kenosis and humanity

I’m reading Marilynne Robinson’s book of theological essays, The Givenness of Things, which I will likely be commenting on several times over the coming days (as is my habit when reading a book; just see my series of Wendell Berry posts from last year.) This line caught me today. from an essay titled “Limitation”:

This dialogue between the Devil and the Son of God might be thought of, so soon after the spectacle of his baptism, as a cosmic rather than a historic moment in which Jesus assumes, so to speak, the full panoply of the mortal condition.

I find this observation about the Temptation of Christ from the Gospels by Robinson a really fascinating one, in light of Paul’s quote of the Christ hymn in Philippians 2:

Though he was in the form of God

he did not consider being equal with God something to exploit.

But he emptied himself

by taking the form of a slave

and by becoming like human beings.

When he found himself

in the form of a human,

he humbled himself by becoming obedient…

Robinson’s aside here paints an interesting way to interpret Christ’s kenosis, or self-emptying, and specifically when it happened. Perhaps, early in his ministry, Jesus grappled with what it meant to be the Christ. This grappling is made evident in the story of the Temptation, where Jesus is presented with three visions of what it could mean to take that role, before he makes the decision to take a fourth path: that of the Suffering Servant, of the Son of Man, of the Crucified One. As Robinson notes here, perhaps this was the moment, too, that Jesus decided that the Christ was fully human, rather than a superhero or epic character. The Christ was to be a human being, with all that comes with that – much of which is what the second half of Robinson’s book is pondering.

Anyways, just an interesting perspective on this story that struck me as I was reading.

Excerpt #36: worship as politics

Sometimes our worship practice is criticized as being too passive, all sitting and listening and not enough action. But we need to recover a sense of how some of the most important work we do is sitting and listening to Scripture, taking time to sit and listen to a sermon, to be fed. In simply withdrawing from what the world considers its important business, in taking time to do nothing but worship in a world at war, in celebrating an order of worship in a world of chaos, Christians are making a most political statement. In takes courage to take time to worship God in a world where we are constantly told that it is up to us to do right, or right won’t be done.

Stanley Hauerwas and Will Willimon, The Truth About God, page 62

As Christians, we must never lose sight of the fact that what we do on Sundays is just as important as that which we do Monday through Saturday. I think the criticism Hauerwas and Willimon describe here is real, and that too many churches who are social justice-minded have internalized that criticism. Worship is not an intrusion into, or distraction from, the work of justice and mercy we are called to. It is, in fact, the very act that does that calling to us! How can we know the kind of world God wishes for us if we do not take time to pray, to praise, to read Scripture, and most of all, to be in community with one another?

Ultimately, this is why I ended up back in the church a little over a decade ago, after rejecting religion quite decisively during my time during and just after college. I never lost my passion for the work of justice in the world, but I found I had no moral foundation undergirding it that also infused that justice with compassion, with hope, or with a dose of perspective. I needed worship, even if I wouldn’t have termed it that way at the time, or for a long time even after I began the faith journey to where I am today. My moral and ethical commitments are not in spite of my desire to worship, nor are they driving my religious feeling. No, those commitments are borne out of the act of worshipping week in and week out. That is why the church is so important, and will never go away: people need more than policy papers and disenchanted justice.

St. Paul: Friend or Foe?

During the month of April, I’ve been leading a Sunday school class for adults at my church, titled “St. Paul: Friend or Foe?” The premise of the class is a defense of the apostle Paul against some of the critiques he gets from more progressive voices, especially around his tempering or blunting of Jesus’ ethical teachings. Any reader here knows that Paul is a particular passion of mine, and this kind of defense is one I’ve engaged in before.

For those interested, here is video of the second class, on Paul’s theology. Through the lens of seven key concepts – cruciformity, covenant, freedom, the theological virtues, justification, participation, and countercultural ethics – I show how Paul’s theology is a well thought out scaffold that comes together as an inclusive, love-centered whole. Give it a watch, and click the link below to view week one, which was a basic biographical look at who Paul was and what he wrote.

Click here to watch week one.