|
Getting
the Name Right Sermon by Cynthia A. Jarvis June 15, 2003, Presbyterian Church of Chestnut Hill Psalm 103 "And because you are children, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying 'Abba! Father!' So you are no longer a slave, but a child, and if a child, then also an heir, through God." The issue of inclusive language in the church has been a hot issue for some time now. For at least twenty years, probably more, questions have been asked, opinions have been expressed, sometimes gently, sometimes vehemently, and concerns have been raised about how the church talks about humanity, about how the church talks about God and about how the church talks about the relationship between the two. "A concern for inclusive language bespeaks the church’s emerging conviction both that the diversity of the people of God is to be acknowledged and embraced in such a way that all may feel included," reads a report issued by our denomination, "as well as the realization that every reference to God is limited in its capacity to express the reality and mystery of the One who has so variously encountered us." These words this day have to do with how it is we express, as best we can, the reality and mystery of this one who has so variously encountered us, this triune God who will always be greater than any words we might find to describe. It is appropriate proclamation on the day not only because it is Fathers' Day, but because it is actually Trinity Sunday, the day set aside by the church to, I guess, consider the Trinity. I say, "I guess" because Trinity Sunday is the only Sunday which celebrates a doctrine, rather than occasion. And since it seems a bit strange to celebrate the Trinity, let us simply consider. On this Trinity Sunday then, I bid us consider the language of the church, the language we use for the Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, knowing well that it is finite and limited, but also knowing well that the words we use and the names we invoke shape our understanding of and so our relationship with God. What that means is that they shape our lives. Let me say, at the outset, this "language issue" in the church is one that intertwines strands of political correctness, with stands of feminism, with stands of theological substance and it is not easy to separate them from one another. The issue is a complicated and multifaceted one. It tends to evoke strong reactions. One the one hand, some people get very angry when words to hymns get changed or who rail in protest when prayer or proclamation includes any feminine images for God. On the other hand, some people get very angry when they hear the pronoun "He" for God, who would rather hear prayers bidding to the Father/Mother God and who have written volumes of creative and inclusive resources for worship. There are, I suspect, some of both gathered this day. Nevertheless, this day I want to give this "Father, Son and Holy Spirit" an honest go as we consider this our "God in three persons, blessed Trinity." To begin, of course, we must ask after what we mean by the Trinity, or the Triune God. There is a story told about Augustine, the great theologian of the 5th century church. One day he was standing at the seashore, watching a child scooping up seawater and pouring it into the sand. Augustine asked what the child was doing and she replied, "I'm emptying the sea into the sand." Augustine laughed at the impossibility and the child replied, "Watch, I'll drain the sea before you understand the Trinity." Well, though the historicity of this little story may be called into question, its point cannot; the Trinity is a mystery and complete understanding of it will forever elude us. The word Trinity is not a word we find in the Bible, yet the doctrine is biblical in the sense that through the Bible we find the people of God experiencing God in three ways. It is a doctrine, writes one theologian, which "arises out of the experience of the Christian community. On the one hand, Christians declared that God is one. The first Christians had been nurtured in the faith of ancient Israel, 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord alone. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might.' Yet the Christian community was constituted by the presence of Jesus Christ in the midst of his disciples … devout people who had always said 'The Lord our God is one Lord' now spoke of Jesus Christ as God. In addition the Holy Spirit descended upon them and empowered them in new and remarkable ways. Yet they knew the Holy Spirit as the power of God in their midst and they knew the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of Christ." God in three persons. There were a few kinks as the early church tried to understand this God, and a few thinkers who ended up as heretics along the way, but in the formula of baptism and in the life of the early church generally Christians spoke of God as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And generally Christians still do. This is where we get to the issue of "getting the name right." These days there are those who reject the traditional Trinitarian language of "Father, Son and Holy Spirit." There are a number of reasons for their rejection. Some who have suffered neglect or abuse by men refuse these words because they bring more pain than comfort. Some have had relationship of equality and respect with men, yet are reluctant to use male gender nouns (Father) or pronouns (he) in referring to God because they feel that language of this kind fosters a second-class status for women. More often than not the language used, rather than "Father, Son and Holy Spirit," is "Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer." It is said as the waters of baptism are poured, as bread is broken and as blessings are given. Here is my point: Changing the language changes the theology, and changing the theology, I think, makes a profound difference for you and for me. Let me be clear- I am entirely in support of changing our language, of making it inclusive, as it relates to humanity. As a woman I want to be included in humankind, not mankind and I want to be considered a part of the people of God, rather than the men of God. They do not, as one of you said to me not long ago, "mean the same thing." I also am entirely in support of broadening the images we use to talk about God and, where it is possible, avoiding singular or excessive use of masculine imagery. The Bible is chocked full of metaphors and images of God that are so very rich and meaningful: the Shepherd who tenderly cares for each and every lost sheep, the Pillar of Light which guides and comforts through the darkness, the Rock which will hold us up when nothing else seems to, the Sun which warms and nourishes, the Eagle which hides us under gentle wings, the Provider who knows are wants and our needs before we even have words to speak them, and yes, even the Mother who bends down to lift her weeping child. How much more we would grow, I think, in our relationship with God were we to employ all of these images given us. But, and here it is that I part ways with some of the voices in the church calling for change, I do not believe that we should change the way we speak about the Trinity. And here is why: Changing the language changes the theology and that makes a profound difference for you and for me. In the first place, setting aside the language of Father in the context of the Trinity, in favor of language that would be "more inclusive" such as "Creator, Redeemer and Sustainer" tends to make the parts of the Trinity simply functional. Shirley Guthrie writes about this problem, [in this case] "God is like a heavenly board of directors of a corporation made up of three equal partners, each of whom has a particular responsibility. The Father handles creation (production and maintenance?), the Son handles salvation (sales and distribution?) and the Spirit handles the reception and enjoyment of salvation (customer satisfaction?) … [It is] obviously to think of three different gods who perform three different tasks." What this does, other than creating, in function, three separate gods, I think, is limit God to being a God of functions, which both seems awfully abstract and distant, and which pulls us further and further away from a personal and relational God. We are missing out on a whole lot about God if we only think of God doing certain jobs or of God as corporation. The Trinity is not about division of labor and not about the jobs God does to deliver the "goods of salvation" to us, but about a relationship, personal and intimate, which grants us light and life. All of which is to say that there is a reason for the personal, relational language for God and for the Trinity. It is personal and relational because the God revealed in the scriptures is personal and relational. The God of the Bible is not an abstract philosophic concept, but a living God, a living personality if you will, who enters into human history to have fellowship with human beings, with us. Taking away the language that speaks of that relationship takes away, I think, so much of God. In the second place, relational language has to do not with God's fellowship with us, but with God's fellowship within the Trinity. You see, God is capable of having fellowship with humanity, with us, because God has fellowship within the Trinity. God is capable of loving because God embodies love within the Trinity. The God who calls us to community is a communal being, consisting of three persons but as one. There is a beautiful image that some use of God, as love, spilling over into other persons with whom to relate in love. To the point, C.S. Lewis writes, "All sorts of people are fond of repeating the Christian statement that God is love. But they seem not to notice that the words, God is love, have no real meaning unless God contains at least two Persons. Love is something that one person has for another person. If God was a single person, then before the world was made, He was not love. Of course, what these people mean when they say that God is love is often something quite different: They really mean, Love is God. They really mean that our feelings of love, however and wherever they arise, and whatever results they produce, are to be treated with great respect. Perhaps they are," he says, "But that is something quite different from what Christians mean by the statement, God is love. They believe that the living, dynamic activity of love has been going on in God forever and has created everything else." Our Triune God is a never-ending being in relationship, creating and re-creating in love. So to take relational language away from the way we talk about God, to replace the language of Father and Son which are inextricably connected one to the other, with Creator and Redeemer which can exist quite apart from the other, changes the way that we think about, talk about, and experience that God. Finally, I think, the way we talk about this our Triune God has to do with more than just ourselves or the inner life of God. It has to do with the lives of our children and the way that they think about, talk about and experience God. It has to do with passing on the faith. The greatest gift we can give our children, I know, is a God on whom to call, which is to say that the greatest gift we can give them is a God who wants to be ever in relationship with them, loving them, caring for them, guiding them, creating, redeeming, sustaining them to be sure, but also embracing them like as a father who runs to welcome the prodigal home. There is no question that you and I need to be able to speak vividly of the biblical God if we are to pass on to our children the depth and breadth of the Christian faith. There is no question that the more we immerse ourselves and our children in the stories of the Bible, the more images we find to enrich our worship and prayer. When we read the story of the Exodus, we understand and can teach our children how God is our deliverer. When we listen to Jesus’ lament over Jerusalem, we see and can teach our children how God can be like a mother hen. When we hear him cry "Abba! Father!" we can feel and teach our children how God is like a father. When we feel the rush of the flames of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, we experience and can teach our children the power of God. And when we hear the command to baptize all nations in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, that name expresses for us, for our children, for little Jillian, the whole Gospel message. No other words that I know of express the whole Gospel message so completely and so fully and so powerfully. I know that it is easy to get lost in the inner life of the Trinity. I know that there is much more that could be said, and is said (mostly by those in the Ivory Tower) about the nature of the Trinity. I know that there is more that could be said with respect to the way we use language in the church and in the life of faith. I know that all the ways we will ever find to talk about God or to talk about the Trinity will ever be inadequate and I know that we will never get God's name right short of the kingdom coming. But I also know that, in the end, faith is not about us getting it right or calling upon the correct name. Because I know that, I believe and trust that, in the end, it is about God getting our names right. It is about God knowing and calling each one of our names and loving us so. In the name of the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit, Amen. |