“For we are His handiwork, created in
Christ Jesus for the good works that
God has prepared in advance, that we
should live in them.” –Ephesians 4:10
Recently I have been doing a bit of
driving –trips to the grocery store, the therapist, the pharmacy, down to
Montrose to hear a lecture about Flannery O’Connor, even a drive to and from
Dallas for a college visit. And during
these drives –especially if I am alone at night—I tend to turn on one of the
Christian radio stations to hear someone preach about God. I started this habit
back in my twenties. It just seemed more interesting than most pop music. Regardless, the habit has stuck. And I can be inspired by and learn something
new from even the simplest sermon (or lesson). I’m not too picky. I like R.C.
Sproul (Reformed), Chuck Swindall (Evangelical), Ed Young (Baptist), Charles
Stanley (Southern Baptist), and a couple weeks ago I heard a woman from Africa teaching
lessons from Genesis 12 and the call of “Papa Abraham.” I had never considered
thinking of Abraham as “Papa Abraham,” but I liked it. What first appealed to me was simply the “exotic”
sound of her voice. It was something different from the usually Southern twang
of many of these ministers. But, I also
liked the simple lessons about faith and following God that she was deriving
from just a very few verses about “Papa Abraham.” So, I kept listening.
But, as I listen to these shows
more than occasionally I will hear someone bring up the arguments of the
Reformation as if they were still a sore subject. The other night, driving home
from Sugarland I heard a preacher (not sure of the name) preaching on
Revelations. As I listened he quickly came to the question of the whore of
Babylon and how it was –what he called—the church of Rome. On one level he was making a pretty good case
starting with Constantine and the conversion of Rome; dwelling with particular emphasis
on the mass baptism of Constantine’s army as a sign of the early Church getting
way off on an extremely wrong foot.
I’m not
certain if it was the same guy, but on another evening I heard the Church of
Rome condemned for keeping the Bible out of the hands of the common people for
so many centuries: 1. keeping it in Latin, and 2. keeping the right (or
authority) to interpret scripture unto itself. Whether it was the same guy, it
was definitely the same channel. I’ve head other ministers on that station
(ministers I respect –like Sproul) deride the Roman Catholic church for its corruption
and especially for still teaching that works are required for salvation. And as I listen, I am often struck by the
thought: you’re over-simplifying! It
seems to me that these ministers were probably taught something during seminary
and are simply repeating it without checking to see if its true (or ever was), and
what the other side has to say for itself.
Heck, they don’t even acknowledge that the Lutherans and the Roman Catholics
signed a Joint
Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification back in 1999 (when
John Paull II was still Pope).
To be fair,
I’ve also heard Catholic radio personalities (on EWTN) do the same thing from
the other side. They ridicule or deride
their Protestant brethren for the teaching of justification by faith, and speak
disdainfully of the very idea of sola scriptura –oversimplifying everything
Luther or Calvin or even Barth might have taught.
It feels like (on both sides) there
is a refusal to listen, to engage the actual ideas of the other side, and a
dangerous tendency to oversimplify. Who needs to actually read and contemplate
the ideas of Luther or Calvin or a papal encyclical, when all you’re looking
for is a straw man to knock over with a blast of your own hot air?
For instance, the other night on EWTN
a Catholic apologist was citing several scripture passages as proof that Luther
was all wrong about faith alone, and that clearly Jesus, Himself, was going to
be looking at our works when it came time for the last judgment.
For a Roman Catholic to think that
Luther (or Lutherans) have failed to notice (or consider) Matthew 25:
31-46 is just absurd. A quick Google search will bring up articles and
sermons by contemporary Protestant ministers preaching and teaching on the importance
of works of mercy and love. But look a
little further and we find that Luther addressed this also; as did Calvin; with
grace and inspiring insight. Whether we agree with an interpretation or not,
what you will find in these writings is a brother or sister sincerely seeking
God’s will and not just a cartoon enemy to be taped to a theological dart
board.
The same could be said of those who
have never read an encyclical or Papal letter, or the Catechism of the Catholic
Church, yet wants to criticize her teachings. But who has time to consider what
the other side of an issue when we are all in such a rush to jump to
conclusions?
Which –by way of a lengthy
introduction—brings me back to Paul’s letter to the Ephesians and the very
question of “good works.”
Paul states here that we are “saved
through faith” (points for Luther & JPII) and adds that our faith comes not
through any effort on our part, but as a “gift of God.” How much clearer does the teacher have to be
here? Suddenly I am wondering why the whole Reformation couldn’t have been
handled over in an afternoon at the pub; a couple of pitchers of ale, a block
of Limburger and a loaf of pumpernickel and it’s done! Thomas Moore still has
his head and Servetus still… well, never mind. As we know, the pub was probably
closed for a religious holiday.
(As a side-note, it is interesting
what the church has paired this reading with, a passage from Second Chronicles
(cf.36:14-16;
19-23) about the “works” of God’s people when they are left to their
own devices: abominations and the polluting of the temple. Even when God sends
prophets with warnings the people react only with mockery and scoffing. Sound
familiar? So, God sends them the Babylonians and a little bit of captivity, as
a gift –one might say; a very hard kind of grace.)
But then, what does all this say to
us about our works? Aren’t they worth something? Or why bother?
Well, what does Paul say? Paul says this: our works were prepared for
us by God, “that we should live in them.” Our works are where we are to dwell –prepared
for us before we were born. What does
that mean: “…Prepared in advance that we should live in them?”
I propose that the answer is found
not in theological debates or creeds or encyclicals and catechisms. It is found
in Jesus. In the person of Christ. In
the time of fulfillment personified; in the Kingdom of God made flesh.
When the “sheep” in the parable of
the last judgment ask the King: When did
we see you hungry and feed you? Naked and give you clothes? A stranger and make
you welcome? A prisoner and visit you? Basically, they are asking Jesus:
When, Lord, were we in your presence? When were we dwelling in the Kingdom of
God? Living in the time of fulfillment? And what does Jesus say? He responds:
“In truth I tell you, when you did this for
the least
Of these my brothers, you did it for me…”
(Mt. 25:40)
Basically, He is answering: when
you did this and this and…
True, those works may not earn the
Kingdom of God, but that may not be the point. The point just might be that
they are
the Kingdom of God. (How very Dante-esque, I must say!)
So, if we’ve signed a declaration
of agreement, why do Catholics and Protestants keep arguing about these things?
And why do they always seem to be scoffing and deriding each other’s ideas? Why won’t they just sit down with a pitcher
of Shiner and a plate of nachos and listen to each other? That’s probably a
discussion for another time, but it reminds me of something Jesus says in Sunday’s
Gospel:
“…the
people preferred darkness.” (Jn 3:19)
No comments:
Post a Comment