people organized and administered cities and how goods were distributed and used.

Now, for many years the Roman Catholic Church had maintained this common life by exercising regional authority, but already long before the Reformation secular authorities were gaining power over ecclesiastical leaders. Then, when the Reformation hit, it only accelerated this process. 

As a result of the Reformation, the Church became the churches, and doctrinal differences were written into rival institutions which were composed of mutually exclusive bodies of Christian believers. Therefore, church leaders, of all divisions, Lutheran, Reformed Protestant, or Roman Catholic were compelled to rely on secular authorities both to promote their rival views of Christian truth and to protect themselves against their enemies, both religious and political.

And the governmental rulers realized that the Reformation's doctrine of sola scriptura - which taught that Scripture alone held real authority - had already fueled the rebellion of local Peasants in Germany, and could potentially undermine all political hierarchy and social order if left unchecked. So the secular rulers understood it was in their best interest to control religion. 

In the middle of all of this we have one of the most famous Reformation figures, Martin Luther. Besides emphasizing sola scriptura, Luther also made a very important contribution to our current understanding of political authorities, which played a decisive role in shaping society as we know it today, loneliness and all. 

Noticing the potential for widespread chaos, Luthr attempted to find a way to preserve both the Reformation's commitment to sola scriptura sola scriptura and some form of social order. In 1523 he published a treatise titled On Secular Authority: How Far Obedience is Owed to It, Luther hoped it would provide a path forward that would eliminate on one hand, the abusive exercise of ecclesiastical power by the Roman church, while, on the other hand, granting the secular authorities the power they needed to prevent anarchy. Luther interpreted Jesus's words in Matthew 15, ("render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's"), to mean that all human beings belonged to two entirely different kingdoms, each with discrete and respective jurisdiction over bodies and souls. Luther argues that "Secular government has laws that extend no further than the body, goods and whatever is external on earth. But God cannot and will not allow anyone but himself alone to rule over the soul".

Now, it's no surprise that secular authorities backed Luther's interpretation. It gave them full reign over the day to day interactions of the people and left "spiritual" issues to church leaders. Luther did indeed curtail abusive exercise of power by ecclesiastical leaders, but perhaps not in the way he hoped. He curtailed it by handing over that authority to secular rulers, who were then left as the sole stewards of human bodies.

By the late 1600s, Christianity was completing its transition from a worldview to a subjective, interior, and compartmentalized social option. It began to be conceived as one wedge in the pie of an individual life, a matter not of shared obedience to the Word incarnate with eternal life in the balance, but of preference. What people believed and how they worshiped was simply a matter of indifference to others. This lack of bonding on the levels of deep meaning and religious longing festered and devolved into the forces that eventually gave rise to radical individualism, the erosion of communal life,  and (in turn) our epidemic of loneliness.

To the Reformers, Sola Scriptura initially seemed to be a source of unity. But they quickly learned that if given only Scripture, many different groups would come up with many different interpretations. By 1789, the unintended, open-ended Christian pluralism that resulted from sola scriptura, which was in turn institutionalized by confessional regimes and cemented by more than a century of European conflicts in the Reformation era, would also be the deep historical context for the First Amendment to the United States Constitution: which states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

When the United States institutionalized the privatization of religion in the first amendment, it also rejected confessional Christianity as a shared way of life. This decision, made largely to avoid confessional disputes that had been so costly in Europe, unintentionally laid the groundwork for the potential erosion of the church's influence on the nation's citizens.

The privatization of religion left Americans to be the arbiters of their own truth, free to choose what to believe and how to act. It thus became an option for people to claim the Christian faith while opting not to engage in social outreach or charitable actions. It would be their legally protected freedom, if they so chose, to live for their own desires while ignoring the needs of others and still claiming the name of Christ. 

Such a life would bear small resemblance to the teachings of Jesus, who preached the opposite:

"If anyone wants to follow me, they must deny themselves, take up their cross, and follow me" (Luke 9:23).

By contrast, lives geared toward the pursuit of individual, self-determined enjoyments would look more like the embodiment of the ideas of the Enlightenment philosophers like Thomas Hobbes, who wrote about the insatiability of human desires,  or of David Hume's views about the power of avarice.

And yet, a truly embodied Christian faith has always come from and produced a concrete human community, not merely a group of individuals who keep their private views to themselves and live as they please within the laws of the state. Without this concrete community, it is unclear how one might learn to actually live as a Christian, as opposed simply to learning how to spend a Sunday morning or what to think on the occasional moments when your mind explicitly turns to God. 

So, the state controlling the churches by granting individual freedom of religion unintentionally created institutional structures that left 'the world' to itself. But what would happen if churches and families, precisely because they were no longer immersed in a sea of faith but plunged into an ocean of capitalism, consumerism, advertising, self-interest, and popular culture, failed any longer to generate virtues conducive to the flourishing of a democratic society?

Now, let's be clear. Religious freedom is by far preferable to state enforced compliance. But when the state says as long as whatever you believe stays private and personal, go for it, but also reserves for itself the power to determine what is and is not legitimate religious practice, religious freedom is not possible.

And the religious message becomes one that says you are your own authority, so choose what to believe, pursue your own interests, and satisfy your own desires. So long as you obey the laws, you are free to believe or not to believe whatever you want, no matter how bizarre or demonstrably false your convictions. 

For instance, have you ever heard of pastafarianism?

Now, this obviously has ties to issues of morality and economics, and we'll explore those in a later episode. But now, let's make the link to loneliness and our lack of community. The Harvard study we referenced earlier also discusses potential solutions for our loneliness epidemic, saying that, quote, "perhaps most importantly, taking on loneliness means taking on another problem–a deep moral failure–that has reverberated destructively through many aspects of American life. For decades,       critics and researchers have decried Americans' focus on the self at the expense of attention to others and the common good." End quote.  The elevation of self-concerns and the demotion of concern for others is one root of many other problems now besetting our country, not least of which is loneliness.

While Luther's distinction was and still is politically convenient, when taken to an extreme and directed by individualism, like we see at times in the United States, it can have very damaging, even if unintended, consequences. We  can't idolize individual choice and hope to sustain any sort of community that extends beyond a superficial niceness and apathetic un-involvement that leaves us feeling very alone in a very scary world. So, in the conversation that follows, we discuss what real community requires, and how our Christian faith might provide resources to help us recover it, at least to some degree.  


DISCUSSION

Julius: Thanks for listening to All Things—this is Julius and Wil, and today we're picking up and we're making the claim that during the Reformation, there's a couple of key moves: I think there's the, I think the splitting of the body and the soul,  and the splits and the institutionalization of doctrinal disagreements led to a fragmentation that we feel even now, like on a personal level in our inability to truly engage with each other as a community.

Wilson: We are lonely. Thanks, Luther. 

Julius: [laughs] Dang really. I know, but it— thanks, Luther. But also I think in this story, we're a little generous to, to… Luther didn't mean for it to get this bad.

Wilson: Definitely was not his intent. And it was definitely much larger than him for sure. But, but…

Julius: Totally.

Wilson: You can't come up with a… you can't tell the full story and be quippy. 

Julius: Yeah, it's true. Nevertheless, so we've already kind of covered in our story, talking about stuff like the loneliness epidemic and how we're facing, just like on an unprecedented level, in some ways like just a growing experience of loneliness in our culture, especially during the pandemic, but not exclusive to just this time.

So outside of that, what does this— I guess the way that the Reformation ripples out and inhibits our ability to engage in community— how else does that look and feel like, and maybe ways that don't seem as apparent to us as like this loneliness epidemic thing.

Wilson: Right. Yeah. It's like, if we've, if we've given the bird's eye view or the centuries summary of, of the ripples and the effects. 

It's like, okay, maybe… but like, but does that really shape how I live? And I think w- I see it every time we go to Starbucks or any kind of coffee shop, or just about… so we used to, you know, we lived in kind of a neighborhood that, where like the San Diego Union Tribune, and even the LA times named at one of America's best—that’s that's quote “best” their category “hipster” neighborhoods.

Julius: Oh my gosh.

Wilson: And just like that, you could not, you absolutely could not calculate how many stores as part of their marketing used the word “community.” 

Julius: Community. Yeah.

Wilson: is. You know, you moved to this neighborhood because you want community with your kind of people. You want, you want, you know, the same sorts of, you know convictions or whatever, and then you'd go, you go shop and you… and you visit these stores because you want community and, and every place it's like, if you just looked at that, at their marketing, you wouldn't know if they sold clothes or handmade journals or organically-sourced dog food— these are actual, these are, these are not random. I have specific places in mind right now. 

Julius: I know which ones you're talking about, dude.

Wilson: …or coffee, like you wouldn't know from their marketing. If I were to go in this store, I would find clothes or journals or pet food or a coffee shop because all of them are marketing “community."

W-and this is one of those where I think the way we feel it is we feel this strong need for it, but our, but our structures and our institutions can't provide it. But, but we all know we want it. And because we all know we want it. And this is what consumerism does, is it taps into our desires, right?

And this is a very strong felt, need, and desire is for community. And. tap into that with our marketing, because it gets attention because we want it. And I don't think they’re… I do not think these places are being like intentionally manipulative. I don't think this is a bait-and-switch. They're not sitting here going, “Yeah, I'm really just about profit and dog food, but I know people are going to buy community.”

Now, I do think there are a few corporations that that's absolutely what they're doing… but these, but these places I don't, I don't think are bad people intentionally doing that. I think they really would love to help provide community. But what we don't see is you- as much as we might think conceptually, about the difference between our ideas in our, you know, our thoughts about individual freedom and and our local grocery stores and our local coffee shops— as much as we can conceptually separate our ideas and our institutions, you can't actually separate them.

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: What drives so much of what actually happens is how we do things day in and day out. And the structures, the institutions are set up for buying-and-selling and fragmentation and loneliness. And so I don't think people are, are being manipulative with their marketing. I think they're naming a desire.

They want to do something to combat it. As long as we keep doing things day in, day out the way we've done them, it’ll-it'll remain nothing other than, well, at this point, this is maybe with, with Shema in our, on our like business side of the org-organizational side of thing, we've found it super helpful.

We took this from a guy named Patrick Lencioni, who’s a, who's a consultant and a, you know—you’re always have to have a core value, and core values drive who you are, but he was super helpful saying I think, each, each group needs to be really discerning and honest with itself about what's genuinely a core value—meaning this actually shapes what we do and how we do it… this is, this is core and to integrate. How we think and how we act pulling those things together. What we do with our spirits and what we do with our bodies are integrated in genuine core values…

But he says, but you also need to name your aspirational values. Meaning we long for this, we want this, we think it would be good for other people, but we have to be honest, we're not nailing it.

We have to figure out how to believe in this, think about this, and practice it—and that becomes a goal for us to strive for. And I think what we need to name is: across the board, at best, community is an aspirational value. Like we want it, we long for it, but we've got to close the gap between what we long for, how we think about it and how we actually set up our structures and our institutions for day in, day out life.

Because how we do life day in, day out is implicitly, you know, at this point, it's going to undercut any sort of desire or, or longing for actual community. 

Julius: Okay. Yeah, that's that's spot on. I think that's, that's exactly one of the things I wrote down in preparation for this was talking about that commu- I mean, you… you just said it verbatim almost, that community, I think, especially in a lot of the way that organizations/companies/brands and stuff, like they’re… they are touching on a very real need and a hunger, especially like on this side of like, a couple of years into this pandemic that just like highlighted our isolation…

I think we're all hungry for community. So I know that that's like a real thing. But yeah, at best it is aspirational, and the— just to name it, these institutions that have formed us, are institutions of like of capitalism and hyper-individualism and leaving too much to the privatized choice… and to connect that straight back to—we kind of hinted at this in the last episode too, is this, on this side during the Reformation, like as a church, we kind of institutionalized these doctrinal differences and kind of forced to look for what does the past tense of forsake, “forsook”? “Forsooketh”?

Wilson: That's that sounds borderline dirty. 

Julius: Oh man. Well, it is because… but forsaking, the kind of commitment to work things out together we, we decided to institutionalize: “well, we're gonna, we're gonna draw the line and this is. This is our side. This is like our camp.”And we like habituated fragmenting and splitting-off rather than like trying to work things out and see the harmonies…

And so here we are on this side of that, like centuries after that, and that has become ingrained into the institutions that have shaped us, the cultures that have shaped us. And as much as our desire for community is, like, maybe real and genuine… I think so many of us grew up not knowing how to, how to truly embody what it means to be a community and to be in relationship with people on, on deeper than like these surface levels of… I think at best how we understand community is like, it’s it's only as good as our shared interests.

Like, that we build community insofar as we share the same interests and viewpoints on stuff. And so, as long as things are good on that surface level, it feels like community because it all feels good. But I think that we're missing a step. And part of that gap is, so many of us haven't been shaped in how, what happens when we start to disagree.

What happens when the- the more that you deepen in relationship, that like intimacy calls us to confront these differences. And I think so many of us don't have that training and that formation to know what to do with the disagreements, especially now that we're picking up from a tradition that was like, “Ooh, I don't think we can harmonize these… Let’s just keep splitting off.”

Wilson: Right.Yeah. Community takes virtue. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: Another one of our key ideas— aspirational values— is cultivating virtue, you know, and here at… and community absolutely takes that, community cannot simply be aspirations. You know, aspirations are not virtues. Aspirations might lead to… but, but virtue is the actual ability to carry out.

So. Good, you know, it's something internally good to, to what we're doing. And so community requires of us certain virtues that, you know—so think of it this way. There are certain virtues involved in any skill that we may not—I think this shows a fundamental misunderstanding of “virtue” and the role that actually plays in how we feel and act that we don’t immediately recognize that virtues are involved in things like playing an instrument or a sport. 

Like there there's a virtue to guitar playing, that there's a level of virtue that Julius has that I do not. I aspire to be able to do some of the things on the guitar that Julius can and to, and to do things in a band with a guitar that I can't, because I don't have the virtues… because I don't understand like what holds the band together as far as the music and how to just jump in yet. 

And now that's one of the things I'm, I'm remedying by putting myself in an uncomfortable position and saying: here's a really good band… will you guys let me play with you regularly? I can get up to speed with that, but it takes that kind of practice. It takes developing the abilities, same thing with like basketball. It's one thing to aspire to be able to move like LeBron or Jordan. It's another to be able to get on the court and play the game with nine other people on the court. 

Julius: Yeah, 

Wilson: Once you have nine people on the court with one ball, if everyone's going in, in their own direction, there is no game. Right? And that's actually a pretty good metaphor, right? T-to get together and play a game, takes virtue. 

We're just, we're not going to develop those as long as we just keep saying—well, and this is where it gets tricky. Those are virtues and skills that involve your heart, your spirit and your body. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: Right. We talk about music is such an ex- as a, as such a spiritual experience is, but there is no music without physical bodily activity. And, and if the, if the mo- like I've got all the, I've got all the passion and I've got all the inspiration, but I, I do not yet have the ability to express that in music, in a way that others could connect with, because I don't have the virtues yet.

And so, as long as our thinking shapes institutions where the—and this is a tricky word, maybe we'll unpack this the second half of this conversation— where the authority is totally severed, totally… separated between the spirit and the body. Then all we will be left with is certain aspirations, but no value. No virtues that we'll be able to enact them, right.

Just like I've gotta… I’ve gotta be able to involve my body in the virtues of God, I've got to, I've got to learn how to take that and put it in my fingers. Right? And be able to plant myself in a place and, and, and think about how physical it is to just… physically to, to, to poke or, or prick some strings and make them move so that the air moves in a way that's in harmony with six other musicians, and in time with six other musicians, and in a way that will tap into the desires and the hearts of the people listening it's body and spirit.

And as long as we're severing our thoughts are our thinking our practices between the body and spirit, we're going to be left with this sort of like deep longing for, for things that really are good and it matters, but none of the virtues of the abilities to pull it off. 

Julius: That’s, that's great. I think that that makes a lot of things click for me of… I think what we're, what we're talking about here is that a disembodied Christianity leads to like, a shallow everything… but especially like community of like… it's like, if, if, if we, if we start to think that Christianity only involves matters of the spirit and the abstract, it’s like— to bring it to the, to the music analogy— it would be like, if we only focused on like theory, but never picked up the instrument, and we don't know what to do with our hands.

And that's what we're left with as the church is that like… we love to talk about the spiritual and abstract “Forgive one another,” like… you're like…

Wilson: “Bear another's burdens…"

Julius: Yeah. Hmm. 

Wilson: “Care for the sick and needy.”

Julius: Yeah, on an embodied level, we don't know literally what to do with our hands. And I was, and so I’m— 

Wilson: You raise them when the leader tells you to… 

Julius: It may be not even that [laughs] oh man, that's a-another, a side thing… but I've been thinking a lot lately, I think last week, praying through the hours I, I found myself midday praying through the Lord's Prayer and was really struck by the “Lord forgive us as we forgive those who trespass against us…”

Or, “Forgive us as we forgive our debtors.”

And there was something in praying it that day that made it click that the way that— first of all, the way that, that’s spoken, like kind of the tense of like, forgive us as we also forgive, like it's, it's like assumed that it's a part of… it’s habitual, it's habituated. It's it's a rhythm. It's it assumes that that's something that a community practices regularly… 

And At that moment, I realized kind of what you're talking about, how that's such an embodied thing and that forgiveness. I think I'm learning the more that I kind of dive deeper into relationships and friendships and learning how to be vulnerable and pursue like true intimate relationships with people is that I think I always used to receive that line of like, “as we forgive others” as kind of like a really shallow, like… “Just like let it go. It's, it's fine.” Kind of like, I'm ignoring, ignoring the hurt without kind of addressing it kind of forgiveness.

And I'm, I think something in that day, praying through it. Pulled me towards maybe a deeper understanding of like, maybe as we forgive those who trespass against us doesn't mean just like a shallow letting go. But that is sometimes it takes the really hard conversations and having to work it out. It's the stuff that Jesus lays out in the gospels of talking about like, if a brother sins against you and then talks about like embodied steps of like talk to them or like talk to And I think that that's something of like what forgiveness looks like.

And that's a virtue that we, that virtue itself is something that as communities, we don't really know how to engage in that. And that is such a bodily thing. Like for me, I feel emotions super, very strongly, and it's a palpable embodied thing to like, To sit someone down for the sake of like wanting deeper communion with them, like, and moving forward from, after being hurt or after hurting someone that it's an embodied experience to sit with a person, to look them in the eyes, to feel the things.

If you're either, if you're the one who is hurt or if you're the one who did the hurting that… there, it brings up a lot— like your heart races, your palms, sweat, you feel the anxiety in your body, you feel the tension.

Wilson: Body and soul, yup.

Julius: And you have to— we have to embrace that. But I think as our, our understanding of community, I don't think so for so many of us, I don't think it gets down to that deep level of embracing that kind of stuff…

Wilson: Okay, so circling back around and trying to, to pull some of the threads together, we started off by telling a story about a certain abuses of authority leading to, I mean, some sort of necessary action, some sort of necessary reform— but that reform turning into a rebellion. Right. And then pretty quickly the reformers Luther exemplary exemplified in his own secular authority starts to realize, okay, Rebelled against that authority, but also have set the framework for like our own authority and, and actually really all authority ever to be totally undercut, but that we don't, they're not intending to create total anarchy.

So they try to back up and, and create some sort of framework for understanding. Now on the other side of this rebellion how do we still hold some kind of authority? So he sets up these spheres between the body and the soul. So we're talking about like bodies, souls, and authority and, and how this.

Idea of this separation. Right. See how it, how it mirrors, how it, the, the severance and the disintegration is. And then that getting institutionalized is a pattern that is mirrored in every topic that we talk. Right throughout this series, we're going to look at, and there's a lot of overlap here with economics.

We can look at that here and morality, you know, but looking here in community, just like it used to be, there was this authority that it was, yes, let's be honest. It was imperfect. It needed to be reformed, but still for a long time, it was the thing that kept people in the same room and made them work it out. And so now when, when the actual institutional split happens between Rome and the Protestant churches, what's now been institutionalized there. W-w-what, what is embodied in the practices is the thinking of like two separate words. 

Instead of understanding, no, there, there has to be in, there is one. We be, we better learn to live into it. They now institutionalized. No, let's just set up different worlds for us to live in. And you see that move mirrored when Luther realizes, oh shoot, we've got a problem here with authority. What do I do? Well, let's mirror that same move and just set up two different worlds. And that sets the pattern for how we handle conflict.

Let's just set up different worlds, set up different worlds. And so now instead of the virtues of community, we have, you know, this. What's now like just, it's almost in our DNA, right. It's, it's definitely in our institutions. It's definitely in our philosophies and it's in our bones to just this instinctual move now to like, well, let's just set up different worlds and those worlds just keep getting smaller and smaller.

Right? So the piece here, that's the scary thing, but I just think this is, this is what good community does is give us community and some encouragement and a safe and encouraging and challenge. Place to, to face the scary stuff. And what we've got to look at is authority. And in some way, a huge piece, if there's going to be any kind of recovery, if there's going to be a move towards genuine community, we need to find a kind of authority.

That's a healing, good, healthy authority. And what we've set up in other episodes. And again, not that I'm the perfect dad. Definitely not the perfect dad, but one of the places where I look back on something that was scary for me and hard, but I look at it and instead of feeling like, “Heck yeah, look at that. I nailed that as a dad,” I look back on it and it's like… that was really good. And in my reaction is gratitude or there's moments where I'm able to be that presence that keeps my kids together and they actually work the problems out instead of just going to their own rooms, literally, and metaphorically and harboring the resentment for. 

Julius: Sure.

Wilson: And so we need some kind of, and that's, that's the picture we're putting up there. And I know it's scary because we've seen bad authority and there is, there are plenty of authorities that it's Right, and good to rebel against to critique. right.

But that, again, they're another part of our aspiration.

Needs to include a healthy kind of authority. The kind that is strong enough, that is healing enough, that it loves, that loves all of us enough to hold us together, to hold the tension, but also create an aspiration for life together. That would be a strong enough desire and love that we would work through the difficulties to develop the virtues, to actually be able to live together.

Right. And So,

I think what we've up to this point and maybe the best thing I can think of. Is no, I don't think the answer is just to go back and, you know, institutionalized religion from the top down it's to name. No, no, I mean, this is, this is what good healthy religion does. And this is what a good healthy authority can do is hold us together.

It creates the conditions for us to be able to become the kinds of people to practice and in practicing to become the, kind of like a musician you can play to become the kind of people that. Participate in community and there's gotta be some authority that pulls me out of my frustration, my anger, my fear, and my immediate desires Right.

now that might work against that.

And so, no, I don't, I don't think we'd go back to just getting the church in the state totally in bed with each other and, and having someone, you know, claiming the authority of God and just telling everybody what to do. But. Maybe maybe a good first step is for those of us who consider ourselves Christians to open up our aspirations and to long for that healthy kind of authority.

And for us to, instead of looking for some external source to be the thing that would enforce it. How about we collectively as a community open up to the idea that, that this authority could be internalized in that. And so from within us, we could submit to it an authority that is, that is big and strong and loving enough to hold us together and teach us to be people that could live together. 

Julius: Okay, got two questions. 

Wilson: Yeah. 

Julius: One of them is kind of just like a clarifying… this authority that you speak of that can hold things together… I have a hunch what that might be, but in my head, I'm like—I think that's, I think that's just, Jesus?

Wilson: That would, I mean, yeah, that would be the ideal. Right. And, and this is, I mean, look at our story again. If claiming to be Christian, it's not a personal kind of piece. Look at our stories. What did Jesus do? W when the expectation was as Messiah, you're going to gather an army and go fight Rome, but he doesn't do that. He gathers together the Jewish community.

That can't be a community together anymore. Instead of going and fighting Rome, he gets people who keep fighting it. And breaking each other apart from the inside and says, all right, first step is you all come around me, the zealot, you that you've stuck a dagger in tax collectors, but because they're collaborators with the empire and the enemy, you and zealot and tax collector, both of you Pharisee and process. right. The one, the one that has been stoned and the one who has thrown the stones, you guys get together and fight. And this is what he does for the first several years of his ministry is just teach the people of God to live together in community centered around him. And if we really have internalized Jesus as our savior, Lord Messiah, I mean, how can we not internalize that kind of authoritative call to learn to live together?


MEDITATION

Julius: And so we've kind of talked about how the Reformation was a real, like a lot of it wasn't like a response that… I think we want to, um, what's it… validate some of the concerns, and a lot of these concerns were over abuses. And that's the caveat where I'm curious, like what— cause I’m… I start to sit with the… 

The deeper you go into this kind of, um, working-it-out in a relationship, and the more and more that the kind of hurt that needs to be forgiven crosses varying thresholds of, um, magnitude… like let's say…

Okay. Uh, I, I just think of the situations where in relationships, um… that things can get so toxic, that the healthy thing is to, to have distance. 

And I start to think and empathize with people who have had like…have been abused by people in authority. And I am extremely hesitant… of, of like putting people who have been abused by people in power in the same room with their abusers.

Um, what do we do with that? And is it just—and is that one of the virtues that needs to be cultivated, of like discerning where and when that kind of distance is necessary and good?

Wilson: Yeah, that is a big one. 

Julius: Hmm.

Wilson: Um and so… vast topic, right? For sure, that to, to actually deal with w-with the appropriate, uh, sensitivity and depth would, would, would need a vast response… but keeping it focused on the topic of community, I think, um… 

Two resources I think of for that are: we have a model in in South Africa and Rwanda with leaders like Desmond Tutu, uh— the, the recently late Desmond Tutu— and some of the leaders in Rwanda, and how they handled that, exactly that kind of reconciliation and did get to a point where they have the, the abusers and the victims in a room together, but in a way that ended up becoming redeeming for the victims. 

But what we'd need to learn from them is not… what we want is to jump to, “Okay, so what's the method. How do we fix all this? 

“Um, oh, you guys put them in a room together?” and not seeing the decades long work that went up to get to that point where they felt like they could do that in a way that would be redemptive and healing. 

And that takes lots of… it takes lots of breakdown and repentance on the part of the abuser before it’s time. And, and a lot of work for the victims before they would be the ones that say: “I am ready, and this would be good for me.” “This is the next step in my healing is to face it.” Right? 

And they, and that's the part. Is we want to jump to the tea-the tidy redemption without looking at— but no, no, no. The actual model they gave us is that long, difficult process of learning to, like Jesus says, you know… to bring down the oppressor and raise up the poor… to lower the mountains and raise the valleys. To, to have that happen so that, that encounter in the room could be healing and redemptive. Um with, with, you know, the genocide and, um… uh, apartheid in South Africa. 

I would look to there, and then I also think of…and maybe, maybe it'd be better. Maybe let's just flip it up and, and kind of put this on a, instead of an individualized, you know, because implicitly the, the meditator at best are very personal, but they also, you know, it could end up in this point being just yet another individual exercise and in sustained desire.

And so maybe just the best way we can, uh, be honest about the limits of a podcast for community, right? 

Cause that's the other thing is like— listening to us is not the same thing as being part of the body of Christ. We hope that it would help and equip you and plant some desires, you know? And so maybe, maybe this one, we'll just let it be a little more off-the-cuff and say, um.

Let’s, let's look to that… um, as resources. And, and if we're serious about closing the gap between the aspirations and the core of who we are and how we live, those would be great models for us to look at. 

And especially that those come from more communal countries and how they responded to the influence of a very individualistic outside force moving into their cultures and then responding with healing and reconciliation there. 

And then, uh, book-wise I think of Miroslav’s Volf- Miroslav Volf’s—his good book… Um…

Julius: [laughs]

Wilson: Oh shoot that was a, that was a shot [laughs]… but this one is a very, very, very good book called Exclusion and Embrace. Where he talks about the reality, where at its best there, there is a time—for real healing— there’s a time for exclusion. For real healing, there’s a time to make visible and true, right, that the community has been broken.

That it doesn't lead to the restoration of community if we act like community is happening, when it's not actually happening. 

Julius: Wow. Yeah.

Wilson: And that there needs to be a severance first before the embrace is possible. And goes through a lot of the theological, psychological, emotional, the nuance of that in a in a very helpful and in-depth way. 

Julius: Hmm. That's great.

Wilson: So do your homework. Cultivates your virtues. We'll see you in church.

Disintegrated 2 - God vs. Thor


INTRO 

In this series we will look into the distant past to see how a famous Religious movement unintentionally helped marginalize God and fragment our contemporary lives. 

Over the course of 500 years, we will watch theology and money, power, science, and human creativity drift apart, then go to war with each other.

Not just because tracing this disintegration helps us understand contemporary conflicts.

Not just because of the strange beauty that can be found watching things fall apart. 

And definitely not because we think some long-lost glory days held all things in perfect harmony.  

We do this to give you permission 

to pay attention to the deep intuition telling you the things we seek to understand and use when we do things like science and politics, economics and art, really do want to belong together, to help you see that we cannot know and use these things well if we continue to ignore their desire for belonging.

We do this to fuel an imagination for wholeness.  

So for us, this peek into the distant past is not really about the past,

but a future integrated in Christ. 

This episode, we look at how the fumbling of a healthy academic debate about God unintentionally helped fragment our world.


STORY

In this episode, we look back into the late medieval period to see how a shift in our understanding of what we mean when we say the word "God" opened the door for some massive, unforeseen, and definitely unintended, consequences that still shape the way we today understand and live in our world. 

At the end of the medieval period, and the dawn of the Reformation, Christianity was an institutionalized worldview.

And at the core of this worldview was a certain understanding of the nature of God. Specifically, an understanding of what it means to say God is Transcendent. And this Christian conception of transcendence had two prongs.

First:

It was understood that God is radically distinct from all created reality. In that sentence, "radically" doesn't mean "wildly, but in a way that's kind of cool." It's built from the Latin word radix, r-a-d-i-x, which meant "root." So, when Christians said God is radically transcendent, they meant that at the deepest, most important and fundamental levels, God is not like any other thing.

You see this expressed over and over in the greatest Christian literature. St. Augustine, in his Confessions, wrote - quote - "What does anyone say when they speak of you?" - end quote. St. Thomas Aquinas taught that God is so "otherly other" that God shares no genus in common with creatures. 

To understand that, lets unpack Aquina's use of that word "genus." This was all before the development of modern biological taxonomies. So it doesn't mean the same thing that the word "genus" does when we're categorizing all biological life. In contemporary taxonomies, the human genus would only group us with our previous human ancestors like Neanderthals. 

Aquinas, however, was using the word "genus" in a more radical way. For him, and the philosophers of his day, a genus was any philosophical category of things that share enough common traits or characteristics that they could be divided into sub categories. So he wasn't just talking about different categories of animal life. What he was talking about a completely different kind of life.

If you think of genus as a kind of conceptual container, you see what aquinas was trying to do. He was guarding us against thinking there is some container grand and expansive enough to hold both God and anything else. That would make that other concept something that transcends even God in some way, would would also make God, in some way, dependent on that other thing. 

But, according to early Christian thought, God is not partially transcendent, or part of some transcendent reality, but God is transcendent reality. God does not live and move in any other thing, but, by definition - all reality lives and moves and has it's being in God. 

For a more detailed exploration of this, see the episode we just re-released a few weeks ago on what, by definition, classical theism means when it says the word, "God." 

For our purposes in this episode note that for ancient theologians, God's transcendence didn't mean God goes beyond the limits of our power or our lifespan or knowledge, God even transcends being. However we can understand what it means for something to exist, God is beyond that, too.

This meant that when people like Aquinas said "God is everywhere," and "My hat is on the desk," they did not, in each sentence, mean the same thing with the word "is." 

[MUSIC]  

Let's talk about grammar for a little bit, because the key to understanding what I just said lies in the predicate of each sentence. 

A predicate is a part of a sentence that has a verb and says something about the subject. In the sentence, "My hat is on the desk," "my hat" is the subject, "is" is the verb, and so "is on the desk" is the predicate because it tells us something about my hat. In the sentence "God is powerful," the predicate, "is powerful" tells us something about the subject, God.  

To preserve God's transcendence, Thomas Aquinas said we cannot not predicate anything to God in the same way we would predicate it to us. If aquinas said the king is powerful and God is powerful, the difference in his mind would not simply be that God has more power than the king. Aquinas, would understand God's power to be a different kind of power than the power had by the king, not just a greater amount of the same thing. 

And this rule applied, importantly, even for being. aquinas would not even use the straightforward term "being" to talk about God, he would call a woman or man a being, hats and pencils would be beings, but not God. Aquinas always called God the "sheer act of to-be" itself.  

But our inability to predicate anything to God in the same way we would predicate it to ourselves, doesn't mean our talk or knowledge of God falls into total darkness or nonsense. Here, Aquinas borrowed from Aristotle's use of analogy. 

Note that any analogy hinges on a creative play between likeness and difference. If I make an analogy between, say, my wife and a lion, you should be confident I do not mean I have married a literal beast with fur and an instinctual desire for raw meat. Whatever point of similarity holds between my wife and a lion -- say a courageous protectiveness -- the point of similarity tells you something about my wife precisely because there are also, so many more, other ways my wife is not like a lion.

So while we could never say, in a straightforward way that we exist in the same way God exists, we can say so analogically. And with this it's always important to remember two things. One, whatever analogy we make between us and God, the point of difference is precisely what allows the analogy to really communicate something to us. And two, wherever there is some point of likeness, God doesn't just have more of that thing, but also different kind of that thing.

This is the transcendent God ancient and medieval Christians believed they communed with and talked about.  

[MUSIC]

But, in the Christian worldview, this transcendence came with a second prong, which was this: because God was not limited the way other things are -- and they made an especially big deal about God transcending the limits of space and time -- God was understood to be free to be intimitaly close to every part of Creation. 

The most succinct and clear way I can articulate the difference that constitutes God's transcendence: instead of being like any thing, God is the source of every thing. If we can say a thing exists, God is not just near to it, or approaching it, but if it exists, God is the source of it.

So in the very same book we quoted above, St. Augustine could also say that God is, quote, "... More intimate to me than I am to myself."

And Christians put this belief in God's transcendent presence into practice at each worship gathering when they handled, tasted, and even ingested the divine presence in the Bread and Wine of the Eucharist.

[MUSIC BEGIN]

But then some of Aquinas' younger academic contemporaries started to argue that we should mean the same thing when we say we exist and that God exists. And this grew into a debate over whether we should understand God's transcendence to extend to and beyond being itself, of if God's transcendence should be centered in the immensity of God's power and the mystery will. 

Which all sounds like a very abstract and high-minded academic debate, because it was. For centuries. And this is exactly what allows me to make my main point: I want us to ask the question, "What was it that allowed this to remain a high-minded academic debate?"   

Think about how this year, families could not stand to get together for Thanksgiving because they had broken down into warring factions over issues that, if pressed, no one would have been able to give an account of the finer points of the science or philosophical arguments underwriting their respective opinions. Think about that, and it becomes a marvelous wonder that the debate over the nature of God was able to remain just an academic debate. 

That is, until the Reformation

[MUSIC]

Before the Reformation, the medieval Catholic institutional structures and practices operated very much like I do as a dad when my two boys are fighting. Most of the time, one of my boys decides to just give up and run away. That is when I get to be the one that says, "No. You have a point and your brother needs to hear you out. We are going to maybe take a little break to cool off. But then we're getting back together in the same room and we're going to figure this out." 

When a controversy developed around a new a idea, the institutional unity allowed previous Christians to evaluate, refine, and integrate what was good or true, together, without fragmenting and utterly turning on each other in violence. 

But after Luther's requests for debate were ignored, then denied and attacked. It didn't take long for Luther's critiques to shift from ideas to key practices, and then toward the church itself. 

And when Luther and his supporters responded to Luther's excommunication by simply forming another church, it was like providing a different structure that allowed the warring siblings to avoid each other and stew in resentment and instead of figuring out some way to work together, spend their time and energy coming up with new ways to defeat the other. 

And once the door was opened to this way of doing things, the fragmentation spread at an exponential rate. One of Luther's earliest supporters was named Ulrich Zwingli. But less than a decade after Zwingli supported Luther following his excommunication, Luther and Zwingli had a formal and passionate debate about what is really going on with, guess what, the Bread and the Wine in the Eucharist. And when they failed to reach an agreement, guess what resulted. 

Over the next century, religious controversy only multiplied. And so did the wars. So eventually people gave up on the idea of religion being the thing that could hold humanity together. A movement that came to be called the Enlightenment arose that experimented with the idea that human reason might be the thing that could hold us together. But after WWI decimated a continent and gutted a culture build on reason, only to have the rest of the 20th century quickly prove to be, by far, the bloodiest century of human history, enough people gave up on Reason, too, for a new postmodern movement to arise. But even with it's efforts, we still can't have a nice Thanksgiving dinner, let alone a good debate about God, without our differences breaking us apart. 

We are the children of the Reformation's fragmentation. To do our little part in the middle of it, in conversation that follows, Julius and I zero in on the point where this began: the difficulty we face in talking about God, then we explore why that is necessary before we try to engage the practical consequences of our fragmentation.


DISCUSSION [Auto-Generated Transcript]

Julius: Welcome back to the podcast that is named “All Things” (in my attempt to try and be fresh with the intro…) 

We're picking back up on—this isn't the first episode of the new series, but kind of diving into the bold claim that we made last week, about how—I mean the broader claim of trying to understand history not just as disconnected sets of events that have no bearing on our reality now, but also more specifically we started talking about the event in Christian history called The Reformation and how that ripples out and affects us today—even like Christians and non-Christians alike. 

And so diving into the specifics of exactly what that affects today, we're talking about God. Which is perhaps the biggest—

Wilson: Always the topic, never the topic. 

Julius: I know. Yeah, exactly. So just to dive straight into it, can you walk us through how the theological and philosophical shifts that happen, that we outlined in the story there, how those shifts ripple out into consequences that we, we feel and experience in our current day conversations about God—I mean, whether it's as Christians or as non-Christians in like the discourse on God…

Wilson: Bottom line is we can't talk about… We were, we… Like and potentially that we never can. It's, it's a hopeless endeavor. But given our current state, we find it near impossible to actually communicate about the topic of God to actually do, to make… to make God really a subject of debate. 

Yeah, we see it all over the place. You can, you find it on YouTube, you'd find it on Reddit forums. You…you find it all over the place where— and it's not just, you know, some clear “us and them.” It's not always some like, you know Catholic Bishop or an atheist philosopher debating that happens, but you, you even have it like within different groups of Christians and different groups of theists, you know… Catholic, Catholic, and, and Jewish, or, or Jewish and Islamic, you know, and. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: Or a religious person and some quasi-agnostic philosophy professor and all these places you have… We have, we have lots of examples of people getting on very public forums and claiming to have debates about God. But what we're saying is 98-99% of those struggle to actually talk about God in the sense that like the deepest, the strongest, the, the best of—and not just Christian— of a theistic tradition and philosophy would would hand to us. So it, I mean, it… there’s nothing more confusing or frustrating than when you're sitting down with somebody and you, you pour a whole lot of energy and passion into something and at the end you realize you're not talking about the same thing. 

But it's a totally different thing. Like that's frustrating enough. It's a totally different thing. When people spend hours and hours preparing, they bet their lives on their position. And, and then they pour out their energy and passion into debating this thing and then don't even realize that we didn't actually debate the thing. That like our felt experience. And I, what I hope this podcast would do is just name that for people. If you're, if you're somewhere not fully committed— well, I, I guess it's not, it's not, well… let's stick with that part. 

If you're someone that's not fully committed, it can be incredibly confusing and frustrating just to hear these debates play out and you know, it matters and you want to, you know, do a good job, to be diligent and thoughtful in your response and not just judge other people. Right? 

But then you try it. It's like. Part of what I would hope this would do is, is maybe name that frustration you feel when you've tried— and this is part of why it can feel so inaccessible is, as a culture, we really, really struggle to actually talk about this and this can be true too. So that's like, you know, the undecided, but that leads to the felt experience of the believer and convicted unbeliever to cause wherever you are looking for to both like test and potentially strengthen or revise your position, when you get in to listen to the other things, it feels like… eh, I mean maybe it just helps to know you're frustrated at the end because you tried to listen to something that didn't really get to something. 

Julius: Yeah, I feel like I mean, just on a broader— our broader cultural curs is, I feel like we have a hard time communicating period… just in general about anything, just that we're so fragmented that with most things have so of substance that we can't assume that we're working from the same definitions and axioms.

And so, especially when it comes to… the transcendent source of all reality/being— which is not even… which those categories aren't even often what people associate with God.

Wilson: Yeah, that's I, I tell… So one of the, one of the most fruitful places that I've found to like have to engage this issue is in the classroom. And if you, if you're not aware of it my classroom is a classroom at a private Christian university. So not all of the students are Christian. Not all the students are theists in any way.

And, and more and more I'm having students from other religious backgrounds too. But in, in that kind of context, the most fruitful way I've had to put it is to, to say…

“All right— so I'm speaking directly to those of you in the room that still consider yourself Christian.” So to the Christians in this room I'll say one of the ways to test this, right. If, if you're, if you're moving towards a more Christian. And I, and I mean, that as in, as like… even that word has to be unpacked, you know. But what I mean by that is the, what I… what we take to be the strongest bits of the tradition that go back to the deepest roots, right… So, yes, biblical, but also like the, the first, you know, five-six centuries of Christian thought where, where people tried to define and clarify what we mean by biblical, you know, so the biblical witness and the witness of the church, and again, not just in the theological philosophical modes, but when the church lives in a certain way, right…

That that is distinct. That that would, would allow people to say, when we, when we trust this, when we commune with this God, like this is where it leads. So all of that, I would say… So like a focal point would be Acts 17, where Paul says to a group of non-Christians— a group of, and I don't mean pagan in a, in a disparaging way…

I mean, as this is what they were. It was there. So to a group of pagans, he says, look, I… So, what he's done is he's gone into the city and he's seen a lot of statues to their gods, right? And a lot of them are named, right, this… you've got a name for this God, and you have rituals for honoring this God, and you've got a name for this God, and you have certain civic festivals that honor this God and keep this God happy.

But I've noticed people that you're so religious that you've got a statue to an unknown God—right now here, here's the fun part. Paul says what you proclaim as unknown I want to proclaim to you as known. But let's, let's put a pin in that word “known” and understand that part of what we're trying to do is understand better what Paul really means when he says “I'm going to proclaim this God to you as known.

So what you worship and proclaim as “unknown,” I made a claim to you as “known,” right? The Creator, the source of all things, right? And he says to him, This God has come to us in Jesus of Nazareth. Right.

But look, here's, here's what Paul says about him… and he quotes a pagan poet about this and says, “This God is not far from any of you, but closer to you than you could possibly imagine.”

This God is not far from any one of us for as some of your own poets have said, “In this God, we live and move and have our being.” So that God, right. That's witnessed to, that’s attested to in, in the Christian tradition that God, if you, if you really like, just set that down as like a pole in the ground, as a starting point to begin your journey into knowing, understanding God, one of the, one of the ways you can test if you're on track or not, I tell them, is look at, look at how you think about…

Look at how you pray to God. Look at the expectations that you form around the relationship you have with God. So if you're communing with God, what do you expect that to be like? If you pray to God and asked for something, what do you expect this to be like, if in, if in this, what you're thinking about or expecting looks more like Superman or Thor, you're on the…

You're on the wrong track because in him, all things live, move and have our being, everything. Right. So like what's not included in that. And so would Superman or Thor be included in that? Yeah.

I mean, if there is some super-human and, and in that sense, you could say divine, lowercase “d,” but truly divine, lowercase “d,” but still, truly divine being like Thor or Superman… even that being would live, move and have their being in God. And so if you're looking for a God that's off somewhere like Thor in as… and, and you've got to somehow get Thor's attention. Cause there's some big problem that you can't solve. It's it's too much for you. And so you asked Thor for help and you got to get Thor's attention. And Thor has got to get Heimdall to open up the rainbow bridge, to shoot Thor to all of that stuff. All of that.

It has its reality in God accord. The God that Paul is directing attention to is, is that so even it's not, you can't reduce it to Thor or Superman, some supra d-d or some supra, divine being that if we could get their attention, say the right things might shoot down and take care of a problem that we can't handle all of that.

And so that's like in the Christian imagination, I just say part of, part of how you come to a truer knowledge of God. According to what Paul is talking about in acts is to problematize some of our conceptions of God, even as Christians,

Julius: Okay.

Wilson: that cuts both ways because you could say that also to people that are more of a, of an atheistic or materialistic. they're looking for is, you know, the let's look at like the law or the principal that brings this thing about, and if you confuse God with the law or the principal, you've made the same mistake.

Now you're not thinking in a, in a mythological vein or mode of thinking like Thor, Superman, you're, you're not thinking that vein, you're thinking in a scientific Mode or vein, but if you're looking for the law, the power, that sort of thing, that would, that would explain some set of events or the existence of a certain thing, like here on your desk, you're, you're making the same category missed.

And this is where people don't understand, we think, oh no, we're thinking so, so, so different. You're thinking mythological, you're thinking some super human being I'm thinking scientific and empirical, but if you get what Paul is saying here, you're, you're making the same mistake. If you're looking for the law, the principle, because the same thing, just like you would say, okay, well, no, no, no, no, no.

Where did the war find door's strength? Where does Thor's breath and being come from? And what about that rainbow bridge that allowed him to magically pop down here? All of that, you know, all of that lives and moves and has its being in God. That's a different, more mysterious place. Same thing here. What about that law?

What about that principle that lives and moves and has it, where does it live and move and habits bringing all of it comes from God. And one of the people that I most respect, even though I do not share well, and he recently passed, So I do not share his final convictions or conclusions. Is Stephen Hawking.

So his is the dude. He brilliant. And he was a cosmologist like his, his whole thing was how does this stuff get here and why? And he stayed, he stayed within like a naturalistic, a more materialistic. Framework, as far as the things he would talk about and explore, but he was, he was a lot more intellectually, honest than a lot of the people that get, you know, honestly, they'd get more subscribers and likes on YouTube.

 But because even Hockings has said. Okay. So here's the best we can come up with with hypotheses and explanations and equations, but even he was haunted and he said, quote, but what is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe why does the universe go through all the bother of exist?

Like even now at that point, at that point, the cosmologist and he wouldn't venture to make a confession of faith and to, you know, to, to make a whole lot of decisions or, or bet his life on that. But at that moment, what is it? The priests fire into the equations there. He's finally asking a truly theological question.

If we let this picture of God from acts 17 shape what we mean by theater.

Julius: So you've started to move the conversation from if we've begun from a place. Exploring the consequences of how the reformation made the or at least got the ball rolling with what it took culturally and philosophically to get fragmented enough to a place where we can't even talk about the same thing when we're talking about God.

So we've talked about like an intellectual. Philosophical like the implications of like how it has jumbled our discourse, but we've started to move into the implications on our lived experience of how, when our understanding of what God is, is like that superhuman demigod from outside of like the sky that we need to conjure up that.

It creates a different set of expectations, both for Christians and non-Christians on what God is supposed to be. And so for a non-Christian that becomes like, oh, that's a silly idea like that. And it. makes it like any real exploration of the divine kind of like they can write it off because if it's in that category, then it's, oh, it's like, it's silly.

So either on a lived experientials level, it it leads to, non-Christians like not taking the divine seriously maybe, or like at least this way of thinking about it. Christians who I like, I think that that view of God is just as common for people inside the church. And on, on like a lived reality level, it creates these expectations for God that often honestly lead to like disappointment because.

 We still like it's, it's so common to then view God as like that Thor superhuman figure that we like, or, or like a genie or something, and that we need to somehow like pray hard enough to twist this divine power. To like come down and change things for us, that working from those categories leads to like, in our lived experience, like a constant either feeling like God is not listening to us or not active or not like doing what God is supposed to.

And that breeds. much disconnect and emptiness and hopelessness, I think. But if we're trying to move to a place where like, what if God is bigger than even all of that and like is on a far deeper level of what makes reality what it is that if we move closer to, like, what if w w of, as we move closer to like, God as like this mystery what does, what is the Christian hope for?

Like how we relate to. The divine mystery as something that is more than and deeper than just like a cause I feel like we can, maybe some of us want just like a God who's in this guy and comes down and that's like kind of easier. 

Wilson: Yep. 

Julius: But the, to explore something like what we're talking about, God is transcendent and mischievous and, and also like the source of all things that live and move and have their being like that feels like a lot more difficult and complex to, 

Wilson: Yep. 

Julius: to know what to do with it.

Wilson: So part of what you're really, really right to, to phrase it.

it's a, it's a, it's a very big, positive step forward. If, if what we're advocating is right. That what you've just done is a, is a positive step forward. When you said, when you phrased it as the hope for how did you say communing with this mystery? that 

Julius: so. I think I was, I was hinting at like, something like convenient, but it was more of like a, if it's more like, Miss, like if it's mystery and transcendence, how do we relate to that?

Wilson: And that's. that?

is the way you asked the question. So we'll name it. So we're not just questioned, begging which in, in philosophy, by the way, this, this one's for free question begging doesn't mean, Ooh. Now this is the obvious question that is raised question begging means you tuck your conclusions in.

Your initial statements or your presuppositions, you rig the game. That's question begging. So as to avoid question begging we'll name that I, I F you've clarified there. What we would say is, is the goal or the hope that a deeper. W capital T more traditional and, but traditional doesn't mean the last 50 to 100 years in Western culture, traditional is like 2000 years and, and spans several like vastly, I mean, numerous very, very different cultures.

So the deeper. Traditional picture of God, the deeper. And again, this tradition too, just that this theistic tradition is spills beyond even just the Christian faith, but, but the iron man positions, the strongest things that would be offered by a broadly theistic position, if that's Right.

and good and true, which we're making the argument that it is, you've just helped us by clarifying what this would lead to it's communion with.

We are not, we're not advocating or talking about an explanation for everything. That's one of the places where both. People that will engage or theistic people that will engage these arguments and the opponents and contemporary debates make a mistake that if we're talking about God will find the explanation for everything. that's not what we're not talking about. An explanation for everything, whereas should, we're suggesting with this, that we draw from this deeper theistic tradition to help us commune with the. Not to find an explanation that will remove all mystery. This is, I mean, I get, I get really, really frustrated cause I hear it all the time in podcast.

I heard it recently on radio lab. I've heard it on stuff you should know, just, you know, not to call out, but to, to be concrete, but, and also just to, to not take a, just an oppositional fighter stance to say, I listened to the. A lot, because I love those podcasts. I've learned a lot from them, but I, I get frustrated there because often, and I've heard it in both of those recently, they'll say.

And now here at this point, you know, one of them was about the emergence of life in an evolutionary system. Right. And so the, the emergence of consciousness is a very mysterious. And still, if you take, if you take the goal of human knowledge to explain everything, consciousness is a, is a frustrating point.

It's a, it's a frustrating mystery for people. And so they would say on, on the podcast. And so here's the point where a theist will invoke God, but I don't like that because it removes the mystery. And I want to be like, no, no, no, no, no, no. If they're, if they're truly theist, they're deepening the mystery.

They are not removed. It's not a boom. Here's this thing. So swipe it away. It's a no, no, no, no. Now God becomes the point where we move deeper into the mystery. When we stop it here, we lock ourselves into our own rationalistic, tiny finite mind's ability to know, and we stay here. We, we it's the opposite.

We're we're. Putting up the boundaries and saying the mystery must firmly stay within these boundaries. If you're genuinely theistic, you're saying, okay, mystery, pull me out of my boundaries. That's a deeper kind of mystery. And what we're advocating is not that we would explain everything, but that, that we would, we would trust this as something that genuinely opens up an opportunity for us to. Go deeper into it. Didn't to commune with that mystery.


MEDITATION

We are convinced that our inability to talk about God shows us what's really been the issue though all the centuries of fragmentation and fighting that has proven to be the unintended fallout of the Reformation. We might think we are fighting over just what happens with the bread and wine or what determines what counts as valid knowledge or how to set up political systems and who has claim to what resources, but implicit in all of this is a deep disagreement about the nature of the relationship between ordinary things and ultimate reality.

That is why we are rooting this series in talking about how we think about God. It might seem, at first glance, like such an abstract issue. But the idea that God has the same kind of being that we do has massive practical implications.

It's not a perfect analogy, but a pretty good one that helps us see what's going on here is this: Think about two people talking over each other. 

[CACOPHANY OF INDIVIDUAL NOTES]

Because we are talking about two things that are essentially the same kind of thing - these words and some other words - and because these similar things are happening in the same place and at the same time, they have to compete with each other.  

If God shares the same kind of being with us, the same kind of power and presence that we have, then God must compete with us to be present and heard. God must either withdraw so we can be present, like one person being silent so the other may speak, or must overpower us to be effective, like one person shouting down another. 

But if instead of thinking about two people talking at the same time, what if we just think about the difference between one speaker and the words they speak. That shift in the analogy makes it clear that we are not talking about the same kind of things. 

You and your words can both be present and at work at the same time, in the same place, because you are not your words, but the source of your words.   

[BEAT]

By the time of Luther, most of the Reformers had been deeply shaped by the idea that God definitely has more of everything it means to exist, but shares with us the same essential being.  

So they might of thought they were debating how people commune with God in the Bread and the Wine - either through God's actual presence, or though our memories of past events that are evoked by the bread and wine. But the real issue always was, and still is, whether or not God has to compete with us and other ordinary things to be present to us.  

But if God cannot be extraordinarily present in ordinary things like bread and wine, why would God be capable of being present in the other things we that tend to center our religious experience in. Why would God be able to meet and to speak to us in our memories and thoughts or emotions? Because, as neuroscience is learning and teaching us, thoughts and emotions involve ordinary things like chemicals and electrical currents. And how different are those things from calories, really?

But if God is the source of all these things, then God does not have to compete with any of these things to be present to us. 

And if God is truly the source of All Things, then God is both the origin of all their massive difference and variety, and the one who can hold all this difference together in harmony.

[MUSIC FULLY COALESCES] 

So here is why the way we speak and think about the transcendence of God is anything but a purely mental and abstract issue. One of the crucial tasks facing our age is finding something that can value genuine differences, and hold it all together in some kind of harmony.

In light of all our contemporary pain and conflict, people are becoming increasingly aware of the importance of our structures - because in more ways than we care to admit, we are still like ancient and medieval people, we too need structures that can help us engage difference and work through the tension without fragmenting into violence. But any idea or program or human vision will always have to compete with some other concept or social initiative to be heard and implemented.  

Only communion with a genuinely transcendent God is capable of providing what we need. Only God's divine presence in ordinary things can enable us to imaging and build the kind of structures that can hold us together in non-competitive harmony. With out presence and work becoming something like the words that God speaks.

Disintegrated 3 - Knowledge, The Monk, The Scientist


INTRO 

In this series we will look into the distant past to see how a famous Religious movement unintentionally helped marginalize God and fragment our contemporary lives. 

Over the course of 500 years, we will watch theology and money, power, science, and human creativity drift apart, then go to war with each other.

Not just because tracing this disintegration helps us understand contemporary conflicts.

Not just because of the strange beauty that can be found watching things fall apart. 

And definitely not because we think some long-lost glory days held all things in perfect harmony.  

We do this to give you permission 

to pay attention to the deep intuition telling you the things we seek to understand and use when we do things like science and politics, economics and art, really do want to belong together, to help you see that we cannot know and use these things well if we continue to ignore their desire for belonging.

We do this to fuel an imagination for wholeness.  

So for us, this peek into the distant past is not really about the past,

but a future integrated in Christ. 

This episode we look at how the idea of a contemplative monk and a knowledge-producing scientist came to be seen as incompatible opposites. 


STORY

Gregor Mendel is considered the father of contemporary genetics. He furthered this area of knowledge by spending his afternoons experimenting with peas, which he did as part of his daily rhythm of prayer, study, and work, which he carried out because he was an Augustinian monk.

If you enjoy music with melodies featuring multiple harmonies and parts, you can thank Hildegard of Bingen, a composer credited with moving music from ancient droning chant into modern polyphony in the 12th century. She was also a nun. 

If you appreciate having the best information and the work of top thinkers translated into common languages, for that precedent you can thank a 3rd and 4th century monk named Jarome.

And these people are not exceptions, rather they stand as great examples of a rule. From about the fall of Rome through the medieval period, monasteries, and the monks and nuns who lived in them, played a central role in creating new knowledge and educating people. It's not always been the case that people believed religion and science must have nothing to do with each other. 

[MUSIC]

This is true even at the birth of our Universities. By the time of the Reformation, Universities had developed, in many cases in close relationship with the preceding monasteries. See, at that time, monasteries also carried the weight of providing medical care and operating as centers of food production along with their regular duties of prayer and devotion. So in an initially cooperative division of labor, Universities came to bear more of the load for the production and transmission of knowledge.

But with this division of labor, there remained a unity of shared worldview. And to us, within this worldview, it might seem like our distant ancestors put theology up on some untouchable heavenly pedestal. But in some key ways it was quite the opposite. Our ancestors valued theology because they also expected it to wear flesh and blood and have actual positive effects on how they thought and lived, day to day. So the church and the monasteries and the universities and political powers and the people all interacted in shared practices and common life. 

At this point, the most important divisions were carried out on the level of labor, not of culture. And this means that theology was not sequestered away and buffered from all other forms of knowledge and new information. 

A prime example is the rediscovery of Aristotle's work along with the science and philosophy of muslim scholars that came to the West in the 12th and 13th centuries. As is often the case with new things, at first this knowledge was seen by some as an incompatible threat. But instead of allowing Theology to continue on as if nothing happened, St. Thomas Aquinas led the way in integrating what was good and true of Aristotle and Avicenna. Not just because this is what theology was expected to do, but theology was expected to do this because theology at it's best, is what could do this. In pursuing communion with the Source of all things, theology was the field of knowledge that was looked to to help people reconcile all the different things they encountered and dealt with.

And this highlights a great point of difference between them and us. Because, how many of our contemporary cosmologists in leading Research Universities expect themselves, as part of their professional competency, to keep up with anything any of our best theologians have said? And how many professors and pastors can maintain their audience while insisting all of modern science is garbage? 

[MUSIC]

But where does the real difference lie? Our ancestors had the same tensions and conflicts, but overall, and in the long run, they worked them out because their production and dissemination of knowledge took place in a culture that did what strong cultures are supposed to do: integrate and hold together things like varying areas of knowledge and the daily lives of people. This cultural difference, rather than varying ways of dividing and facilitating the work, or the gap in the volume of information available to us, is the real difference between them and us.

And notice, in the ancient and medieval world, it was only possible for the conflicts between theology and astronomy to be carried out at the highest levels of learning because theology had to interact with other areas of practical life and knowledge. This unbuffered interaction is precisely what allowed theology to play a helpful and integral role in the culture.

So when looking at the unintended effects of the Reformation on knowledge, this is exactly where we locate the prime shift that leads to the disintegration that characterizes our own age.

Once Luther found a massive audience and split with the Roman Church, secular authorities like princes and kings started choosing sides. Here, a real disintegration begins, but at this point the disintegration had yet to make its way into everything. Christianity was still an institutionalized worldview. So we must understand that within this still-Christian culture, the word "Secular" did not mean to them what it means to us today. It simply meant not specifically and directly dealing with the church. So a "secular" role was merely a position of authority not officially carried out within the church. 

So even secular rulers - like princes and kings - carrying out their job within this institutional worldview still believed they must do their job as Christians. That they would be held accountable by God for what they did with their power in their moment. 

So. Once Christendom began to split, the secular rulers felt they had a duty to determine which side they believed to be most right, and then to protect that side's teaching. So this university, under the protection of this secular ruler, became a Protestant University. While this other school, under the protection of a Catholic secular ruler, became a Catholic University. 

This wrote the Reformation's doctrinal disagreements into the institutions themselves. 

And, in a misguided attempt at faithfulness, trying to protect the Catholic side from the Protestant heresy, or vice versa, the rulers threw their secular political power into protecting their Theology from having to engage the arguments of the other side, and from having to integrate the findings of others schools of thought.

And I, as a theologian sitting where I do now, wish we could have done this differently. Because this is the point where the disintegration was given what it needed to infect everything.

[MUSIC] 

With our institutions now working not to make us work things out together, but institutionalizing our disagreements, they unintentionally rendered our doctrinal controversies unsolvable. So as the fighting drug on and on, more and more people simply gave up on theology, and moved on to find common ground in other pursuits like, as we will explore in a later episode, shopping, or in what is at the center of this episode: producing new knowledge.  

But then, with more people finding common ground by devoting their time and energy and money to science and research, our culture got really good at making new knowledge. 

Here, the buffering of theology from the rapidly increasing field of scientific discovery backfired in several ways.  Because theology did not have to keep up and stay conversant with new knowledge, theology was unable to offer it's gifts for integrating new information into a view and set of practices that could aid the wholistic flourishing of life. Further, as the gap widened between what theology said and what new knowledge revealed about how things work, to many, theology seemed increasingly irrelevant. Yet, for a while, theology remained institutionally protected. As long as the political powers would stand behind and fund it, theology could act like nothing was happening. But this only delayed a reckoning, long enough that when it came, it was disastrous. 

But not just for theology. 

Because when people began to leave theology to the past and made knowledge-making their central concern, the faster rate of information production combined with a growing consumptive demand that we will outline in our coming episode on the reformation and economics, and this combination shifted the very nature of knowledge itself. Rather than facing the expectation that it must integrate with a larger culture, new knowledge was freed to largely define the culture, and so was also freed from other cultural, and indeed religious concerns, like morality. This is how "secular" came to mean "having nothing to do with God and things associated with religion," and how knowledge became secular as we now use that word. 

But we don't think it would be good for us as a people if the idea of a monk-scientist continues to seem like a strange contradiction.  

So in the conversation that follows, Julius and I discuss how the unfettered freedom that enabled us to produce more, as fast as we possibly could, without having to be slowed by pangs of conscience or thorny concerns for how to assure that some new thing we are suddenly capable of doing will be good for other things, shapes our experience of knowledge and its practical effects. 


DISCUSSION [Auto-Generated Transcript]

Julius: Thanks for tuning into “All Things.” This is Julius, and…

Wilson: Nobody tuned… 

Julius: You don’t know that…

Wilson:…on your radio…. What's a radio dial? 

Julius: [Laughs] Colloquially “tuning in” on your podcast app or wherever you find your podcasts. Or whatever podcasters say.

Wilson: Speaking of cultural holdovers… 

Julius: I think I, maybe I mean, on like a um… Nevermind. [laughs] I mean “tuning in” and on a more spiritual level. 

Wilson: That's right, with your attention. 

Julius: Yeah. For tuning in your attention… And that is where we're beginning today. This is—as per “uzhe” —Julius, joined by Wil… I’m going to have fun trying to notate that on the transcript, cause I never know how to spell the word “uzhe”… the abbreviation for usual.

Wilson: How you, how are your phonics? 

Julius: Yeah, I'll try my best. But today we're picking up on um… we’re well into the series about the Reformation and its ripple effects on society at large, both within the church and outside of the church, and why those distinctions feel so hard in the first place, um… in our lived experience. And today we're talking about knowledge.

So recapping from the story. I think, I think our intention here is to not just point out the ways that the Reformation rippled out into like, to affect our current life and like our culture, our relationships and knowledge in negative ways, but also to point out the ways that these consequences were not aligned with maybe the original intentions of the people who were seeking to reform the church. 

And in hoping to understand that, maybe our hope is to kind of move forward and recover some of the things that were lost in these unintended consequences. So I guess. If we can revisit the story of… we're talking about knowledge today and the way that the reformation changed our relationship with knowledge, I guess it’s easy to kind of simplify the story in a way that like… 

Around the time of the Reformation there were just so many doctrinal disagreements based on differing interpretations of scripture that eventually it became too exhausting to try to harmonize these points, and that the church ended up kind of institutionalizing um… the, this kind of “agree-to-disagree” mentality in how we approach theology and kind of just like, “You know what, it's all, it's all up to interpretation so we're just gonna…We’re just going to leave it that way.” 

And that um, like… maybe that’s… is that too simplistic of a way to kind of understand where this begins? That the disagreements become too hard to harmonize and so that differing camps just start to…

Wilson: Yeah, I think what you started to point out there that could be really helpful for us to understand is naming super clearly in the Reformation. What we're saying is the key thing to keep your eye on is that what got institutionalized at the beginning was this disagreement, right? So, we can't agree on this, but there's still that cultural holdover— the princes, the local rulers, they believe they've got, you know, they have a duty to God, so they choose sides and they just institutionalize it.

This will be a Protestant university. This will be a Catholic university, right. That carries over for a while. But what, what I want us to trace now is to see that that institutionalized move and fragmentation continues even in our secularized environment.

Julius: Right.

Wilson: Because, broadly— and this is retracing, some of the stuff from previous episodes, right—it used to be, we believed God and religion would be the thing that would hold us together. So we institutionalized that.

If God and religion can't hold us together, what will? You know, and the enlightenment was an experiment in “Well, maybe human rationality will.” So we institutionalized human rationality. And this is, this is where you can see it really, really clearly.

I mean, this is true across the board in most of our Western institutions, but the example, the institution that serves as an example of this would be the growing research universities that start to develop and reach their peak in, you know, the 17th, 18th, 19th, centuries… you know, and then even still now in the 20th century.

So they institutionalized human rationality—a certain sort of like… divorced from God, divorced from theological questions and concerns, which, theological questions would be like, “But what is it really? Like in its, in its nature, what is it? And what's its potential?”

And if this is what it is… right? You know, science is great in like, “What is it made of? What power does it have? What effects could it cause?” Right? In describing those kinds of things. But the realm of theology is the realm of meaning and purpose. So like, what is it and what could it be and how do we discern—

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: And, and there's bad theology for sure. There's bad religion for sure.

But good theology, healthy religion helps us determine good goals and good purposes. And so, we institutionally bet on human reason, but divorced from these kinds of theological questions, right? And this proliferates, we get, we get tons of new descriptions, right? Which is, it's producing new kinds of knowledge that describe “What this is made of? What kind of timeline was involved in this? The process that led to this?” 

Science crushes it at that for a couple of centuries. But then we start to see that human reason won’t to hold this together either. Because just like human reason will disagree on scripture, human reason will disagree on interpreting science… whether or not, right, we're going to w- there's no way around those questions that we tried to bracket off with the scientific method.

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: You cannot live a human life without asking questions about like the essence, the nature of a thing, the purpose, the goal, the meaning… what should we do with this? We have all this power, but what's gonna, what's gonna like direct it? And without some sort of common religious culture you have a bunch of warring different goals and so now you see this… 

And this is how postmodernism starts to kind of organically develop as a reaction to all of this. Human reason and the differences there, the differences in interpretations and the warring goals leads to violence. Hands down—it’s not even close— hands-down the 20th century was the most efficiently, bloody century of human history in terms of sheer body count, no century comes close.

I know we make a lot—and we should, we don't sweep it under the rug about previous religious wars and conflicts… But none of those come close to the 20th century. And so in, in the 1900’s, people start to lose faith in human reasons ability to hold us together, because look: we're still fighting. We're still killing. Genocide is still happening.

And now we have these incredibly powerful rationalistic, super efficient, modern tools, industrialized methods, not just for y’know, building things, but for killing people. And so post-modernism is this reactionary move saying, well, human reason won't hold us together. You know, what will? But what happens with knowledge after this is this the same sort of fragmentation gets institutionalized in our higher education. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: And so now this is why you have departments. And I mean, just think about the way most universities are laid out. You have this department over here, you've got this, the economic department over here, philosophies over here. If there is a theology school, it's over here in this other corner, and then you've got the humanities, and you've got the social sciences, the music…

And the, and students might move from one to the other, but there's no real integration between the different departments. There, there isn't a field of inquiry or study that really integrates these things together.



Wilson: And so, even down to now, you see it. You might have a university, but within the departments, I mean… I’ve, I've been there. And, and I, and I think comparing the university I work at to others, we’re better at it than other places where I've seen this try to happen. But you try to have an interdisciplinary dialogue and it's a total circus. 

Julius: Totally.

Wilson: It's a, it’s a massive exercise in misunderstanding each other and talking past each other. And so I guess, what, what is it— to, to speak to your question— what does it look and feel like? I think it looks like that. And I guess what it looks and feels like, I guess on that feeling question, I'll share a little story.

A couple of years ago I was teaching a class and we were going through this material. Um. And I got onto looking at the way Christian thought has conceptualized what it means to be a person over the centuries. And how, you know, this is, in the first few centuries this is what we talked about: a human person being created an image of God, and this is how it shifts… you know, in the Medieval period. And then Reformation, post-Reformation, Modern period, looking at all of this. 

And I sat there and I thought: all of these students just, just heard exactly what I said. And the handful that are going to crush it on the test are going to give me exactly what they know I want on this test…

Julius: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Wilson: But then they're going to go to economics and they're going to hear something radically different about what a human person is. You know, depending on the school of economics, even still… you know, this could even, within that, it could sub-fragment, you know, if, if the economics teacher that they're going to go listen to is of this economic school, they're going to hear that the human being is this rational being hat makes the best rational choices based on the opportunities in front of them. 

And so this is how they, this is how the human being as an economic creature exists and functions in the world. 

And then they're going to go to their social science class. And they're going to hear about the human being, being an arbitrary construct of social forces that's beyond their personal agency, and they're going to go to philosophy and here's something totally different. 

And then they're going to go over here and they're going to hear something totally… and what got me is, here's what I think it feels like at this point for, for many of my students. I think, when I think, maybe the most poignant thing we could say about what it feels like is that it doesn't feel like much— that we're numb to it.

I don't think a single one of my students was troubled by that the way I was. To them, what it is to participate in a university, what it is to participate in school in, in gaining and participating in knowledge for them has basically just devolved into performance. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: And it’s: "Well, I'm in this classroom… and in this classroom, this prof is the one with the power and the influence, so if I care about the grade, I'm going to give that prof what they want.” 

Julius: Right.

Wilson: “And when I'm in this classroom, studying this subject, I'm going to give this prof what they want about what it means to be a human person. And over here, when I go to professor Ryland’s class, I'm going to give him what he wants to hear about….” 

And, and I even started to see this in the students questions when they're coming to me. And they're not just asking about, “How do you want me to format this paper?” They're talking about the content itself. And instead of being concerned with learning the stuff the way they constantly phrase it is, “What do you want?” 

What do you want when I, what do you want when I, how do you want, how would you want this expressed? Right.

And that's where it clicks to me is, is even what it is for them to go through school. They're not trying to actually participate in something bigger than us, bigger than me, bigger than this class, than this class, than this class— it's all fragmented and broken down to just that “me” in this class, the other professor in this class, than the other professor in that…

Julius: Well, that's super interesting… yeah. Cause I think one of the things that I wrote down while I was kind of processing all this leading up to this conversation was to connect it to our t- to connect it to our previous kind of conversations in the past series about like, “practice” and “external vs. internal goods”… 

It feels like the way particularly the academy, or at least like Western approach to pedagogy has been shaped, is that we've lost touch with something like the internal good of the pursuit of knowledge… that it's all primarily an external good. And it feels like the commodification of, of knowledge—that like that whole like, “Knowledge is power thing,” means like… our understanding of knowledge-as-power is that knowledge is this kind of… that our grasp of what, like, the culture and the academy defines as knowledge is like our relationship with is that we treat it almost as, as a…as a currency to achieve greater and greater arbitrary levels of achievement of like… so as a student, I, I totally like understand it.

And I felt that, like, “What, just tell me what I needed to put on the test,” because that's the point it's the external good of, like, “I just need to know what to write down so I can pass this class. Cause I need to pass this class. Cause I need a number of my GPA and I need a number of my GPA to get the certificate and I only need this certificate so I can get this job.”

But then like, what's happening is we're shaping people who don't have any connection with the internal good—we’re just good at memorizing facts and telling people what they want to hear.

Which was a super interesting thing that when you were starting to talk about—I mean, this leads kind of into that next aspect of, of “specialization,” right? When you're talking about the fragmentation and like, the seeming impossibility of different disciplines to kind of talk to one another, what you're s-you’re starting to kind of point out is what we'd talked about, I guess, in the conversation prior to this… of like our dichotomy between the subjective and the objective, like subjective and objective knowledge and how even maybe the way that we use those terms are super simplified and divorced from a deeper understanding of what that means.

But I think that we use it in a sense of like “subjective” is that which is subject to opinion. And so like, that's your opinion, this is this person's opinion. And that's just how it is. There's no way to kind of find, like, what is truly true, which would be “objective.”

And I think, sorry, like this might, this might be a lot to… 

Wilson: Run with it. 

Julius: Maybe a lot to track with, but it feels like… Our assumption is that we treat stuff like theology and the humanities as purely subjective studies.  That like, these are a lot of different opinions and interpretations on things, but we leave it at that.

There's no way that there can be something that harmonizes this… but then we'll treat something like math and science as: this is objective. And this is—and I think we find a comfort in it because we think that there's no mystery in it, but actually the deeper you go into these fields, like what you were saying, you realize that there are differing interpretations on science, different, like… and that people are engaging with it. Like, but I think that those people are few and far between to kind of get into those deeper levels. So where to go with…

Wilson: yeah, so I think what's, what's, I mean, w w we could get into a whole nother podcast series talking about the development of even the categories of subjective and objective, but a quick, just, I mean, I just a passing kind of narrative to hold that?

since, since we brought that. Those terms into the conversation is I think something that's important for people to understand is especially in the 20th century and especially in the latter half of the 20th century, there were lots of schools of thought.

 And, and the way we, because this comes out of a time, it grows up in a time where we're already so fragmented. You know what you start to see popping up. Yeah. Certain sociologists, certain theologians, certain philosophers, right. And now, even within these, the what, the, the kind of common move or what all these different people shared is something that was shared in common regardless of whether or not they professed religious belief.

So what I'm about to talk about there were, there were Christian, there were Jewish. There were there were Muslim and. There were atheistic philosophers, sociologists, whatever they would make a common move. And one of these common moves is we've got, there has to be some kind of knowledge that holds us together in some kind of harmony.

There, there has to be a way to know this. And so I think maybe what I would say. So like one. The brightest and has been probably one of the most influential for me is Martin Heidegger. And this is what sets off his whole project that like made his career, made his, his name in philosophy is is he was, he was working within a, they call it a phenomenological school of philosophy, which is really like, okay, look, when, when you break this stuff down into these arbitrary rationalistic categories, we get so divorced from everyday life. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: And so let's just. And he never, you know, he actually trained as he, he early on trained in theology, but left that and never picked it back up and never again, like claimed any sort of religious beliefs. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: but he says, as soon as we set things up within the categories of subjective or objective, we don't actually like understand the way we, we really live and we lose the whole thing.

And so he's moving towards some sort of like, Yeah.

you might, there might be that thing that is not me. Right. And there's me, which is the knower, but, but there's gotta be a kind of communion between these things, Right.

And so knowledge is not just passing certain facts about this other thing from one spot to another, transmitting it from here to another, especially in the things that matter most in life.

Like if you come down and you, and you think that like scientific method is the only thing that can give you any kind of knowledge of an object outside of your brain, then even in relationship, like I, according to that criteria, I can not know that my wife loves. I can know she's here often. I can collate a lot of data about how much time she spends with me and that she doesn't leave and go live in a different. Right. I can, I can quantify the number of times that she's kissed me, that she's spoken, incur. Well, even that I don't know that I could quantify encouraging words cause encouraging words now were right. Whether they're words, I can't know that they're incorrect. They were intended to be encouraging that they actually ultimately were in.

Right. All I can say whether or not she loves me. I can't know that if we're talking about just data. 

Julius: Yeah. 

Wilson: And so I think maybe, maybe even better, that was kind of a long excursus, but pulling it or sidetrack, you know, but pulling it right back in to the main point here, I would suggest that maybe a. A better way to talk to think about the categories, because you can have both of these and these can work together as dimensions of the same thing.

These do not have to be set up as. 

Julius: Ooh. 

Wilson: sort of polarized, this is a subjective thing or an objective thing. You can have both of these things and they can both be necessary, have roles to play and work together even as they're distinguished. And as you think about like propositional knowledge, this is facts.

These are statements that we can weigh and judge that we can evaluate, right? Propositiaonal knowledge and participatory knowledge. 

Julius: Yeah, 

Wilson: Participatory knowledge is the thing. Like you hold it together. Like, I’d insist this. I know my wife loves me. Right?

But if I try to prove that in only propositional, only rationalist, only scientific methods, I cannot prove that… but I can, I can experience that, and I can know that by participating in what our relationship is.


Wilson: And, and that only comes though when you've got some sort of shared way of life. And this is now, this is bringing it back to the crux of the matter. What we fragmented was a shared common way of life. 

Julius: Hm.

Wilson: what used to be institutionally. Was common practices and a way of life that let us participate in something good.

Right. And yes, the theology played a central organizing role in this one. And now it's pulled together the series because of its object. What it's seeking to know that the object of its inquiry is God, the source of all things. The only thing, conceptually, philosophically, that is capable of holding all things to.

In all its richness is and all this diversity with all the different potentiality, right. Is God. And so from that to ask, if it comes from God, then what is this thing that gives us a way to begin right. To, to ask that question that religious question, but what is it? Right. And so now, if it is this, it has all this power and this potential, it could be used for this.

It could be put to this purpose, right. And. And then to think about the final goal, right? This is its essence, its nature. What's its final goal. If it has this power, what would be a good use of this in a way that it would integrated with other things? How could it bring wholeness and goodness, like an example of how specialized knowledge just kind of runs away with the game.

It can end up totally backfiring. If it's severed from these kinds of religious theological questions of like. But what is it in that sense? Not what is it made of? Not, not how much energy does it contain? Not, not that sort of description, but that, that more mysterious question of like, but, but what is it and what could it do when it's severed from that?

You know, you think of like, what, what are modified food is we, we know so much about what makes up the food that we can get in there and start manipulating it. And we are incredibly good now at making tons and tons of. 

Julius: Yeah,

Wilson: And this is where we would say when it's severed, you know, again, you're, it's not that you're not going to have some kind of end goal, some sort of main purpose or reason or meaning is just, what's going to determine it.

And right now what's institutionalized is consumerism and consumption. And so. Since we had this knowledge, that knowledge has been untethered from religious questions. And so it's been freed and I know we tend to think of being free is only a good thing. But here I'm saying this is. Proven to be a good thing, that it has been freed to serve the goal of consumption. so we, we know this much about it. We can modify it and so we can make more of it than we've ever had. And look at all this food, but guess what? We've so manipulated it, that the very food that we're eating is poisoning some of it. right. It's backfired on us. 

Julius: Oh 

Wilson: And so instead of nourishing us and providing, providing for life it's causing cancer, like the, the opposite of what is supposed to be.

And so, so what we're, what we're making the case for recovering and reintegrating is, is noticing what has been institutionally. How this has restricted us from being able to do participate in a shared way of knowing and think about what is it to recover that, to get, to get back to a place where no, we don't, we don't run from deep questions.

We don't run from it. You know, this knowledge, like we said, in the story that wasn't good for theology too, but where theology and. Can play its role in helping us form a shared life together that allows us to participate together in something good instead of just further fragmenting and this and this thing.

And having those off towards the goals determined by institutionalized consumerism. 

Julius: Yeah. That's really interesting. I feel like are you talking about there with, yeah. Like if. If we think that like freeing up knowledge is just kind of Like the ability to do, to do whatever we want and kind of like increasingly when the point becomes about accruing knowledge itself and like, what can we do and what can technology do?

And we stop asking the questions of like, wait, but why, and what holds us together. And what is this directed to it's that, it's the, it reminds me of that kind of image you've brought up before of kind of like powerful things are kind of like handing. Handing a kid, a chainsaw, like a chain size, a powerful thing, and it can be directed to something good, like building a table or whatever else, but like without the proper kind of guidance or at least just like.

 A relationship to like, wow, this is a powerful thing, but this also has the power to destroy. And so we should ask, who's wielding it. We should ask how are they wielding it and towards what And I think that's the key to cause because going back to kind of your observations on what it's like, what it feels like to be a student, especially once you get to the undergraduate and maybe gradual, I mean, graduate feels like more specific to a field or whatever.

And even that whole thing, like is a part of the specialization of knowledge that we're talking about. Right. But I think on the flip side of that illustration, I think when we started talking about this, I was reflecting on my experience in undergrad and how I felt like, you know, on the contrary I felt like me and maybe like a handful of my friends, for whatever reason, I think the way that.

Engaged in school is it almost felt sometimes like Providence, that the classes that I would sign up for on a certain semester, all informed each other. Like I happened to take sociology the same semester. I was taking a philosophy class called ethics responsibility and love. And I was taking that class at the same time that I was taking a class on like liturgy and and.

I think maybe because of just like the type of person that I was and the type of person that my friends were like, that the way that we would talk about things after class would kind of tease out the connections where these things would inform each other. And it was a really beautiful thing to see how these like.

Wilson:

Julius: think there was such like a wonder about how like, wow, like this thing that I'm learning in sociology really makes me think and like puts it into conversation with this stuff we're talking about in philosophy. And I don't think that that's limited to just people who are bent towards like philosophy and the arts.

I think it's like a certain I think it's a disposition of openness and curiosity and wonder and people who ask like the why and what is this connected to? One of my, one of my good friends is like, he's, he was a math major, but he's like one of the most kind of thoughtful, like inter like his relationship with numbers and math is.

Inspiring in that, like, the reason that he does this is held by something like greater than himself. And that allows him to see connections between like math and theology. And might've just point out that the person like Brad Gregory, right? The person who wrote unintended reformation, who has served as the fodder for a lot of this conversation, like taking these, that he's a head of the department of history and that 

Wilson: but he has a master's degree in theology. So he's cross-disciplinary and it's allowing him to integrate different fields of knowledge. Yeah. And. 

Julius: Yeah. And so it's just, I, and I remember kind of bringing that to you will, and you kind of pointing out this phrase that I actually don't remember what I think you've told me a lot of times now, but the phrase that theology was considered the queen of all the science. And how there's something in what theology is getting at, or has to offer in connecting this to something greater than ourselves.

That greater thing, being God and like asking questions of why is this stuff here in the first place that helps us like that, that it, what it offers is the ability to see all of these things in harmony, like the sciences, the math, all of these subjects that we kind of fragment. And I think what it is is it's a certain.

It's a relationship to, it's a relationship to God. And therefore that informs our relationship to the world. And I think what it comes down to is like what we talk about all the time, that it's a relationship that is built out of love and a desire for communion. And when we approach knowledge in that way, then like, It's hard to just be okay with seeing things as fragmented and at its best at enables us to see things with wonder the way that things are incredibly intricately connected.

Wilson: And then, and so I, I would also say, because knowing a little bit of. Your actual schooling, the, the actual professors that you studied with that you were given, some of these tools to integrate you were, you were you were given permission to try to integrate which a lot of people don't feel like they are given permission to integrate, because if they try to do that, they're going to get laughed out of this class and they might get an a, in this one, but get an F in that one.

Right? So you're giving permission and you're giving tools to do that. And that's what we're about. This series is a part of, is trying to give more people the desire for that permission to seek that and some tools to be able to experience that kind of integration in life. Because when that happens, then, you know, hearkening back to some of the stuff you just said, we're not just free to do whatever we want. Right.

It's not just that our scientific power and our technology will let us do what we want than that. It frees us to become the kind of people that can train and wanting. What's good. And then in wanting what's discerning what's good and wanting what's good, then that, that unleashes our scientific knowledge and our power and our technology in a totally different way to serve what is good instead of.

Just serving our desires as they currently are right now. Even if those desires will solely kill us and destroy our world. 

Julius: Okay.


MEDITATION

Monks and Scientists don't have to represent warring ideals.  

We'd like to propose that a decent way to think of how we might move toward a more integrated culture that could facilitate an interactive and harmonious division of labor between scientific knowledge and Theology is to appreciate that 

Science is great at describing in increasing detail, the what and how of things. Science leads us through questions like "What is this thing made of?" Or "How does energy transfer from one set of conditions to another? From stored water to light from a bulb?"

And instead of competing for the job of explaining things, Theology is there to help us explore the "why" and the "for what" dimensions of the very same questions. 

Theology leads us through questions like, "Why would we use energy this way? What would it lead to? And would this result be good?"

It's important to see, that the fields of theology and science are already more united than we tend to appreciate at first glance.

Both fields involve reason. 

And, if we are to truly understand reason and knowledge in any depth, we must not overlook the truth that both science and theology also involve love. 

After the Reformation set off a couple of centuries of fighting rooted in passionate convictions about God, it's easy to  understand why many would turn their hopes to a dispassionate reason. But there is no such thing. 

No one will put in the time and energy necessary to engage deep and mysterious things like the subatomic make up of carbon or real questions of meaning and purpose if love is not involved. 

And once we know something, that knowledge will inevitably be used to serve what we love. So this flows right into the theological questions of whether what we love is something healing and sustaining, or consuming and destructive. 

So when we try to sever knowledge and love, faith and reason, we end up living lives full of contradictions and unnecessary gaps.

But it does little good to simply critique this aspect of the broader culture if we're not willing to let something shift in our own character. So, to engage this on a personal level:

Name a piece of knowledge you gained that proved powerful or valuable ... Think of something you understood that many other people could not engage on the same level you could. 

And can you also name a moment that that knowledge became severed from Love? 

Maybe you used your expertise to help develop a highly addictive and anxiety-producing social media app. 

Or you used some sensitive information to shame and tarnish the reputation of someone you were afraid might be some kind of threat to you.

Or you won another argument, but lost yet another friend or lover. 

But now, just bring some of the basics of Theology into your understanding and use of knowledge. 

Along with teaching that God is the source of all things, one of the most foundational ideas of Christian thought is that this source is not just some mindless energy, but that God is love. 

And since the reason of both Science and Theology involve love, what both long for and serve is a larger communion. 

When you research with love, you're not just seeking facts. You're seeking some level of communion with the thing you are studying. 

And when you genuinely communion with God, you're not only sharing a private oneness with some mysterious entity, but also uniting with everything that God loves, and everything that God's love produces.  

So name a time your knowledge and love came together. Think of a moment when your understanding unlocked a larger flourishing and communion for you and the the people and things around you.

In that moment, you didn't just feel smart did you?

You felt alive. And grateful.  

Moments like that are times we glimpse something of our vocation, of what we were put here on this earth to do.

Because those moments, my friends, are times we participate in God.

And just what would become of your knowledge and power if you also learned to love the One who loves and wills the good of everything?

Disintegrated 1 - The Reformation


INTRO 

In this series we will look into the distant past to see how a famous Religious movement unintentionally helped marginalize God and fragment our contemporary lives. 

Over the course of 500 years, we will watch theology and money, power, science, and human creativity drift apart, then go to war with each other.

Not just because tracing this disintegration helps us understand contemporary conflicts.

Not just because of the strange beauty that can be found watching things fall apart. 

And definitely not because we think some long-lost glory days held all things in perfect harmony.  

We do this to give you permission to pay attention to the deep intuition telling you the things we seek to understand and use when we do things like science and politics, economics and art, really do want to belong together, to help you see that we cannot know and use these things well if we continue to ignore their desire for belonging.

We do this to fuel an imagination for wholeness.  So for us, this peek into the distant past is not really about the past, but a future integrated in Christ. 


STORY

With this whole series we are building off the work of a historian named Brad Gregory, so treat this opening as a kind of all-embracing footnote. If you want to explore any or all of this in greater depth, we will be linking his Book: The Unintended Reformation: How a Religious Revolution Secularized Society, in the show notes for every episode. 

But before we get into the weeds with what all this means and why, let's start with some basic facts from the distant past: on October 31, 1517, a monk and college professor named Martin Luther sent to his Archbishop a copy of 95 Theses - which were 95 different points for debate Luther had drafted. It is also possible Luther nailed a copy of the Theses to a door at All Saints' Church in Wittgenberg, because This was the way University folk of that day would announced their intention to debate and allow others to begin formulating their arguments. 

One of the key issues Luther wanted to hash out was the Church's sale of plenary indulgences - which were certificates church members could buy that, they were told, would reduce the amount of time they or their loved ones would have to spend in purgatory atoning for their sins. Luther also wanted to debate some of the finer points of connected issues like sin, guilt, punishment, faith, repentance, and forgiveness. 

But this set of theses ended up being widely published and read, and started something much bigger than an academic debate. They ignited what history later named the Protestant Reformation, a religious and cultural movement that radically altered life in Europe.

To some within the Christian Tradition, the story of the reformation is told as a grave schismatic error. Other Christians tell this story as the moment Christianity rediscovered the pure gospel.

But, in 2021, for most in Western culture, the question isn't which of these stories rightly holds the facts together. The question is, "So what?" 

For many, before they consider the Reformation with any seriousness, they need to be shown why they should care at all.

[MUSIC]

And this isn't just the case for those who are increasingly making sense of themselves and their world without religious faith. Many Christians wonder why they should care about the events of the Reformation. I mean, how much could things that happened 500 years ago possibly impact things that happen today?

Their world was so different from ours, why would anyone continue to care to understand the people of the distant past? What do monks and princes and indulgences have to say to those of us wrestling with technological isolation and overstimulation while trying to make sense of and navigate contemporary fights between Wall Street v. Main Street, Universities and Captial Hill?  

To provide an answer as to why we should care, let's look at some other past events and see if they might end up being in some way similar to the events of the Reformation. 

Say a person learns about another man who, when he was a boy, bravely, but just barely, rescued his younger brother from drowning after he fell through the ice on a frozen lake, then he married his high-school sweetheart but soon after suffered a terrible divorce, lost his business in the 2008 economic disaster, then re-married and started a mentoring program for underprivileged youth. 

Now, all these facts, taken as they are with no further story to hold them, might lead that someone to feel something of the highs and lows the other man had experienced. 

But then let's say the fuller story here is not just that someone is learning someone else's backstory, but they are hearing about these past events as they sit across from, and learn the backstory of, their own father.

Now, because they understand the events of the past shaped the man who shaped so much of the environment in which they learned to think and feel and act, those events generate more than empathy. They shed light on who they are, and why they are who they are. 

Now, with that story holding those facts, that person doesn't just cognitively understand or emotionally connect with why the events of the past matter. 

In a very real and important way, that story has shifted the very nature of the events -- to the point it's no longer even accurate to label them "past." They are present and alive and working in the way their mind processes complex information and how their gut responds to adversity, they way they show or fail to express romantic interest in another person, and on and on and on ... those historical events continue living in new event after new event of that person's life.  

[MUSIC]

By Winter of 1521, Pope Leo the 10th had excommunicated Martin Luther. Which, the Pope believed put Luther outside of the Church. Because up to this moment that is exactly what excommunication had meant. But this time, another Church grew up around Luther, called the Protestant Church. Some princes and kings and heads of Europe's institutional life would join forces with the Protestants while others would reinforce their commitment to the Catholic Church. And  once this became a full institutional rift, The Reformation spread beyond politics and religion and impacted all other key areas of institutional life -- like economics and education -- and by the end of the next few centuries, nothing would ever look the same again. 

Over the next few weeks, we will make the case that the story that best holds together the facts of the Reformation  is very close to something like one person sitting down and learning about the events that shaped the personalities of their own parents. 

Even though Luther's Theses and their fallout was all long ago, in this series, beginning with the following conversation, we'll explore why the events of the Reformation are not dead and buried with history textbooks for caskets, but but are still living, in us, and continuing to shape the way our own world unfolds. 


DISCUSSION [Auto-Generated Transcript]

Julius: Welcome back to all things as we pick up on a new series today, once again, this is Julius

Wilson: ...and Wil.

Julius: ...Wil. 

Wilson: The gesture was great. I wish people could have seen when, when you handed it over to me to introduce myself,

Julius: That’s right. There was a very elaborate hand gesture on Zoom as if to present…

Wilson: it was a f-a flourish. I feel like flourish is the word that I, I feel like…

Julius: It certainly was. That's a great word. Well, we've, we've just…coming out of this story we've kind of addressed how though we tend to view history as something that's kind of like disconnected or something that happened in the past…we’re starting to make the case for how history has a lot to…not just show us about like ourselves in terms of like drawing parallels, but like directly we can trace threads as to like where we are and how like our view of the world and how we interact with one another. 

How we interact with the world is shaped by these events in history. So we're talking today to start off this series, we're talking about the importance of the reformation as an event. 

And so I want to pose the question of this was obviously like a massive historical event for the church, but in what ways does that story and that event matter Like, does it matter just for the realm of religion or does it, is it something that like ripples over into how the rest of like a philosophy or realms outside of just Christianity have been shaped?

Wilson: And in response to that question, what I'm going to do with the listener you listener I'm going to deposit a check that we will gradually cash over the course of this whole series. But what we hope to show as we cash that check is, is how the reformation doesn't just matter for religious folks or people who are still in the church, or for some reason are interested in philosophy or religion or religious history that this shapes.

 So like every dimension of our lives. And I think of it like. When people first start to kind of connect with history meaning like th they make the kinds of connections that gives it some force or some power and like taps into like deeper levels. And like, we start to make the connection on just on one dimension.

And then it's, it's kind of like a connection with the chain of dominoes, you know, you start to see, oh, Well, when Martin Luther did this, then that started this and then that, and dah, dah, dah, dah. And that's where if we just see that dimension, that's, that's why we would think, okay, for those of you that still care about the church or still care about religion or whatever it may be, maybe we could see how those connections there, but how does that domino stream connect to me?

 If you're outside or, you know, Not interested for whatever reason. And to answer that, I would say we've got to move beyond just dominoes because yes, there is that, you know, there are those direct cause and effects links, but, but larger, what we're talking about is that the history doesn't matter to us now, just because, you know, the Domino's.

And, and that chain of dominoes happened to fall into a domino that involves me. It's a whole paradigm shift and what we're trying to, the case that we will make as we move through this. That what happened at the reformation shifted began a process of shifting something much, much bigger. And so there to see what we're saying, I think you get it beyond the dominoes.

Think thank more like glasses that if, if you have a certain like prescription.

prescribe prescription or set of lenses over your eyes, it shapes how you see the whole world. And. The, the Christian faith at the time of the reformation was such an institutionalized worldview, meaning it shaped how they understood and thought about every single thing.

And the effects of it were not that we just took the glasses off or we threw them away. Is it shaped now the glasses that we're wearing? And so we'll, we'll trace, we'll trace on the domino level, the effects between. You know, not just, and we will start with religion. We'll start with God. I think as our next episode, how, how God was thought of previously and how we, and the many different ways we can think of God now and how that's affected and how radically different those things can be.

But we'll see. You know that chain of how, how that shaped our theology, but we're also going to look at how, what happened in the reformation shaped the way we do politics shaped the way we do schooling and education. And so shaped the way that now we think about what knowledge is and how you obtain it, and what, what would provide valid evidence for trusting something economics money, how we, how we even think of value and ascribe, things of value, and then trade things of value after a handful of episodes when we've changed.

Down this chain of dominoes. And now this chain of dominoes, you know, theology dominoes, and how economics dominoes, and, and now knowledge and education dominoes, and then politics and power Domino's that the cumulative cumulative effect of that will be to lead us to see, oh, it's not just Domino's, it's also like the glasses things that this, because.

You know, because of what happened back then, it has shown it is just so shaped the world that we're in and it affects the way that we see absolutely every area of life. Now, harking back to the story, like the way, you know, growing up in your parents' home. Shapes everything about how you, you think of like yourself, your world, what, what you do feel and what you think about those things that you feel all of that associated by the home that you grew up in.

You know, that when we're talking, what we're tracing here is like the culture of the Western household and how profoundly that, that whole household began to shift back then. And so radically influences who we are and how we see things. Right to then make the case. That understanding that helps us come to hopefully clear as clear as a way for a more truthful understanding of who we are. And so gives us some sort of insight and guidance into how we could become who we want to become.

Julius: Hmm. So diving into the specifics of the reformation as a grand event that affects everything, everything that comes after it Can, can we talk about I mean, reform movements don't come about unless like people perceive that there's something that needs changing, that there's something broken or corrupt that needs fixing what exactly were the leaders of this movement reacting against in how the church was doing things in the time?

Wilson: It's fairly common knowledge that one of the major things Luther was reacting against was indulgences and what he perceived as kind of a an earning of our salvation by doing things that impress God which in Christianese is works righteousness. But I think it's. Enlightening necessary. Good for us to really understand that, to go a little bit further back and kind of challenge the what, what history and philosophy of history has pretty thoroughly debunked recently. it's been called the great man theory of history, which is, you know, Hey, there's this one incredibly significant personality, say like a Napoleon or a Martin Luther and this personality by, by the force of just strictly that their, their personality, they change the course of this whole Western culture.

Everything like that. Now, Luther is, is an incredibly significant figure, but Luther's critiques and what Luther didn't said. I mean, it's, he was a match. We could say that for sure. But. Even even a lit match, doesn't create the kind of explosion that the reformation caused if there weren't, if there wasn't powder strewn about already, you know?

And so to challenge the kind of like. Great man, individually, this, this powerful individual personality changed everything theory. It helps us to see that there was a general dissatisfaction that had been brewing for a good long. And when I say good long while, I mean, centuries, and that general dissatisfaction is kind of like the.

There was strewn about, there was, there was in the air so that when Luther as this kind of like fiery personality, when that match is struck, that's why it doesn't just, you know, and then burn out. But there's a massive boom. So going back a couple of centuries in general, we could just say as, for a while, the church had just got pulled into playing the game of power, the way the world plays the game of power.

 A few concrete instances of this would be starting around this period in the centuries before the reformation. Generally the culture is starting to think about power and states and politics in new different ways. And it's the beginning of what we now like live in what we understand as a nation state.

 And, and those sorts of political ideas are just starting to germinate and blossom. And there were some other local princes rulers. Royal families that notice there's some things that are shifting here and being opportunistic people. If we, if we play this right and really go forcefully, we could seriously extend our power and our influence.

And so they're taking these sorts of ideological political shifts and, and trying to extend their power, their influence. And it became a threat to not just the established powers, but I mean, think about the people on the ground. It it's by. Invasion by, by taking over by you know, just forcing and violence.

And so in general, everybody knew something needed to be done. And just like, today's still the Pope, even though the Pope was, you know, the head of the, you know, the the head of Christendom, the Pope in theory had no. Temporal power or what we might think we might use the word secular had notes, secular power unless it had moral implications and this definitely had moral implications, something definitely needed to be done.

And with the way things are set up, people kind of looked to the Pope. So the Pope handled this situation. Take care of, of some people that in general, most people thought, Hey, this dude, these people, they need to be put in their place, but the way they did it tarnished the Pope and not, not just the individual Pope, but the papacy, it tarnished the people's ideas of the whole, the whole office.

 And I mean just when you, when you hear stories, The Pope being ultimately responsible for something like a dude being sewn up in a sack with poisonous Vipers and thrown into the ocean. You can't help but wonder like, is this really the one that we want to be heading up the church? And this trickles down through a general moral decay, that's moved throughout the whole administration of the church. They'd been, they'd been practicing for awhile. The, the practice what's called simony, which means selling a church office. So you could sell a priesthood or you could sell, and even more importantly, Seat and as politics and temporal worldly power and the religious systems got more and more intertwined for a lot of local princes, they needed the income that came from having an office, like a church, Bishop position.

And so they could literally just buy it. That was Simon that you could buy the office over the counter in Rome. But some of these princes got so kind of overextended living beyond their means that to continue to have the and think like celebrities, you expect them to have a lavish lifestyle. People expected their princes to live lavishly.

And so they got so overextended that to continue to be able to live the way that people expected them to they had to hold two or three offices. So you would have, you know, people that you have to all sorts of. That in the parish system for the Catholic church, it's really concretely tied to a specific locality, but when, so when you have somebody that has. different bishops seats. And those bishops seats are tied to specific places. That person can't be three places at one time. And so you would have an official overseer who wasn't actually doing the job of overseer and like in a Bishop is supposed to be like a pastor to pastors. And so when that is, when that care's not given the whole thing just ended up devolving.

 And you see there, like the connection between. Good administration. And on the ground spiritual health, it would get to that place where you would have, you know, a priest that didn't, he maybe didn't even understand the words of the mass. And there are stories of priests just getting up there and just mumbling nonsense, literally nothing because they didn't, they couldn't read the liturgy books.

They couldn't pronounce it or. Or hold mass correctly and there's no Bishop there to actually correct. To train, to oversee. And, and so just there's there was a whole complex of things for centuries that are roaded people's trust. And that's what it comes down to. I mean, similar to the kinds of things that are, are fermenting, our contemporary desires for reform.

It's a, it's an erosion of trust and. Again, and the main point in this is to set up, to see like why even if Luther was like, you know, even if he is a big match, know, even if he a butane lighter still, if there's not explosive gas in the air, that flame is only gonna go so far. And this is all this stuff that had been there and there had been, there had been reform movements for a good long while several they had called counts. To try to change things they had, there'd been a whole movement called the conciliar movement. One of my favorite books came out of this the imitation of Christ by Thomas a campus. He was part of what it translated. You know, they said it in Latin. Latin's awesome. But it translated it's the modern devotion.

 And he was part of this. It was in, it was the kind of it was, it was a monastic but unofficial monastic movement to try to reform the church grassroots from the inside, but what it comes down to, is there a handful of post. Especially, and then because of them and how they place the people around them, like six discs, the fourth Leo, the 10th Alexander the sixth, there was, there was a string of Pope's to be fair to them, they were very, very good at some things, but they were just good at the wrong thing.

For that office, you know, had they been princes or politicians? History might remind them, remember them as geniuses, but because they were supposed to be leading the church, it actually ended up at roading people's confidence for a good while before Luther shows up on the scene.

Julius: Right. So all of these conditions, right. That led to. The, the, the match lighting or the explosion happening, these seem like kind of valid things to be, to put it lightly, like, worked up, worked up about that. It's like, like erosion of trust, moral decay, like definitely needed to be done.

Exactly. Yeah. Church like ma mob boss. Pope's tossing people with snakes into the ocean.

Like it does, it does sound like, okay, something does need to be done. This needs fixing this is broken. But it, it feels as though, or you will, depending on where you land on like the theological spectrum or what, like tradition. I like, which part of the Christian tradition you identify with, like the, the reformation can be either seen as like a tragic event or like the event where we got it right.

Where we got the gospel. Right. But I think we're trying to make the case that maybe it's not quiet.

Wilson: It's it's, it's a quite a bit more complicated. Yes.

Julius: Yeah, that there are complicated, like massive implications for the way that the reformation happened. So even given the validity of some of the ways that like the ref, like some reform needed to happen, can we talk about With some of the pitfalls of how the reformers may have done things that led to employee like that led to implications that rippled out that were less than positive for how we're doing things in the church.

Now.

Wilson: So the way I'm going to answer that question, hopefully my answer itself is clear, you know, understandable. But if you understand what I'm going to say, especially for those of our listeners who are Protestant, it might complicate some of the story for us. The intention there. Well, I will say there is intention there, and I want to just name that upfront two cards on the table and not have that be a secret.

The intention there is because I don't is tied to the fact that we have some deep, deep symphony. And these are not secret. If you listen to more than one episode of the podcast, or even just paid attention to the titles, but we have deep sympathies with the deep strands of the Catholic Orthodox faith.

 And we're convinced that that, that still has so much good to offer our. And so with like one foot in our moment, in our time and place 2021 Western culture, there's a need for reform. And we're convinced that an important part of that reform is recovering things that have been obscured lost so that we can continue to offer that well in the world.

Right. So when I go into this story about Luther. And our take on Luther, which I think is, I think it's a truthful one. It's definitely by, by the scholarly historical material, it's a defendable position, but, but we'll tell it in this way to hopefully yes. Challenge, especially some of our more like very convinced Protestant brothers and sisters challenged the idea that, Hey, of course, something needed to be done.

And of course, what we did was what needed to be done because there was no. It definitely went awry there, definitely some deep unintended consequences of how Luther, Calvin and others went about it. That is creating exactly the conditions we're experiencing today that are making us feel the need for reform.

So I'm going to complicate the story hopefully to help us see where are some missteps and where are some things that we can look for so that if we're going to maybe we'll actually reform and not just further split the body of.

Julius: Okay.

Wilson: I'll say it this way. Luther started off as a genuine reformer,

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: And even in his tactics and his way, he went about it at the beginning, he was intending to reform you.

We've got to remember. We remember Luther as you know, the Protestant, but Luther for the, the formative years of his life was an incredibly devout Catholic. He. Was raised Catholic. He entered a Catholic monastery on a very rigorous, very stern Augustinian monastery. He became the Catholic chair of biblical theology and hinge in his universe. And he began working out his critiques and his ideas as a Catholic priest and a teacher in a Catholic school. And that's, and that's not just saying, oh yeah, of course he had to be because that's the only institution that was around. But he was really in his heart. A Protestant from no, no, no. He was Catholic in his heart.

And the places like when he begins to critique indulgences, he does it from. The very Catholic foundation. It's, it's the deep roots of the historic Christian faith. They give him grounds to push off on to critique the way like indulgences were being sold and how certain, and even, even the idea of indulgence is tied to something. That's true about the Christian faith. You go back a couple centuries before the roots of indulgence has come from. I think it was Pope Clement, but all he did all he really emphasizes is the fact that in the body of Christ we're in this. And we can carry each other's burdens. And sometimes if, and it's, it's true and it, it, it, it is spiritually true.

Like if, if I'm in a moment when I'm incredibly weak, dry weary, but Julius is spiritually strong, Julius can help carry me. And, and what they're beginning to emphasize is this Christian Catholic and Catholic, they're being honest, you know, universally Christian, understanding that if. You have some strength and some merit, you can grant that to me and help me as a, as a weaker brother or sister right now.

That's good and true. And in what Luther uses is that deep, true Catholic Christian thought to push off on how indulgences have warped and twisted that teaching. And he calls out. The churches in certain ways, the way the church has bowed to power and money, but he does it from like the, what he had been given by the church.

And even as far as his tactics, he does it as a reformer. He works out his theology. He works out his ideas about faith and grace from a biblical Augustinian standpoint and openly in his lectures for decades. He talks about this stuff. And when he gets to. Like the worst abuses of indulgences were being carried out in the parish, right next door, the parish of Mainz right next door to Luther.

So Tet soul is the guy, the preacher that he was just really, really good at terrifying people. And then really, really good at convincing them that the solution is just to give the church some money. And so you would hear all the coins plopping in his pot at the end of his sermon, right? This is Tesla is doing this right next door to Luther.

Luther is working out his. Openly. And then when he hears about how this is happening, he begins to reform the way a loyal member of the church would seeking the good of the body of Christ. He calls for debate. He calls for action. He asks the bishops, can we meet and talk about this? This is a serious ordeal, but he's ignored.

And this is part of what, and this is what trickles down from the way that those few Pope's had been leading things. They were great at the wrong thing. And so that shapes the culture. And so when Luther is calling them to good things, the bishops ignore him. And this, this is the pattern for the first bit, because they just assume, you know what?

Yeah, Luther he's fiery he's this and that, but he's only up there in that kind of, it's a relatively insignificant parish over there and what's now Germany, you know, and they thought he was ignorable. And they didn't start to pay attention until they realized, oh, there's a lot of gunpowder in the air. So when he lights, this match stuff is happening.

But at that point it was too late and you see the. You see the transition and Luther, where he moves from genuine reformer and you watch, and at the beginning, you, you read a sermons, you read his tracks, he's thoroughly Catholic, but it's like the, the being ignored. And then the kind of opposition, he felt forced him into becoming the later Luther. And that's when it becomes incredibly problematic to where in his thing. I think with faith Luther found something that he was a very melancholy. I mean, I would not be at all surprised to learn. He was an Enneagram for just a depressive melancholy beating up on himself constantly internally, you know, maybe a one, maybe a one, but but he found something in faith that touched his private.

Right. But then he universalized that in a way that became problematic because he, he, he led us to a system where we ignore where, where, yes, we see that faith is important for Paul, but he led to an understanding of faith where we ignore some other parts that are just as important to Paul. Like Ephesians two is a classic faith passage.

And it says, you know, it's by faith. You've been saved, not, you know, anything else. It's by faith in the grace of God. But in that light, it's like one sentence. It's one thought flow. The whole point is this is the faith that unlocks it. That allows us to do good work. And he, he says so far and this isn't like a, Ooh, this is a nice side.

Benefit is good. Works to Paul it's. It's central to who we are. He says, this is for you were created for good works. This is what you are made for, and this faith flours into it. But Lutherans up, setting up a dichotomy, a problematic where faith and works are seen as like in opposite. And this isn't just problematic for like an internal theory like this.

This is integral to the internal consistency of the whole Christian story. About about God's good creation leading to goodness and truth. And so it should, if salvation and faith is happening as it should, that goodness should flow out of us. Right. And, and, and if we can become these basically terrible people, but it all gets wiped away and it's okay.

W w you eventually. Right. Begins to crack and down the road, you start to see more and more people as the culture is shaped by this way of thinking, finding it totally irrelevant in con dismissible. Right. And, and this is how it plays out in Western culture. I mean, when it gets to the point that Luther calls the book of James, an epistle of straw, because James.

Too on the nose about doing good things. And when you have, when you have a Bible scholar moving to the place where they're calling a book of the cannon straw and kind of wishing, and it's also anti-Semitic to that was another part of, of Luther's reasons for his, it was a two, it was two Jewish. And that should tip us off that.

Okay. Maybe he found something that helped him in some way, but as far as like a whole system, there, there are some things here that are putting up some warning flags that should give us

Julius: yeah, yeah.

Wilson: And the bottom line with all of this is as it moved from, from reform

Julius: Huh.

Wilson: and doing it as a reformer within the church to a schismatic use, then see Luther and the reformers play the same power games.

And that's one of the most, the biggest ironies of the whole thing is the church playing the power games for centuries is what led to the condition. Right where there's powder in the air, the desire for reform and those reformers end up playing the exact same power games. We, we know Luther and Calvin's names, not because they had the best ideas and not because they were, we know Luther and Calvin's name to a large degree because Lutheran Calvert, Calvin had.

 Princes and city councils get behind them and support them

Julius: yeah.

Wilson: There were some, some of these groups that were part of, you know, these these local princes that were seeing an opportunity to extend their power. And th that saw Luther. If we could get him on his side, get him on our side, he could help us with this too.

And so Luther escapes with his life because of the prince that, that scurries him off to his castle, hides him away and princess stuff and distributes it for his own agenda too. And, and Calvin becomes Calvin because Geneva basically gives him the keys to the city and says, run our city. And because these worldly powers back, these people this, this is why they're called. Magisterial reformers. Cause they, they had worldly powers get behind them too. And, and it's not very long before Luther. Irony of ironies. You know, it's not very long before Luther is putting down a peasant, revolt in violent is calling for he didn't himself, like take up arms, but called for and gave permission to violently, put down a peasant revolt.

And you have Calvin sentencing people to death and Geneva that it, that again, just begins to erode the genuine respectability authority of, of the church because they got caught up in the same old.

Julius: Yeah.


MEDITATION

Given the current divisiveness of our world, especially over matters of religious belief and practice, it becomes very tempting for Christians to either gloss over the failures of the church, or to treat them in a way that would feed cynicism and the false belief that we can totally jettison the past and start from some Radical Zero. 

But there is no starting from Zero. As the twentieth-century writer William Faulkner, put it in a book titled Requiem for a Nun, "The past is never dead. It's not even past." 

Which sounds so counter-intuitive, but it sounds this way not because what Faulkner wrote is not true. It sounds this way because of the current state of our intuitions. 

To feel the truth of Faulkner's words, think of one instance from the past that greatly influenced the personality of one of you primary care-givers.

And now think about how their personality has influenced the way you think and feel.

The past may be confusing, and is often painful. So we understand why people would be tempted to try to barricade past events up in history, to burn all the systems and traditions we've inherited, sever all ties, and start from some radical Zero.

But just imagine you look at some part of your parent's personality or one of their habits and decide, I never want to be like that, and then work to never be like that. You're not actually severing all ties from that personality trait or habit, you're actually forming and strengthening a new bond with it. Defining yourself in some kind of rebellious relation to that very thing you think you are leaving behind. 

On a larger scale, even seeking to burn down traditions and jettison inherited ways of thinking is not a break with the past, not really. It is a reaction to what from the past is still present and alive.

And every time we try to break with everything that came before, we start from a place of nieve ignorance, which is the perfect condition for us to invent new traditions and methods for the same old mistakes. This almost guarantees we are going to justify new ways of perpetrating the same evils.  Just look how the Reformers ended up captive to the very same worldly powers as those they were reacting against, and either justifying what they'd done, or being totally unaware of it, because they were so sure they were right about God and definitely were not like those other people. 

So we will not gloss over the failures of the past, nor will we tell the story in a way that could feed cynicism or childish rebellion. 

Which is a challenge, but we found an inspiring Guide in St. Ignatius of Loyola. He lived and taught right in the middle of the Reformation's tumult. And one of his most enduring practices that came through him in this season, is called the Examen. 

The point of the Examen is to become more aware of God's presence and unconditional love in the midst of whatever happened to constitute our day. And this is also, we believe, the key to hearing the truth about something like the Reformation in a way that could lead to something redemptive.

So, let's spend the next couple minutes practicing the key moves of Ignatius' Examen. They're really quite simple.

First, just find as still an environment as you can, quiet your mind to the best of your ability in the moment, and begin to review the events of your day.

Don't judge the events yet by trying to take your mind to what you thought was most exciting or significant, or by dismissing events because they seem too ordinary. Simply let the memories come. 

Then, invite God to show you where God was present.

And ask God to help you understand how you responded - not just to the event, but to God's presence.

That's it. 

We tend to begin by noticing the obviously good and redemptive things, but, just like jogging or smiling or any number of other simple acts can have huge effects if habituated, over time, the Examen helps us develop the skills to become aware of evidence of God's presence in moments and acts we would have previously totally overlooked. 

With practice, we start to notice some small and insignificant acts would not have happened without God's help - like simply staying silent instead of blurting something funny but unhelpful. 

And then, with even more practice, our instincts for God sharpen to the point we begin to recognize God's presence in moments of darkness and regret.

And so, slowly, the practice can help fill us with the conviction that absolutely nothing can take us to a place where God's presence and love is not real.

And the truth this practice shows us, is not just true on the personal level. In a personal way, the Examen invites us into a truth that permeates every level of reality. 

So, in light of the fuller story of the Reformation, and remembering this practice was developed in the middle of it's cluster of conflict and failures, we can see, one of the things Ignatius was teaching Christ's people, is how to view things well. 

So as this series progresses, we invite you to treat it as an extended, corporate, examen of consciousness. Let it be training in our awareness of, and response to, God's presence even in the middle of our own confusion and sins.

Because the real hope for a future united in Christ is not centered in our awareness of how the past is still in us, and our perfecting ourselves by deciding not to be like those fools, but simply our faithful response to Christ's presence and love as it permeates our mess.

If this is who God is and what God does, what would God be doing in you?

And the third [article of the rule of faith] is the Holy Spirit, by whom the prophets prophesied and the patriarchs were taught about God and the just were led into the path of justice, and who in the end of times was poured forth in a new manner upon [people] all over the earth renewing [humanity] to God.

How is the Spirit present in this moment and this text, leading you into the  path of justice and renewing you in God?

How is the Spirit pulling you into the biblical narrative, where two histories, ours and God's, always intertwine, but where God is always the primary actor, but who also always acts like we see Jesus act.

So how is the Spirit present now, in your reading, in this moment, inviting you not to escape the difficulties of a fallen creation, but to join God in moving it toward a splendid vision of creation's renewal through communion with God?

How is your engagement of this difficult text becoming the occasion for you to see and join the story of the world going out from God, and returning to God?

Precedented 8 - St. Irenaeus, The Rule of Faith, and Those Nasty Parts of the Bible


INTRO 

True, we've never before had a nearly-instantaneous, nearly-worldwide network connected to devices in our pockets alerting us to rising temperatures and the temperamental outbursts of tyrants or the spread of malicious insects and viruses. 

And being constantly aware of all this can feel disorienting and surreal. 

But even so, we're not convinced we should be so quick to call our times "totally unprecedented." Our ancestors weathered tyrants and plagues and renovated their political thought and activity when facing the consequences of previous human actions. 

And for those of us within the Christian Tradition, we must always remember that our predecessors took on the challenge of reinterpreting all of reality in light of the singular life of Jesus of Nazareth. 

What is not "unprecedented" is humans encountering the unprecedented. And in the midst of our own unique challenges, we unnecessarily feed the bad reactions that can come with fear and uncertainty if we believe we face our challenges alone.

So, in this series, we look at people and moments in the Tradition where those who came before us give us precedents for facing our epoch-shaping tests and tasks. 

This time, we meet a man who's approach to interpreting the Scriptures has shaped our faith for centuries. His approach, known as the "rule of faith", still serves as a key for us today as we seek to interpret and understand the scriptures, especially the difficult parts of the Bible.


STORY

Even in a digital age, with infinite video content available on TikTok and Youtube, we still use writing every day. But just because we use it all the time doesn't mean we always nail it. 

How many times have we seen a politician or celebrity tweet something and then have to explain what they really meant? But we don't need to create some distance by naming politicians and celebrities in our example, do we? You have personal experience with this, don't you? How often have you felt the need to text something like, "So what did you mean by 'o.k.'"?

At least with words spoken to us in person we can clue in on some of the things that help make the message clear - like the situational context, and the tone of voice and facial expressions of the speaker. But when we are on the receiving end of written text, we have a lot more gaps to fill in.

And if we sometimes struggle with interpreting 140 characters using our own language, it only gets tougher when the message starts in one language and ends in another. And when that is the case, it usually also means we need to add a cultural layer into the interpretive mix. And let's say the sender is from a direct culture and the receiver is from an indirect culture, where different interactions have drastically different meanings. 

Next, let's say the original message was put into writing thousands of years before the receiver attempts to understand it. And then, just for fun, let's also have the message be directed originally to someone besides the receiver, so it'll have contextual clues and references that the receiver won't necessarily catch.

And finally let's say that the written bit of communication is dealing with complicated topics like economics and human power and life and death and sin and God.  

Now a situation like this might sound like the ultimate game of telephone.You know, the game that starts with one person that has a secret message whispering that message into someone's ear, and then the second person whispers whatever they heard to the third person, and on and on until the message reaches the end and the final person announces to everyone whatever it is they thought they heard. With this kind of translation, if the person who kicked off the whole chain whispered "filet mignon", you're lucky if the last person announces they heard "flaming lawn." or anything that even sounds relatively close to the original message.

Which is great if the goal is to play an entertaining party game, but  scary, if the message is no game and could have incredibly consequential effects for how we approach and live our lives, especially if it's a message that we give authority to, you know, like with the Bible.

Attempting to interpret the Bible can at times feel like a giant game of telephone. It has all the complexities that make it difficult to understand: it's in written form, it's ancient history, it's from different cultures, it's been translated, and it wasn't written directly to us. 

So how are we supposed to be able to make sense of it? And then, when intelligent people do share their interpretations of the Scriptures but don't agree, who's right? Is just one person right, or are we all correct? Or nobody?

And people in recent decades have felt this problem with special potency when they consider the Old Testament, because it contains some particularly difficult texts. What are we to make of those texts that seem not just to contain or speak of violence, but seem to be violent themselves? 


Thankfully, these questions aren't new to our faith, and we have a precedent that we can follow. For this, we'll turn to particularly helpful Saint from the second century, named Irenaeus. But before we get to Irenaues, we need to first talk about a heretic named Marcion

In the second century, Marcion was an influential theologian and teacher. He claimed that the Old Testament, then known as the Jewish Scriptures, was the story of an entirely different god, one who was not the Father of Jesus Christ. Marcion argued that the god of the Old Testament created our material world out of spite, or possibly out of simple ignorance, and that this god now rules on the basis of law and judgement. On the other hand, Marcion said, God, the Father of Jesus, is a God of grace and forgiveness. A God who rules in love and promises, according to Marcion, a particular kind of salvation, that involves an escape from this evil material world which was created by some lesser deity.

As a conesquence, Marcion argued not only for the exclusion of the Old Testament, but even severely edited the New Testament, cutting out every place a New Testament author quoted the Old Testament, or even carried too much continuity with Old Testament themes and ways of thinking. For example, Marcion rejected the entire gospels of Matthew and John for seeming too Jewish.

The early church debated Marcion's views because his teaching seemed at odds with many of the fundamental doctrines of the church, such as creation being the good work of God, and the incarnation of Christ. In response to Marcion, Irenaeus, a bishop from Lyons (what we now call France), wrote the first extended theological essay in the church's history. In this treatise, Irenaeus argued that there was one God, the God of Abraham, Moses, David, the prophets, and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, defended a fuller Christian account of salvation, and took on Marcion's views regarding Scripture.

To Irenaeus's mind, which shaped largely the orthodox mind of the church as a whole, the key to understanding the Bible was to keep in view Scripture's unifying narrative, in which the chief actor was God. In the biblical account, two histories intertwine: the history of Israel and the life of Christ. Although they diverge at places, both are the history of God's actions in and for the world, and so both are part of the larger narrative that begins with creation and ends not with a total escape from Creation, but with a vision of a splendid new city in which the Lord God will be the light.

And, according to Irenaeus, what had happened in Christ was the key to understanding the entire narrative. Even though the Bible is a large and diverse book including many literary genres from varying cultures and epochs, its central plot is rather simple. It is the story of the world going out from God, and a returning to God. 

Irenaeus summarizes the narrative this way in his "rule of faith": 

This, then, is the ordering of our faith. ... 

God, the Father, uncreated, incomprehensible, invisible, one God, creator of all. This is the first article. 

The second is the Word of God, God the Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, who was revealed to the prophets. ... At the end of times, to sum up all things, he became man among men, visible and palpable, in order to destroy death and bring  to light life, and bring about communion with God.

And the third is the Holy Spirit, by whom the prophets prophesied and the patriarchs were taught about God and the just were led into the path of justice, and who in the end of times was poured forth in a new manner upon men all over the earth renewing man to God.

To understand and use the Rule of Faith well in our own times, with our own dealings with Scripture, we need to think of a "rule" not so much in the sense of an instruction to follow, like in a classroom, but more in the sense of a ruler that we would use for measuring a distance. Irenaeus's "rule" was used to "measure" other interpretations to see if they fit into the narrative of the Bible.

And Irenaeus' "rule of faith" is a piece of early Christian thought whose importance cannot be overstated. In fact, you may have noticed that Irenaeus's rule sounds a lot like the Apostle's Creed. That's because his rule went on to become the framework of the Creed. And Irenaeus's approach to understanding the Scriptures informed all later interpretative efforts. Whether one reads Athanasius against Arius, Augustine against Pelagius, or Cyril of Alexandria against Nestorius, all assume that individual passages are to be read in light of the story that gives meaning to the whole. 

According to Irenaeus, reading and understanding Scripture is similar to arranging a mosaic. There are multiple ways to configure the individual tiles: but not all arrangements are the same. Some will give the reader a portrait of Jesus the King while others might reveal a total jackass. Without an idea of the central narrative and plot, or in other words, a "rule", to reference, it's incredibly difficult to see if what we are arranging is as it should be. 

With the help of Irenaeus, the early church rejected Marcion's teachings as heretical. And although we would like to think that we have nothing in common with Marcion today, his views have been a constant temptation for Christians. We always need to guard against forgetting the narrative of the Scriptures, lest we de-link ourselves from something like the Old Testament and create a mosaic of a jackass or a brutal demigod and call it Christ.

An example of this today deals with the doctrine of redemption and/or salvation. When many Christians say that through Jesus we have salvation, most are referring to an eternal life after death, or going to heaven when they die. If this life after death was the central message of Scripture, it's a little bit odd that in most of the Old Testament it is not even mentioned.

And to be content with this commonly understood meaning of the good news of Jesus, we implicitly have to accept and follow Marcion's example and de-link ourselves from the Old Testament. While it is true that the New Testament affirms that there is life after death, this wasn't necessarily "good news", or really even "news". This was well known and believed by the Pharisees long before Jesus' time.

As Cuban-American historian and theologian Justo Gonzalez puts it: "The core of the good news is that the resurrection has already begun in the raising of Jesus from the dead. This certainly means that we can trust in him for our final resurrection. But even more, it means that the long-awaited (Old Testament) promises have now begun to be fulfilled. The Reign of God has dawned. Life after death is good news. But it is not all the good news, for the Old(er) Testament reminds us that the scope of God's action and revelation includes much more than life after death. The witness of the Older Testament reminds us that God's salvation is not purely 'spiritual,' in the common sense of that term, but is also political and social." 

With this in mind, in the conversation that follows we'll discuss Irenaeus's approach to interpreting the Scriptures and how we, today, can utilize his rule in order to better understand and embody the communal apostolic faith as witnessed to in the scriptures.


DISCUSSION [Auto-Generated Transcript]

Julius: All right. Welcome back to “All Things”… this is Julius and Wil, and this is our…

Wilson: Should we like start doing when there is no guests do the back and forth, like “This is Julius…”… “and Wil” where, I would say my own… 

Julius: let's do it. 

Wilson: would that spice things up a little bit. 

Julius: Let's do it. All right. All right. Welcome back to all things. This is Julius waves. That camera got him.

Wilson: that's way better. 

Julius: We tried to change things up today. Um, I think 

Wilson: small incremental improvements every day. 

Julius: 1% improvements, um, I think are we approaching the last of the series? 

Wilson: I think so. 

Julius: Wow. Um, to, I guess almost wrap up this series today, we're talking about scripture and, um, I was just thinking about this. Um, reflecting on that story. I think that the question of what to do with scripture remains as timely as I think this, the stuff that Marcien was dealing with of like, uh, I think that, that overhanging question of like, oh, what is, what is the old Testament about and why does this seem like a different guy?

It is a timely question that a lot of people face. And I think that similar to, and I'm like, oh, where a lot of folks have landed is just a, well, we don't know what to do with it so that they kind of just get. And not just on the old Testament entirely, but kind of, I feel that the Bible has become such like a, we don't know what to do with this responsibly.

And so the people kind of just put it down and give up on reading it entirely. And I think that's the place that we're coming from. And we're trying to speak to today because it seems that at worst people write off the Bible as, um, and I understand. Based on kind of the ways that it has been used for harm and weaponized against people.

And then at best, I feel like even a generous understanding of why Christians, like the Bible at best. Some people might even just see, like, see it as like a, oh, it's just a book that kind of like a, like a glorified book club that like, uh, people are really into this fiction and they really like talking about it and like that.

Th th it can give like meaning to their lives or whatever, and like inspire them in the same way that a good work of fiction or like a trilogy might. But I think that what we're trying to get to today in addressing that, and just the overhanging question of what do we do with this. Um, I think that there's something more to scripture than that.

And it seems that IR NAS was a key figure in kind of helping lead the church towards that. So how can you state for us what IR NAS has to offer to our relationship to scripture, especially from where we are right now.

Wilson: What I would, I mean, in short, what I would say irony has, has to offer is a way for us to approach the scripture that allows us to recognize step one, to begin to recognize. And that's a, that's a bigger, more important first step than we tend to think. Um, or maybe. To say a little bit more clearly. What I mean by that is, is even the process of coming to perceive and recognize is much more of a process for us than we tend to think.

And so, um, but it, it offers us a way to recognize and to engage and move through that process where we can perceive, and then. The key goal. So these are both important steps, but I'd say the second is kind of the tell us or the purpose of the goal of scripture is to actually commune with a God of love.

So Irenaeus gives us a way to understand the scripture so that the scriptures become a means by which we recognize and commune with a God of love. Oh, now if I don't, if I don't have the burden of supporting that, I'm happy. Do we just wrap it up this shortest shortest episode yet? 

Julius: At like eight minutes. I like that, especially the way you explained it. Just now I like that here in AIS elevates our relationship to scripture as being more than just a book for us to decode. Or like interpret to have some kind of like meaning or analysis. I know that was the way that I primarily related to scripture, especially in like my younger, like my, especially like my high school days.

I think that it was, um, that my quiet time of devotion in reading scripture always had a Bible, a commentary and like a pen and pencil in the hand. And. While I, I don't think that that's necessarily to be done away with how then do we take that piece as well as the invitation to see scripture as something that invites us to recognize it and commune with God?

What does, what could practicing the rule of Aaron AAS look like

Wilson: well, I guess we could then go through. Step-by-step what I laid out. You know, if, if in my head what I just said, there, there are four that rhymed, there are four. Ki like

linchpins 

Julius: Great.

Wilson: to what I just said that if RNA is rule is understood and practiced that's one and two understood and practiced. It allows us to come to scripture in a way that scripture becomes a tool where we can perceive and commit.

With God of love. So that'd be perceived would be three commune would be four. So understood, practiced, perceive, and commune. Um, and so to, to understand his rule of faith, it takes time to just look at it. And so, uh, one of the things that we pointed out key to interpreting to understanding the rule is as a rule. And you think rule, not just as in here's the law, these are the rules of the classroom. You do this, this and this, this, but bigger than that, it's, it's a standard, it's a thing for comparison. All right. So if you use a ruler, you CA you lay it down and you compare it to the thing next to it, and that allows you to measure it. 

Julius: Yeah. 

Wilson: if, if it's a rule, this is a, this is a succinct statement of the faith that if we're going to come to some of the. By scripture or through experience or what other other means, some other sort of understanding articulation of what the faith is and what it's about. This is the thing that we lay down next to it so that we can measure her articulate, um, or measure our articulation or our understanding of what the faith is.

And again, whether that's, you know, then it can act as a rule for that. Whether we come by that articulation through personal experience. You know, some mystical experience. Some communal we had a, we had a big committee meeting and we hammered out the big things, and these are the points we came at. Right.

Which those are happening all over the place right now, by the way, if, if you, if you. Any foot in any of the Christian worlds, odds are pretty good that in the last five years you've engaged a camp saying, well, here are our five tenants. Here are our 

Julius: Sure.

Wilson: And so here are, whereas, whereas, whereas it, it, it is resolved this, this and this, you know, these kinds of statements are popping up all over the place.

Any of those, you know, whether it's a personal thing or whether it's a new committee from this convention or this loose association of Christians that share this kind of ethos, you know. Or whether it's done by the interpretation of scripture, you can take any of those things and lay it down next to Irenaeus’s rule and say, let's, let's measure it next to this. 

Julius: Hm.

Wilson: And so that's what it's intended for. Right? So the, and, and what it gives us. If we take seriously, if we, if we seriously attend to what's laid out in his rule, what he gives us is not just bullet points that does the doctrine match this and this and this, what he gives us as a story, right? This is God, God has come to us in Christ.

And now by the holy spirit, right, we're brought into communion with God through. 

Julius: Yeah. 

Wilson: And this is what renews us and, and through us, like it's covering, you know, he says, look over the earth, renewing man, mankind, humanity to God. Right. And this is what he lays out for us. And so then if you, that first step, if you really understand it, Implicitly an unpacking what's there inside its rule.

It leads to that second point that this is the kind of thing that must be practiced. Um, and there are all sorts of analogies to this, right? Just like it's one thing to understand the rules of basketball

Julius: Right.

Wilson: and to be able to watch a game and describe this, this and this, but can you play, 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: thing to be able to, to look.

Uh, and here's a great place, the gap between me and then my wife and my, and my oldest son. I can look at a recipe like laid out right there and I can mentally comprehend it. But if I go to put those ingredients together, what comes out of the oven is never. Somehow it's turned to some like spongy, nasty textured thing with an aftertaste that nobody wants in their mouth.

But I, even though I comprehended the recipe, my wife, or my oldest son they'll look at that thing and they can do it, they put it together. And so what the rule gives us is something that if it's under. Then leads us to good practice so that we can live into this faith, which is to be renewed too. I mean, it's right there.

This is where it culminates in the rule of faith to be renewed to God. Right. Reconnected, leading to communion with God. So bringing this in, I took kind of a roundabout way, but I feel like was important to lay the foundation, bringing that back into your question about. Right. So when you're a kid and to have, um, your devotions and all of what you laid out there, I would say, Okay.

no, no, no.

There's not necessarily anything I heard there that sends off any alarm bells, Right.

Or that light that's, but that might actually be a great personal example that we could lay down next to RNA as is rule. Right, And so if we lay what you just described out to his rule, the question his rule would lead me to ask is, okay, no, no, that's good.

Because some of that's difficult. right.

And this is throughout the history. I mean, you want to, I just love, I absolutely love looking at how the early church theologians treated scripture. I mean, you can, you can look at there, there is example upon example upon example, but just off the top of my head, I think of, uh, like. Saint Augusta. 

Julius: Um,

Wilson: more towering figure in at least in Western Christianity than Augusta. And you look at how, when he starts off to read the Bible, he starts first with, uh, let's say he's got all sorts of commentaries and sermons on Genesis, but if you, if you look at how his process, that's, that's there for us in historical record, he starts with what he would call the literal.

Of the scripture of Genesis. And now when, when he says literal, he doesn't mean what we would mean as far as like a literalistic or fundamentalist, uh, understanding what he means is just seriously attending to what the words actually say. And if we re and it's like, right, and again, there's already a chord with RNA. Like rule of faith, just if we attend to it. So that's the first step is really looking at and Tinder and he points out over and over and over again, if you really pay attention to them, especially in the first two chapters of Genesis, 

Julius: Yeah,

Wilson: it's going to lead you to questions beyond just the literal level, 

Julius: definitely.

Wilson: part of attending to what the words actually say, like, how are their days, if there has not been a sun made or if the sun has not been made yet. Right. And these are the kinds of questions he asked. Centuries ago. And then from, from that first step, right? If you, if you really look at it, it's going to lead to big questions that have to be interpreted and what I, what I like to point out and, and just to have people look at, in this case, we're looking at Augusta, but across the board, the earliest church theologians, when they moved to that place to actually interpret and understand the scriptures, they come.

Uh, I mean, I guess to, to some contemporary eyes, contemporary Christianized, they, it would seem like just wildly creative interpretations and applications of the scripture. But the church at that time was able to say like, all of these are our faith can hold and, and integrate and benefits from all of these like different interpretations of scriptures. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: And that doesn't mean all of them were totally perfect. Right. But we even have the resources to discern. Why? Because that wasn't the here's, here's where all this was, was coming to the main point relevant to your prompt 

Julius: Okay. Yeah.

Wilson: they understood widely because of like internalizing something like irony.

This is rule of faith that decoding wasn't the main point, the decoding, and coming to the one. The single one-to-one correspondence will this, if it is a metaphor, this is the only proper right. Interpretation of the 

Julius: Oh, 

Wilson: or if there's it. right. So it's the, the whole point wasn't to come to the one single proper, like a decoding, the, the end point as we gleaned from. the, the, not just the logic. Yes, the logic, but the, the ethos and the heartbeat of Irenaeus is rule of faith. When we come to that, because we understand that the end point is communion with God. And so where these different interpretations genuinely facilitate communion with God, then we embrace them, we recognize them as valid. 

And so that to say, with young Julius pulling out commentaries—good. Because the Bible is a difficult text and there are certain things that, because it was, I mean, it's very, I mean, you just look at the things that some of what we pointed out in the story that made the scriptures difficult to interpret, there are so many massive things that can make it challenging… we should come to it. That’s… and, and even more. 

On the intellectual level of the problem of interpretation. But if our, and, and understanding, given all these challenges, but even more so if the heart is communion with God, that puts us in a place where we're ready, because we're coming with humility and openness, a willingness to be challenged to grow and to actually learn something.

Not, I mean, if we come with the attitude that I basically already know everything, I need to know, I just want this holy scripture to confirm it. Uh, the. We're not coming in a place of, of openness and humility that could lead us to the kind of communion with a transcendent world-rearranging-and-healing God that we're after. 

Julius: Hmm.

Wilson: So, good… to come at. but the key point is to understand that that's a good part of the process and that's not the end you…. And the way I say it to some of my students is when you've come to that point of, okay, this, this helps me interpret and understand. Right?

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: And you close your Bible and you close your commentary, you review your notes to let it sink in…once you've got that info there, as long as you understand, once you reach that point, you're not done interpreting and practicing the Bible that when you put the book aside and you go out into the world, if you remember what was there and you take steps of risk to actually trust. To look for God and to trust God's nature, God's character to live into God's intent for the world, as we've learned and encountered in the scriptures. When you, when you put the book aside and you go out and you live you're still interpreting scripture. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: And it's out of that, that dynamic, that kind of, uh, that kind of spiral in relationship between reading and interpreting and living is where the word true genuine Christian theology comes because it's, it's genuine testimony. 

Julius: Yeah. 

Wilson: And then again, expound it too. It's not just the personal individual's experience of doing this, but it's the church's experience… of learning, reading, engaging with God and the text. And then from that look going out and finding analogous, uh, continuous meaning like continuous, as in like there's, there's some sort of connection between the communion we found in the text and the communion we find with God in the rough and tumble of everyday life. That it's that personal and communal testimony. That is, well, we we've said earlier in the series, that's how the church arrives at doctrine, not the reverse. 

Julius: Yeah, I think that's, I think that's a really helpful point. And it makes me think back to, for anyone listening, who hasn't listened to our past series, where we talk quite at length about practice, um, in a meaningful way as something that, um, well… you can listen back. We define it well there. 

Um, but the whole thing of kind of like what you minutes ago, talking about basketball and kind of like… almost understanding the scripture's role as being held in a practice in the same way that one studies the rules of basketball, or like a recipe for…something right. That it's, there's an interaction between studying the, the thing and then practicing it. And that, that helps to kind of shape you come back to the text with different questions or different thoughts once you kind of embody it. 


Especially to see the ways that scripture is an account of God's ongoing presence with the world, with a particular people. And then as that extends out to the many, like, people that are affected by, um, this, the story as it continues to unfold through the Old and New Testament.

Wilson: Yes. 

Julius: So with that said, I think. What I want to talk more about, which I think will help me with kind of the hanging questions for me—especially with what to do with the problem that Marcion faced, with like this… so what do we do with the passages, especially in the Old Testament where. If we're seeing this through the lens of like, does this help me commune with God that there are some difficult passages, like you'd alluded to that make it, that it's kind of difficult to commune with God through those stories…

And it seems to me that the story that we laid out prior to this conversation, um, really centers on the way that the, that Jesus Christ, that Christ is key in helping us to perceive that God as being the same God— that the revelation of Jesus is like crucial to how we perceive God through scripture, especially those difficult passages. So can you speak more about that?

Wilson: So… and especially now that the reasons why people have difficulty with something like scripture, um, require… So I’m kind of already the king of caveats and roundabout answers, but, but because of the particular difficulties that are born on it, like real misuse and serious, like, I mean, in, if we're just honest about history places where you can't use a word less than like atrocity, um, w-w-when knowing that it's born out of stuff like that, I feel like caveats like this are absolutely necessary. 

And so I will say this what I'm about to say about the Old Testament, teaching us to see God in Christ is peculiar to, particular to, a Christian reading. And just want to acknowledge that this would be the point that would make Jews say no. So what I'm going to say, it's going to involve portions of scripture, that Jews claim as their own and I do not contend their right to claim these scriptures as theirs. Right. 

But. Just naming, they, uh, they would treat them differently. And the caveat would be, uh—to not to really direct our attention where my criticism would genuinely fall the criticism that's implicit in what I'm about to say is not actually directed at the, any form of the Jewish faith. It's more directed at contemporary misunderstandings and just broadly cultural prejudices that the west shares. So it gets to a place where we notice this like, “Ooh, a travesty we…” So we're really reticent to say this way of reading is better or right or any of that kind of thing. And if, if out of that, we end up, which we so often do explicitly or implicitly saying, “Oh, well they're all the same.”

Anyway, that's actually not being respectful to other folks. So like, I mean, just all it takes is situate that same thing in like an interpersonal conversation. And if you're saying something that you care about, it matters to you and somebody else, the person on the other side of the table keeps going, “Oh yeah, same thing. Same, same, same, same. I agree. The same thing.” 

And then they say something that like totally cuts against , that is incompatible with what you just said. That's offensive. That's disrespectful, right? It's way more respectful to say I hear you. And here's where we actually disagree. It's totally disrespectful to say, “Oh no, no, no we agree…” when you don't. 

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: Right. So here I'll that preface to say Jews would not agree with what I'm about to say. That's a different conversation to be had respectfully between different parties at a different time. So that caveat to say what Chris. Say what the Christian faith, what the rule of faith from Irenaeus on would help us say about how the old Testament helps us see Christ is let's start with the rule of faith, which is, and it would be the second point. It’s the word of God, God, the son, Jesus Christ. Our Lord that's, that's a central core tenant to the Christian faith who was revealed to the prophets. Right.

So this would be in that. That through the prophets— and, and this carries, um…definitely up to Irenaeus’s time and a good while passed to us. When we hear the profits, we might think the last group of books in the old Testament, but to Irenaeus back, that just meant the old Testament. It was all prophetic. 

You know, it wasn't, it wasn't like Isaiah, Jeremiah Lamentations and those following. Those are the profits, but the Psalms, those are just songs… and Ruth and Esther, those are just stories…and first, second Kings are kind of like theological history… all prophets.All prophetic, um, to the Jewish mind, this is a point where, to this point we agree, Right.

Um, the difference is, oh, do these prophets witness to Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah. Right now Jews would say, yes, these prophets witness to the Messiah and the coming messianic age, when God will convict everyone, convince everyone in their hearts, not just in their minds, but of God's reality.

Right. But where Christians and Jews begin to diverge is to say, it's Jesus of Nazareth is that Messiah. And God has done that in Jesus. So. The second one in RNs through the profits. This word was initially was beginning to be revealed and where you could point to the book of Hebrews, where it calls the things.

And in the old Testament, prophets, like the tabernacle and the law, it calls them shadows of things to come. We hear shadow and especially recording this just days before Halloween, we think, Ooh, like. It has connotations of evil, bad dark, but that's not at all in the context of Hebrews. That's not at all what the author is saying.

What the author of Hebrews is saying is this is beginning to teach us to recognize, right. Now we're seeing the theme. This is when I said it helps us perceive God. And, and then in that perception also helps us further down the step to actually commune with this God. It helps us perceive God, and Christians believe the fullest revelation has been in Jesus of Nazareth. But the point of this would be like, um…infants, like newborns—they see their hands. 

It’s right in front of their face and, and it totally confuses them.

Julius: Definitely.

Wilson: They do not understand that this is “my” hand. They don't, they don't understand that it's a hand cause they have no concept of hand. They don't know what this object moving. And in fact, newborns even have trouble distinguishing the difference between like, if they're laying down and their hand is moving in front of the face against the background of a ceiling, they even have trouble distinguishing the difference between the ceiling and their hand because they don't have either of those concepts. 

They don't have the ability to perceive that difference. To them it's it's all just one thing coming all at once. And even distinguishing the sight perception and the sounds that are coming, it's one just big jumble chaotic thing what it's just w-it’s just sameness without any differentiation in their mind.

And so this is why they look at their hand and they're so amazed by it, then they come. Right. And you can s-you can see… I remember my kids catching a couple moments of realization where it certainly wasn't the fullness of, “Ooh, this is a hand and it is mine.” 

But something clicked where I remember one kid was like… you saw it going from just out of control in front of their face to… there was a look of realization and the movements became intentional.

And what they started to realize now is “I have some agency. I have some say in what this thing does.” And then they gradually come to know through better and better—and again, not perfect, not…y’know. But better and better concepts. right. 

Of, oh, this is a hand and it's mine. And so when would I say better and better? That can sound weird, but I mean, think about it. If you really start asking questions about like subatomic particles and energy fields and your hand gets really weird, even to you, right, But your concept of hand is more useful, more accurate, more true than what it was when you were an infant. right.

And so your mind has to have some kind of, some kind of experience and growing category through which it can make sense of what it sees.

And so all of that. Just like with a newborn bam, there's this thing moving in front of my face. It makes no sense if God had just bam. Here's Jesus. It's totally lost on humanity.

Julius: Right.

Wilson: There’s, and we already see, even with all the preparation, I mean, read Mark it's, it's difficult for even the disciples to come to a realization of who this is. I mean, that's a question that pops up over and over to who is.

Julius: Yeah,

Wilson: Y’ now, chapter four— “Who is this, that even the wind and the seas obey him?” Right.

Even with the prep. But what, what Christians would say is we were given just enough preparation and that this would be the fullness, the appropriate time for the human consciousness to even have a shot at, at, and again, not fully, not totally, but to even have a shot at reliably, initially, recognizing who and what this. 

Julius: Okay.

Wilson: the gift there to see what to come or what to do with it. And this is what the writer of Hebrews means by shadows. 

Julius: Hmm.

Wilson: They're outlining. They're their initial experiences and initial, uh, initial revelations that would allow us to begin to see the contours begin to recognize as something involved in God and God's work for the world that, that would be able to begin to form in our minds, the concept of—and the language that we, that the tradition gave to it, is "The Messiah.” And who the Messiah is and what it would take for the Messiah to be the Messiah and to do what the Messiah… it's all beginning to prepare us to see. 

And this is why Irenaeus, the rule of faith, the book of Hebrews would say, we can't do away with that. There that's, that's the background. And just like anything for you to differentiate, you need a backup. To recognize what's happening here. So like the Mona Lisa— that's my favorite example here is, why is the Mona Lisa smile so intriguing? Cause that's the thing about the painting everybody talks about is the smile, but the smile, if it didn't, if it weren't set in that context, right?

The background of that painting is, is like bleak. It looks, it looks post-apocalyptic. If it were set against a different background, if it were set against like rainbows and rollercoasters and cotton candy, then this smile is going to make more sense and not be intriguing. But because she's there and she's smiling that way, the smile becomes intriguing.

The background allows us to recognize something about what's there, and without the background of the Old Testament with—without all the. The difficulty and the reality of what it is to wrestle with God, in the midst—and that's what Israel means wrestles with God—and to bear witness to that wrestling with God in the midst of the tumult of, of like the blood and the loss and the pain and… like politics and economics and everything that comes with being human in the world…without that background, we don't see Christ as clearly as we could. 

And so there's that background since, but also this rule that allowing us to get to the second thing, right? The Word of God revealed to the prophets. It also begins to shape in us, uh, the beg- like the ability to perceive, to, to look for at least an outline, the right thing so that when Jesus is there doing those things, we've at least got a shot of recognizing it for what it is instead of it just being a totally confusing experience that's ultimately lost on us. 

Julius: Right. Okay.

Wilson: The only thing. And it's important to note for the Christian. It goes both ways. The old Testament prepares us to perceive and to commune with Christ, but then that goes back to the. W once we've initially perceived and communed to the degree that we're capable at that time. Right. That communion does something to us.

It expands us, it expands, right? Just like, I mean, just like once you, I get to know my wife, I can recognize marks of her all over the place because I've communed with her, you know? So it brings us to that place where there can be an initial record. And a communion should the degree that we can, but that creates new, new, uh, abilities.

Like it expands the degree to which we can perceive and commune with God. And so now with that expansion, it flips back and now we're more capable of seeing Christ in the old Testament, more reliably. And that's where it comes down to faith for us. When we look at some of the really well. Inter to us really wild, uh, analogical interpretations and allegorical interpretations of old Testament stories that we see.

Uh, it seems wild to us, but if we can trust that that was born out of community. Right. Did that, that really does become the place where it's born when they do things. Like for instance, there's the, Um,

like one of the many really troubling texts is when God commands genocide in the old Testament to root out these people, everything from it, one of this pretty standard.

And again, it's, what's interesting about this. Is there a lots of church fathers that say something similar, right? Like Gregory of Nyssa origin. Uh, Aquinas does similar things with other texts. Uh, Augustine does this, some Maximus confessor for certain like, but it's interesting that not totally independently, but to a certain degree on their own in reading these texts, they all do something pretty similar, which is to look at that text and say, no, no, no.

Like, of course, if God, God would be a month. If you take it just at that superficial level. So what do we do? And, and again, they share their tradition. They share this rule, but out of that, in a certain sense independently, they all come to some sort of interpretation that says, well, what, what we're talking about here is like the places where sin has taken root and.

And so we must treat this as a war against sin within our very souls. And don't make friends with it. Don't make, don't make a place for hate and division and, and greed in your heart, but you must, you must completely remove it from the land the kind of interpretation there. This is what we say it as the old Testament teaches us to see Christ Christ then teaches us to see Christ in the old Testament in more and more faithful, beautiful ways that facilitate communion with God in ourselves.

Right. And in the way that we live, not just having information about God in our heads. 

Julius: Yeah.


MEDITATION

We are not the first to find certain passages of scripture incredibly difficult, or even offensive. And because others before have engaged this difficulty and found ways to commune with God through it, we have been gifted with a very precious precedent.

This meditation is meant to give you an opportunity to practice using Irenaeus' rule as a guide in a concrete and particular place your faith has needed such a guide. 

So, to really facilitate this, we cannot simply pick a passage of scripture we think you have struggled with, or should struggle with, then read through it and tell you what interpretation Irenaeus' rule might lead us to. 

To give you a real opportunity to practice this, you're going to need to find the difficult passage yourself. 

So, bring to mind a biblical text that has given you trouble. 

Pause the podcast if you need to, grab a bible, find that passage, and read through it again. 

Don't shy away from the details. Look what is concretely written directly in the face. What is the main action or idea or emotion portrayed? 

Say out loud what you think the passage is saying. Now name, as exactly as you can, what is troubling you, and why.

Lay your interpretation and current understanding of this text out in the open before you and examine it.

Now, remember Irenaeus' rule is intended to be something like a ruler that you lay next to another thing to measure it, and to help you read individual passages in light of the foundational story running through all the twists and turns to give meaning to the whole.

So here again is the Rule of Faith. Lay it down next to your understanding of the text.

God, the Father, uncreated, incomprehensible, invisible, one God, creator of all. This is the first article.

Trust God is able to be present in all times, and in all things, even now. And that God is infinitely creative and powerful and good, and so also able to meet you in the difficulties of this passage, and your thoughts and emotions, and guide it into something beautiful and true.

The second [article] is the Word of God, God the Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, who was revealed to the prophets. ... At the end of times, to sum up all things, he became man among men, visible and palpable, in order to destroy death and bring  to light life, and bring about communion with God.

According to the rule, God is most clearly seen in Jesus, who entered fully into our human situation to destroy death and bring us to communion with God. So where is death revealed in your difficult passage? 

And how could you see death at work in a similar way in your  world? Or in your life?

And if God works in Christ to meet us at our darkest places to destroy death, what would God be doing in your passage?

In your world?

If this is who God is and what God does, what would God be doing in you?

And the third [article of the rule of faith] is the Holy Spirit, by whom the prophets prophesied and the patriarchs were taught about God and the just were led into the path of justice, and who in the end of times was poured forth in a new manner upon [people] all over the earth renewing [humanity] to God.

How is the Spirit present in this moment and this text, leading you into the  path of justice and renewing you in God?

How is the Spirit pulling you into the biblical narrative, where two histories, ours and God's, always intertwine, but where God is always the primary actor, but who also always acts like we see Jesus act.

So how is the Spirit present now, in your reading, in this moment, inviting you not to escape the difficulties of a fallen creation, but to join God in moving it toward a splendid vision of creation's renewal through communion with God?

How is your engagement of this difficult text becoming the occasion for you to see and join the story of the world going out from God, and returning to God?

Precedented 7 - Trinity and Pandemics


INTRO 

True, we've never before had a nearly-instantaneous, nearly-worldwide network connected to devices in our pockets alerting us to rising temperatures and the temperamental outbursts of tyrants or the spread of malicious insects and viruses. 

And being constantly aware of all this can feel disorienting and surreal. 

But even so, we're not convinced we should be so quick to call our times "totally unprecedented." Our ancestors weathered tyrants and plagues and renovated their political thought and activity when facing the consequences of previous human actions. 

And for those of us within the Christian Tradition, we must always remember that our predecessors took on the challenge of reinterpreting all of reality in light of the singular life of Jesus of Nazareth. 

What is not "unprecedented" is humans encountering the unprecedented. And in the midst of our own unique challenges, we unnecessarily feed the bad reactions that can come with fear and uncertainty if we believe we face our challenges alone.

So, in this series, we look at people and moments in the Tradition where those who came before us give us precedents for facing our epoch-shaping tests and tasks. 

This time we talked about how Christians have faces other public health crises, and in them, become like Christ, and come to see God.


STORY

COVID might be the first time we've had to live through a pandemic, but, to take some indulgent pleasure in stating what is excessively obvious, we are not the only ones who have lived. And for many previous generations, pandemics have been part of their lived experience.

As one example, in the middle of the 3rd century a massive plague tore through Rome. There is no way to be certain what illness was at the root of the epidemic, but because of the fevers, aches, and unexplained bleeding experience by the victims, historians have surmised that it might have been  smallpox, some form of influenza, or a hemorrhage-inducing virus somewhat like Ebola. 

Whatever the disease, it killed somewhere between ¼ and ⅓ of the Roman population. For a little perspective, America, as of my last Google search, just passed 750K COVID deaths. That is a lot to lose and mourn. For certain. But if the mortality rate were equal to that of Rome's plague, the numbers would be somewhere between 82-1/2, to 109 million. The height of the plague - and mind you, this is not the entire epidemic, but the height of the plague - lasted from 250 to 262 CE. That's 12 years.

Let that sink in. 

And during these 12 years, upwards of 5,000 people were dying per day. 

Under this kind of suffering, people must ask the question "Why?"

Initially, many of the political, philosophical, and religious leaders offered conventional answers for why something like this would happen. The Stoics believed in a highly ordered universe where nothing happens by accident, so they pointed people to some greater reason or purpose that humans simply could not see. Other's pointed to angry gods that must be appeased. And you may not know the specifics of the doctrines of the ancient philosophical schools or pagan rituals that produced these responses, but you've heard some version of these kinds of answers. And to a certain degree, for a time, these responses seemed sufficient enough.

Until the plague wore on, and on, and on, and the casualties piled up. And when the question "Why?" began to boil and spill out of peoples' minds to burn in their joints and instincts, the leaders offering the conventional explanations started acting out of fear and self-interest -- abandoning the sick to quarantine in country estates and finding whatever way they could to salvage whatever they could, for themselves -- and so, when people saw their leaders acting this way under the stress, the answers they offered lost all credibility.

And today, many, Christian or otherwise, offer and settle for, some variation of those same conventional explanations. So here, we'd like to introduce two Christian leaders from that period, because they offered responses that were much, much more challenging than the conventional answers on both the intellectual and the existential levels. But, because these responses refused to back away from the difficulties people were facing, they ended up proving, much more satisfactory.

The first Christian we want to introduce was named Dionysius. He was a bishop in the city of Alexandria, in Egypt. And in the preaching and instruction he gave during the years of the plague, he taught his church to understand the season and circumstances as a "school" and "testing." 

Which might steer our minds to think of God as vindictive or cruel. But that was not his point at all. To understand the kind of intellectual framework he gave, let's unpack a couple things. First, to interpret what Dionysius meant by "testing," don't think of God saying "Let's see if you can impress me, and if you manage to pull that off, then we'll see about providing some relief." Think more in the lines of what Porsche or Chevrolet do with what they call their "testing grounds." On those automotive proving tracks, the companies take the things they have made and find out what those things are capable of. It's what they were made for. 

So the analogy I'm making is that in response to the plague St. Dionysius said something akin to, "Okay, Christians. We have this story of Jesus entering into our suffering and death and then being raised to new life. If we trust that story, then let's see what we can do." Because, what he understood, and what he wanted his people to understand, is that whatever circumstances we find ourselves in, we were all made to be like Christ. That's how we come most alive.

So, the second point flows out of the first: in times of incredible suffering and fear, Dionysius framed the whole plague as a severe opportunity to experience the victory over death Jesus had already offered his followers. 

And this framework, when tested, flowered into actions very different from those of the other Roman authorities who abandoned the sick to their fate.

To see something of the specific actions that grew from Dionysius' take, we can look to a second Christian leader named Cyprian. He was one of Dionysius' fellow bishops from another city, Carthage, which is also in North Africa. In one of Cyprian's letters from about 251, as he and his people were enduring all the radical doubt and anxiety that death and suffering can bring, St. Cyprian instructed his people to train their faith by caring for the sick. And, for this to be Christian training, it was important to him that it didn't matter whether the sick were relatives that duty said they should love, or the poor and enslaved whom duty would allow them to abandon.  

Now in contrast, Pagan priests had no doctrinal basis to direct their response or the responses of their people to a situation like this. But Christian morality, from the beginning, stressed charity and love as central norms for Christian communities, particularly in caring for the poor and the sick. 

And when we say the doctrinal basis for this kind of morality was there from the beginning, we mean it came from Jesus himself. 

For instance, in Matthew, chapter 25, Jesus tells his followers that whenever they feed the hungry, welcome a stranger, or care for the sick, they do this for Jesus himself.  

And Christians to a large degree took this seriously for the next couple hundred years. So, by the time Dionysius and Cyprian and their fellow priests and bishops entered the testing of their plague, they did so as a part of a church that had begun to develop an infrastructure set up to care for the sick and poor. This infrastructure included both systems for delivering aid, and the kinds of habitual, liturgical action that shaped individual character around charity and love for the sick, so that there would be Christlike people who could participate in and manage those systems.

So the church had virtues like love, courage, and faith, and also the concrete means for translating these personal virtues into actual help for those in need. 

And all of these things were Christlike.

So this testing provided an opportunity for the Christians to become like Christ in a season when obeying Christ's example to not abandon the poor and the sick to fend for themselves also required they become like Christ in not fearing death.

So, while most were fleeing the cities to quarantine as best they could from the sick, Dionysius and Cyprian and their fellow Christians took it upon themselves to care for the sick and the dying. And this earned credibility, not just for them, but also for the ideas and practices that made them who they were.

And there are historians and sociologists who point out that not only would this action earn Christians goodwill, but further, if Christian communities were places where people actually received care, they would naturally produce survival rates much higher than the survival rates of places where people were simply abandoned. And this combination of higher survival rates plus goodwill amongst the survivors, some argue plays a central role in explaining Christianity's spread throughout the empire. And all this is true enough.

But we want to take this to as deep and mysterious a theological place as we can. To find a precedent for moral action that also provides a precedent for Communion with God. So, we want to argue that Christians obeying the moral call of the gospel is what enabled them to develop the doctrine of the Trinity. And that the doctrine of the Trinity is what allows us to hope for communion with God even in our own pandemic.

Now, you don't get more involved in matters of flesh and blood than you do in caring for the sick. But the Trinity, as a doctrine, is often considered the most "abstract" and "ethereal" doctrine. But it is anything but. So how is caring for the sick in a pandemic connected to the Trinity? 

To see this, first, notice the time period. Dionysius and Cyprian lived through these plagues in the middle of the 200s. And the Trinity didn't get it's doctrinal seal until the full divinity of the Holy Spirit was asserted at the Council of Constantinople in 381.

So, more than a century before the Trinity was solidified in Christian teaching, when Christians practiced their faith in the way laid out by Dionysius and Cyprian, connected to the commands of Christ, those Christians concluded that Jesus' words promising that when you care for the sick, you care for Jesus himself, had proven true. That means, to them, Jesus, their Lord, who entered the grave and rose from the dead and ascended to heaven, was still present as they cared for the dying. 

And so, if that Jesus who walked in Galilee and Jerusalem 250 years earlier, was still present to the Christians in Alexandria during the plague, those later Christians had to wrestle with the question of how Christ continued to be with them. And their conclusion was The Holy Spirit.

In the last episode, we walked you through the reasoning that lead Christians to assert that Jesus was both fully human and fully divine. And the driving conviction at work in this doctrinal development was that salvation is union with God. And so, since only God can unite us to God, Jesus must be God. And, conversely, since only a human could truly unite humanity to God, Jesus also had to be fully human.  

And now, just move through the same pattern of reasoning. If trusting and obeying Jesus united them to Jesus in the Holy Spirit, and Jesus is God, only God can unite us to God, the Holy Spirit must also be fully God. Or else the Holy Spirit would not be able to unite us to Christ.

So in short, living their faith in the proving grounds of the plague led them to experience a reality they could not explain. So they had to develop new ways of thinking about and expressing what they were living. So the combination of action and contemplation made the church into the kinds of people who could imagine and articulate the concrete reality they experienced in the Doctrine of the Trinity. 

So, in the conversation that follows, Julius and I talk about what it might actually look like for us to become more like Christ in the midst  of our public health crisis, and how becoming more like Jesus might allow us to know, and see, and talk about God more clearly. 


DISCUSSION [Auto-Generated Transcript]

Julius: All right. Welcome back to “All Things.” Today, Julius (myself) and Wil, are picking up on a conversation about, um, I guess the, the precedent of all precedents as we talk about, um, I mean… the topic that spawned this whole idea. Talking about where we are right now in a pandemic. And today we're picking up on a story about how the church responds to a very similar crisis of public health, um, with dealing with a plague even.

And I think one of the things that struck me from the story was this notion of how the deadly mortality that surrounds the church proved to be an opportunity for the church to become more Christ-like by, um, learning not to—how was it phrased here… “learning not to fear death.” 

And, and I'm struck by that because there's, there's a heart there that, um, situated in the story that, that place, that comes from a place of compassion. I think in contrast to what other leaders in the day and in their culture were starting to act out of self-interest here. The church's response in caring for the sick and the dying came from a place of, um, compassion that they saw from the life of Christ. And so as we parse that out into what this precedent has to show us, Our present day situation in the pandemic.

How can we talk about some of the differences that can get kind of confusing? Um, because on the surface, one could look at this and argue like, Hey, well, the church went out to like, when people were quarantining from the sick and the dying, they went out into the, like to, to make contact with these people to care for them.

Um, how was that? Um, Different from some of the rhetoric that I'm afraid like it can get compared to in our present day about this faith over fear, like, uh, why do we have to quarantine from other people and like limit our gatherings and stuff when we have faith in God and that we don't fear death? Well, it feels to me like those are coming from two different, very different places.

So how can we talk about some of the differences to help kind of change? Um, what this precedent really has to offer us

Wilson: Yeah, I can see why this will be so confusing to people because you, my hope would be for me, this is true. And I hope this would be true for the listeners as well, that when you hear the story of people like Cyprian and Dionysius and, and their churches and what they did in this kind of situation, and then there that.

You would see their actions and something inside you would, would resonate and be inspired and that you would feel like the word for that is courage and faith. And then you would hear their reasoning for it is grounded in Jesus and something in, you would say yes, but then it can be really confusing because you hear some of the same rhetoric, some of the very similar language, you know, about faith, overcoming fears of death and, and risk and all this kind of stuff.

But then you look at what is actually happening, the actions that accompany, that, those words and, and it, you just don't have quite the same visceral sense of like, yes, that's right. And good and true. And so how. That the, that the rhetoric can be so similar, but something's very different. And this is, I think the real, the, the real nugget of potential in this episode is to name what the actual precedent is.

And the precedent is Christ. And that Christ shows up that. It goes into play Christ, assumes risks on, on his own body himself and invites his followers to freely follow him into places of risk, to care for the sick and the dying to care for the people that can do nothing in return for them. Right. The outcast and the lonely.

So, so yes, you get Jesus going and actually touching. Uh, disease that can easily be transmitted through physical touch. Right. And you see, you see Jesus touching a sick little girl and not knowing why she died, but touching her and raising her to life. Right. Um, and then he tells his followers to do this, but what Jesus, I mean, the precedent is Jesus is here heal to care for, to love the sick, the dying and the vulnerable. And I saw again, I know it's super dangerous to treat anything on social media as an actual position that somebody holds because,

Julius: yeah.

Wilson: uh, at the risk of sounding like a very cheesy dad, which I guess I. I definitely am a dad. And I guess it's okay to be cheesy sometimes, you know, but you find way more strawmen on social media than you do.

Even in the, the harvest festivals in Halloween though, the, in the middle of the hay amazes that I've taken my kids to. And so recognizing that this could very well and, and even naming that this probably is more of a straw man than, um, strap.

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: Women women make this mistake as well, but a straw man argument.

Um, because I know lots of people have the mini pastures. I do know, I don't know. Directly that have been just blatantly irresponsible. I know many that have made huge sacrifices to care for the people of their congregation and their town and their, their neighborhood as best they possibly can. So for all the, for all the knuckleheads you read about on Facebook or, or Twitter or whatever, I know lots of them and I've, I've not actually met.

Of them in leadership positions. And so that stated, I will say, but there there's stuff out there. There's rhetoric there memes. And the, the one I'm thinking the meme in particular that I'm thinking about said what? Jesus social distance question, mark brah. He touched lepers. And as it's like the only, the only connection there is the physical touch, but in all the other things that matter to, to make some guiding a connection to the disease, these are way different things

Julius: right.

Wilson: that, yes, Jesus touched lepers to heal them. What, what given what people are worried about now? It's not like Jesus was like, Hey, I might have left. But here you go. Right. Um, and, and go like rubbing up against children, right. Potentially spreading that disease to them. activity. What heat. And in setting that precedent and then calling his followers to do is to love and care and do everything they can for healing. Right now, this is what these early Christians and during the plagues in the third century, right? This is what Dionysius, this is what Cyprian or Cyprian is, is teaching talking about and calling his followers to do and even understand at this point you've got. 200 plus years of the church working to practice this as best they can. So they've got at this point, they've got the precedent of Jesus, of Jesus's teaching, which creates a moral demand. That then creates a habit. And because, because. Other bishops and Christians had been working to figure out how do we care for the sick and the dying?

How do we care for the vulnerable and the ill? And the poor, the church had began to develop an infrastructure that helped them actually do these things. And so what they ended up doing did, and this is why there are certain sociologists that will credit the plagues. It just, now there are many dimensions to it, you know, theologic.

Dimension spiritual dimensions, uh, sociological psychology, you know, there are many dimensions to it, but on a sociological level, there are many sociologists that will credit the way Christians handled the plague as being a central factor in the spread of Christianity and why this little obscure start-up faith was able to eventually like, uh, convert the empire from the inside out was because of how they handle this, because it led to here. Right now. Sure. Sometimes miraculous and I have no reason and I don't intellectually or otherwise to doubt that part, but even just practical where at the time were so many for fear of their own safety, for fear of their own comfort. We're just abandoning the sick we're abandoning the places where the illness was spreading. Now you have people who are willing to give the most basic and actual needed care. And so more people serve. And when Christians care for the, when Christians care for each other in this way more than abandoning, it was more effective in treating and curing the ill. Right? And so you have both look at the recovery, but also just as sociological numbers, game more are still alive.

More Christians are still alive, and there are plenty of people who survive because Christians care for them. And this is why it's spread. And you see the connection. Between who Jesus is, what he did in the actual outcome of their actions, in caring for other people, right? Not just the F the efficiency and the effectiveness of caring for them, but the outcomes on all those levels, the mental, the spiritual, the psychological, and the physiological levels.

It, it led to goodness and healing. And so it spread. And now in contrast to contemporary situations where people might be using very similar language about, you know, faith over fear, we're learning not to fear. Um, I think what's quite telling and the question we have to wrestle with. Right? And so even with that, and I know being charitable here will not win me points with some other people that are understandably very upset, but, but even still being committed to being charitable and looking to find some kind of common ground, I would at least say that if you're going to take that rhetoric, there's something potentially.

At least that we could work with. Cause it's, it's good. Right? If you're gonna, if you're gonna claim Christ as your Lord, and you're going to take the, the name Christian for yourself, then yes, we, we need to learn what it means to have faith over fear, uh, to, to place our hope in something that is larger than.

Um, to place our, our, our desires to direct our desires and our wants to, to something, um, beyond and larger than just surviving, like sure.

Julius: Right.

Wilson: But if we're going to do that, then we, we must really, really grapple with the question of like, um, who is actually assuming the. And for whom is the risk being assumed? Um, because so many of the things, the critiques that are put out there that need to be listened to are, you're not really putting yourself, especially if you're like a middle-aged healthy. Right. You're you're not, you're not really putting yourself at risk. The critique is that needs to be taken seriously.

You're putting others at risk. You're putting the vulnerable, you're putting the, the, exactly the people that Jesus would risk for. You're putting at risk. And we've got to really wrestle with that question. And so who's assuming it, and for whom and now. The place where I would kind of rubber band this back is to say, yes, we need to learn right.

Slowly, painfully by Jesus's guidance. And it's miraculous. It's, it's nothing other than the holy spirit, continuing to make Christ life Christ, faith, and hopefulness. And God's in God alive in us and to us right. To, to overcome the fear of death. But the question here is what death are you really scared of?

Julius: Hmm.

Wilson: Because I'm afraid that, you know, especially the middle-aged healthy, right. That you're not most concerned with your potential death from COVID

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: I would just, I would put this out and I won't presume to know. Um, but for certain what's going on in the secret places of people's hearts and minds, but I would definitely want it out there as something to talk about and wrestle with.

Is it like, are, are we overcoming that fear of death or is the rear real fear of death that we need to face the fear of our gatherings in our congregation, in our finances

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: dwindling down to nothing or to.

Julius: Yeah, I think, um, one of the other things that I see is like, um, it's interesting that part, that paradox where I feel, and I want to say this is charitably as I can. Is that a lot of the folks who. We'll speak with that kind of what, to me honestly, sounds like bravado sometimes, actually that like people with who speak with bravado are kind of the most scared.

And I kind of, and I sympathize with that. Like I want to show like sympathy because I think some of what's happening there is kind of like, uh, I'm actually, like, I'm actually scared that what if, um, Or at least some of the anxiety that I perceive is that like, what if we're wrong? Like that, that this is, this is a real kind of test of like, what if our faith isn't big enough to handle this?

Or like the way that we do church, like church, as we know how to do it, what if, what if it isn't big enough to hold our fears of death? And so some of us will just swing completely the other way of like, you know what? No, like

Wilson: Right.

Julius: faith over fear.

Wilson: And, and that can go and in a situation like, and where you see it, especially more viscerally for more people was in a time where the plagues were running rampant and they didn't understand germs. They didn't understand bacteria. They didn't have modern medicine, they didn't have a hospital.

Right. And so the best hope was actual people giving. Care for folks not abandoning, right? It gave, gave the IL a much higher chance of survival. Now, continuing this and the desire to be understanding and charitable. I do want to say that I would understand the concerns for our institutions like item. I know for, for a while, it's been very easy to dismiss and criticize something because it's just institutional or you're concerned about maintaining the Institute. Like, I want to say that that, that should be taken into account. If, if we mean what we say, and we do mean what we say about like the ethos and the drive and the vision for this whole podcast is exploring what it means that Christ reconciles and heals all things, then that should include our institutional and political level.

I mean, cause those are just the things that we need to do life together. So yeah. W I understand being worried about that, but we always have to prioritize. And think, but are those really the most important and does it come a time where if we face institutional debt, It's worth it. I mean, learning to F to F uh, learning to overcome the fear of even that death, because this is, this is the thing with institutions.

When we would get really scared, it can be the thing that we place all our hope in to get us through the next five years. Right. This is what if I'm isolated in my house or this or that, this is what's going to keep my income coming or whatever, right. That's the institutional dimension. But if it comes to a conflict between being faithful to Christ and.

Faithing institutional death. Are we willing to face that one to,

Julius: Hmm.

Wilson: and so this is a place where we do. Uh, that this, we haven't talked about it directly yet, but this precedent and story that we've laid out gives us another precedent and story for exactly this question about concerns like for our local churches and for our denominations. Right. That, um, what hasn't been stated and would just need to, to fill in the gap.

What I would need to fill in the gap for some listeners is right about like the. Of what we've named so far. So we've talked about the plagues and the two fifties, and we've talked about Jesus of Nazareth. So, right, right. About the middle of that, right around the beginning of the second century, there's a Bishop named Ignatius of Antioch.

And some of his letters are some of the earliest letters that we have there. There's some of the earliest Christian literature we have. That that date right after the new Testament times. So like next earliest to new Testament documents or some of his letters if, um, Ignatius and where he. Living there's, there's a move right now to, to shift the Christian worship service from Sunday, from Saturday evenings, which is when the traditional Jewish Sabbath had been celebrated to Sunday mornings to place it in line with the resurrection of Christ, which is the foundation and the hope for all like Christian proclamation, everything.

Right. So then moving from Saturday night to Sunday.

Julius: Um,

Wilson: And his letters are immediately a response to the criticism he's received because, uh, Quote, unquote being quiet. And what they mean by that is you're you're in the office doing too much work or you're out in the streets doing too much and you're not showing up and talking a bunch in front of us.

Right. You're letting other people preach and teach. You're not talking enough. And he says the reason. I mean silence. You have to understand the context of what the silence is here, but he says, the reason for my silence here is because I'm the way he says I'm doing the work of a Bishop because when we were worshiping on Saturday nights and this was Eucharist and the Eucharist was actually a full meal, a full communal meal.

And when we're doing that on Sunday nights, he says, this was the primary way that we were able to obey Jesus. So making the connection to what we're talking about here to live and flesh out the precedent. You told us to care for the poor and the ill and the primary central way we do this is, is woven into our worship.

That the Eucharist at the time, wasn't a little like cardboardy wafer and, and a tiny little plastic, uh, cup of grape juice. It was a full meal.

Julius: Um,

Wilson: that meal culminated in the ritual with the bread and the wine that was distributed to everyone is the body, you know, the body and blood of Christ. And this is how the church would bring their resources.

And at this point we could do it here because Saturday nights, the poor and those that the rest of the time they had to work basically nonstop for their. Base-level sustenance, they could show up. But when we go to Sunday mornings, especially those that are still enslaved, those that are working a lot of people may not be able their masters may not give them the time off to attend worship.

And so what I'm concerned with is I understand this. This institutional move, you know, for the liturgical reasons, but Ignatius says, but I'm not speaking so much. I'm giving that to others so that I do the main work of a Bishop, which is making sure we're still finding ways to care for them. Like that's the main precedent, right?

To, to live that out.

Julius: So. So I like what we've come to so far with what this precedent has to offer us. As far as the churches, at least like posture for how to respond to something like a pandemic and how that still, like, it comes down to conforming to the shape of Christ and how the compassion of Christ or the character of like Christ-like compassion that was formed in the church.

Um, and the desire for like healing and wholeness for the community around them is what ultimately gave them the discernment to figure out how to respond to their times. And so pulling together that thread, as well as the thread that we kind of just laid out about like some of our own fears about, um, our own beliefs or like our belief systems or institutions worship, as we know it.

Th that there's some fear about those things dying or disappearing, at least in the form that we knew them. How can the precedent that we talk about? How can that give us some kind of hope for the possibility of like, um, our continued deepening knowledge of Christ, um, even as. The ways that we do, like the worship gatherings changed to, to, um, to adapt to our times, like out of care and the like talking about where we are now in the pandemic, that we've had to learn how to worship together differently, but how can that, um, how can this precedent help ease some of the anxieties that some people have about the church disappearing?

And, um, and I know that we, we put down the thread about like how this. Led to development and how we talk about something like the Trinity even, and how that was a big development. Like

Wilson: Yeah. That's.

Julius: what can that show us?

Wilson: Right. Well, that's right where you got to push it that deep. And we've got to, we've got to like live Christianly that, uh, fundamentally, and, and what that means is it reframes the whole. Is it? Sure. I understand. And again, please, we've we, we get, and we understand the fears and the concerns.

I mean, Shama has felt it too, you know, just like everyone in way. Like we, we understand we have compassion for that, but we've got to see really what's happening would shift our perspective to this. This is providing us an incredible opportunity to commune with Christ, to seek him first and, and to actually know him, but not, not just in like a, an abstract, like heart mind thing, but to actually still tangibly, physically commune with Christ as we care for the sick, the ill, the right.

And. So to, to draw that together, we say, what we've got here starts the historical pieces. We've got Jesus of Nazareth. And he says, this is my body. And this is my blood, right? Not, this will make you think about my body or blood. This will help you remember my body. He says, this is my body. This is my blood.

He also in Matthew 25 says when you cared for the least of. When you clothe the naked, when you gave a drink to the thirsty, when you fed the hungry, when you did this, you did it for me.

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: And when we put, when we put our lives out there with that sort of focus and intensity, we have to see he meant it. And do we believe it that this is an opportunity to care for?

And so to commune. Him. And so what you've got connecting the historical pieces here is you've got Jesus saying these things, making these promises and you have actual church leaders that track. And believe it. And so, all right. So if we're moving it from Saturday night to Sunday morning, I'm gonna make sure my first thing is not getting in front of my people so that I write so that they hear me talk.

And so that they see me, I'm going to, I'm going to say, make sure that I'm gonna be in front of my people in a different way, as far as making sure our priority is to continue to care for Christ, by caring for the. By feeding the hungry and that being part of our worship, part of our identity as the people of God.

So you've got Ignatius that, that puts. Into practice. And so 200 by the year, two 50, when Cyprian and Dionysius are engaging their plagues, they have the commands, the moral demands, the promise of Jesus. You've got the precedent of church that has prioritized that you've got bishops and Christians that make that their habit.

And so what grows up around. Institutions and infrastructure. And so they have all of these things connected that allow them. One to perceive the real opportunity to care for Jesus, by staying in caring for the sick and the dying. And they've got the social accountability, the habits and the infrastructure that make it possible for them to do this.

And so coming out of it, Christian survive at a much higher rate than, than many. People groups. And that creates a spiritual, psychological effect on people, because look at what those Christians did, look how they risked to care for the vulnerable and the sick look. Look how many people would say I am alive because this follower of Christ didn't abandon me.

So to like put a fine point on this. Our fears are unfounded.

Julius: Hmm.

Wilson: If we start to think that, well, if we give up this and if we give up this kind of institutional gathering, like what look things for a time might die. And so that's where the real school is. That's where Dionysius his words still speak to it.

This is an opportunity for us to learn, not to face fear, but we've got to do that soul searching and ask what does. The fear of what death is really most deeply rooted in me.

Julius: Yeah.

Wilson: the promise here is if we're afraid that our faith is going to go away, that our churches are going to go away, that our local gatherings, our bodies, even our institutions, they might shift forms or this and that.

But if we're afraid that the church is going to go away, that our faith and our central doctrines are going to go. No, it's an opportunity for us right now to, to like they were in the two fifties to put ourselves in places where the only explanation is he's still here. And because of that presence, we're experiencing a life and a reality beyond death beyond just our efforts and beyond our explanations.

And. Like it's quite the opposite. It's an opportunity for us to get into a place where our faith gets more real and more true, and it might be an opportunity to shed the fears that lead to a simulacrum of the Christian faith.


MEDITATION

When it comes to understanding things that contain a certain depth - things like lifelong friendships, having and raising a child, seeking a vocation and not just a job, knowing God, with these kinds of things, deeper understanding always follows our living.

For instance, I experienced this in a profound way beginning with the night before I decided I was going to propose to the woman who eventually became my wife. At that point, because of my grade school vocabulary teachers and because of the testimonies of the people who had gone before me in jumping into their own mysteries, I knew, to a certain degree, what words like "commitment," "faithfulness," and "vulnerability," meant.

But that night was one of the most intense nights of my life because it brought me to the enigmatic edge of those deep mysteries .. and invited me to jump.

It brought me to a scary awareness that if I was going to go through with the proposal, I was also going to enter into circumstances that would shift those things from words and concepts and make them into lived realities. 

And the real tension came because what I wanted was to get what I wanted without having to go into that fearsome territory beyond what I already knew. I wanted the fact that I could define words like faithfulness and vulnerability and risk, and use them properly in sentences, to be enough to carry me into a profound communion with someone I loved. 

I wanted to calculate and plan and prepare ... And control ... I wanted especially some guarantee that that vulnerability part would not end up leading to hurt ...

That's what I wanted. And I couldn't let go of wanting it. But I also knew I wasn't going to get it. 

Instead, if my understanding was going to go beyond calculating and controlling ... If my understanding was going to deepen, I would have to enter into and move through that mystery. 

Which meant, my deeper knowledge would have to follow my living.

And so now, 20 years later, having stepped into something like that, I know what words like trust and faith and communion are pointing at in ways that are difficult to put into words even though I've been able to define all the necessary terms since grade school. 

See, the order in which we come to understand is always the reverse of the order of existence.

So here's were we have landed in this episode. People like the Apostles, Ignatius of Antioch, Dionysius of Alexandria and Cyprian of Carthage and their fellow Christians, didn't stop with understanding the grammar of Jesus' sentences. In fact, with some of Jesus' sentences, like -- "What you do for the least of these, you do for me." Or, "Surely I am with you, to the very end of the age." --  once you understand sentences like those, they lead you to confusion. 

And so, the Apostles and Dionysius and the Christians who weathered their plagues, stepped into the mysterious realities those sentences pointed to. 

And because they lived them out, the church was able to give you new words, like "Trinity." 

And, just like words like vulnerability and trust were still to a large degree abstract for me on the night before I proposed, to us, the word "Trinity" seems abstract and etherial because we have only received it as a result of someone else's testimony.

So, if you want to understand what the Word is pointing to on a deeper level, you are invited to follow that same course walked by those who developed the word.

So, in the time of our plague, what opportunity do you have to assume risk for someone else's healing ...

Name it ... Be specific.

What could you give up that might benefit someone in a more vulnerable position? And what might that cost you? 

Do take some time to discern if this is just a silly risk, or if it would be a genuinely Christlike action. It'd probably be a good idea to talk to a couple people you trust to help you in this discernment process. We're not advocating careless and foolish, knee-jerk reactions.

But once you've named a genuine opportunity to be like Christ as you care for Christ in the poor and vulnerable, do it.

Do it in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the Holy Spirit. 

So those words will move from etherial concepts, to names of people you've come to know.