796
24
26018
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/80feb88aa02ea4a0ff8bac74fab2193b.pdf
036dd1371e8661f5c65743a4bf021536
PDF Text
Text
On Being Civil and Committed:
Reclaiming a Great Tradition
Lecture By
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
At
United Church of Christ Fall 1996 Conference
St. John’s United Church of Christ
Grand Rapids, Michigan
October 6, 1996
Prepared Text
I am honored to be invited to address you at this Fall Conference. I come to you
as one recently released from a denominational affiliation, which I am certain is
no news to anyone here. On Tuesday of last week, the Classis of Muskegon, RCA,
signed a separation agreement with Christ Community and accepted the
resigning of my ordained status within the Reformed Church in America. I
mention this because it gives me a new sense of freedom. The experience is one of
being unleashed and, with that, a sense of entering a much larger world.
This sense of release has been mine now for some time as I have been
emotionally removed from the RCA since February when the Classis judged me
out of bounds. And I have found that I have moved into a state of being able to
identify with a much larger community of faith than ever before.
In the 60s, I spent four years in Europe. I found that a richly enlightening
experience as I was able to look at my own nation from afar, from a distance.
Being immersed in the culture of The Netherlands, I was able to view my own
country with the eyes of my Dutch neighbors. That was a transforming
experience. I came home, but I've never been the same. I had been broken loose
from a narrow nationalism and had come to appreciate another culture, people,
way of structuring government, society.
I tell you this because it reflects something of what I feel as I come into your
fellowship today. I come with a deep appreciation for who you are as the United
Church of Christ. I have been aware of you, knowing a few of your clergy, learning
much from the work of your Walter Brueggemann, being aware of the cutting
edge positions you have taken as a denomination. But, more recently, I have had
© Grand Valley State University
�On Being Civil and Committed
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
a more intimate look at the UCC. Over these past months I have received several
letters of encouragement from UCC folk and I am indebted to your Conference
Minister, David Reece, for his supportive presence and counsel. I have had the
sense that I am not alone and that I am not outside the great mainstream of the
Christian tradition. In your fellowship I would never have been called in question.
I never suspected I would be in my present position. Over the past twenty-five
years I have carried out my pastoral ministry, nurturing and shaping a faith
community as I myself have continued to probe the biblical story and reflect on
Christian faith formulation in light of our contemporary context. I have been
straightforward in my preaching and teaching at home and I have attempted to
engage the RCA in theological reflection through my writing in Perspectives, a
journal founded by the RCA in 1985 to stimulate theological discussion. I carried
out my calling to think the faith seriously and responsibly and I had a genuine
concern to effect theological renewal within the RCA.
Suddenly that was challenged, not because of theological positions set forth in
writing, but because at Christ Community we offered our chapel for use by the
Metropolitan Community Church of Muskegon, a denomination that ministers to
marginalized folk, especially the Gay/Lesbian community. Once the investigation
of our ministry to that community began, it soon broadened to my theological
positions, which had been in print in the journal of the RCA for a decade. The
investigation became a nightmare; the matter took on a life of its own. The result
was that I was judged outside the parameters of RCA confessional statements. I
resigned my ordination in the Reformed Church in America, which has, after
some months of negotiation and a good deal of anguish, now been recognized by
the Classis of Muskegon.
You did not gather today to hear my story, but that recent experience is so fresh
and vivid in my mind that you must recognize that it forms the context of what I
want to say to you today. My experience causes me to want to affirm the spirit
and posture of the UCC. All human institutions have strengths and weaknesses
and I'm sure as you experience the UCC from the inside there are elements you
value and aspects you might want to change. But, as one who views you from the
outside, let me call you to appreciate and value the liberal spirit that marks you as
a denomination. I use liberal not as a catch word or as a label for a certain
theological persuasion, but in the sense of a spirit of openness; liberal as large,
broad, generous in contrast to narrowness of outlook, of mind; in contrast to
meanness of spirit, to bigotry and dogmatism. I use liberal in the sense of
magnanimity.
It is that spirit that I find marking you as a people and I want to suggest that,
because that is so much a part of your culture, you might take it for granted, but
you must never take it for granted. And beyond that, Liberalism as a name for
that 19th-century theological development that marked the progressive wing of
© Grand Valley State University
�On Being Civil and Committed
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
Protestantism in its mainline expression has taken a beating in the last half
century and especially in the last couple of decades.
One hears the claim, "Liberalism is dead," and not infrequently there is a certain
satisfaction in that claim as though what Liberalism's critics always claimed has
proven true - that it held forth an inadequate Gospel, a faulty view of scripture
and a flawed theological vision. As sign of Liberalism's naiveté concerning the
radical darkness that again and again erupts into the human scene, the demonic
that lurks in the wings of historical movement, one hears reference to the
preeminent journal of liberal Christianity, The Christian Century, named around
the turn of the century that was to be the century in which the Kingdom of God
came to flower - The Christian century. Then one is reminded of the bloodshed,
violence and horrendous evil that has manifested itself in this century now
nearing its close, and one hardly dares confess the least affinity with the great
Liberal ideals that fired the imagination of the spokespersons of that movement.
Add to this century's bludgeoning of the liberal vision the rise of the Religious
Right with its rhetoric of righteous indignation over the societal chaos and
turbulence coming to expression in the 60's - the collapse of values and
crumbling of the foundations of family, church and nation, and it is clear that any
claim to hold and advocate the Liberal vision is a sure formula for being written
off as a hopeless Don Quixote, dreaming an impossible dream.
Perhaps it is best to begin with the admission that the classic Liberal vision was
flawed. Under the spell of evolutionary development that so permeated every
sphere of the human endeavor as this century dawned, there was a dangerous
naiveté and shallow optimism that marked the thought of Protestant liberalism.
The Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man was as glaring in its sunny
optimism as in its sexist expression. The Kingdom of God was coming through
rational human effort and goodwill. The arrogance of Western civilization's
paternalistic attitude to the rest of the globe and the exploitative colonialism were
well masked under a facade of good will, for the most part sincere, of bringing
light to the nations, liberation to those enslaved in heathen darkness. The
darkness would retreat before the dawning of the light of the world, Jesus Christ.
John S. B. Monsell caught the spirit of the 19th century in his hymn, penned in
1863:
Light of the world, we hail Thee,
Flushing the eastern skies;
Never shall darkness veil Thee
Again from human eyes;
Too long, alas, withholden,
Now spread from shore to shore;
Thy light so glad and golden,
Shall set on earth no more.
© Grand Valley State University
�On Being Civil and Committed
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
There is something here that stirs the soul. There is a grand vision of light and
love enveloping the whole human family. But then this "Christian Century"
moved into unprecedented darkness and the manifestation of the demonic such
as could not have been imagined. The great wars, the Cold War, the anguish of
the Middle East, the agony of the Balkan countries - as this century draws to its
close, we must recognize that the amazing breakthroughs in science and
developments in technology have only increased exponentially the potential for
the human family to destroy itself, its environment and its grandest vision.
Liberalism reacted against the orthodoxy locked in a 17th-century paradigm of
Protestant scholasticism which was defensively reacting against the rise of the
modern in the wake of the Enlightenment. Liberalism scrubbed the dour doctrine
of original sin, emaciated the Evil One with the promise of progress through
education and saw everywhere in historical development the upward movement
of the evolutionary drive.
But, instead of the Kingdom of God - disaster dawned.
I cannot rehearse the whole theological, social history of the last half of our
century, but only mention the names of Karl Barth and the reversal of the liberal
tide on the continent with his Theology of the Word and God - the "Wholly
Other"; Reinhold Niebuhr and his powerful recognition of the darkness that
continues to threaten and the demonic that breaks out again and again.
Liberalism has been chastened and put on the defensive. And we are now faced
with a vociferous Religious Right marked by fundamentalism in biblical
interpretation, arrogance in claim to be the Christian voice and belligerence in
claiming its right to determine "Christian values," willing if possible to legislate
its social agenda.
Well, before we dispose of the Liberal vision, let's take a closer look at where we
are in the cosmic journey and whether or not there are contained in that vision
essential insights and attitudes that cannot be lost if we are to fulfill our calling to
follow the way of Jesus, live under the reign of God, and be agents of Shalom in
the world.
In a society locked in culture wars where reasoned discourse and respectful
dialogue is all but a lost art, I believe there is a critical need for a resurgence of
the liberal vision, duly humbled by the experience of this century, taking account
of the reality of historical existence as it has been experienced in this century, the
most violent ever. My contention is based on my conviction that a world marked
by global consciousness, technology that has made the world a neighborhood and
the fact of religious pluralism demands an open mind, a gracious spirit and an
all-embracing compassion.
© Grand Valley State University
�On Being Civil and Committed
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
Global consciousness marks our world. For the first time ever, humankind is
experiencing a common history. The beautiful picture of this lovely planet
suspended against the black background of spacial darkness is reproduced on
posters and postage stamps. Our kind has set foot on the moon and looked back
on the earth - beautiful, fragile and obviously an interconnected whole. That view
of our world from beyond us is a symbol of the reality of our human existence.
We are one and belong to each other and all the barriers that divide - national
borders, tribal turf, religious enclaves – erode before the compelling reality of one
world spinning out its destiny in cosmic space.
The image of the planet as one, indivisible whole is being translated into
existential experience through the marvels of the electronic age, the wonders of
global communication. Being one of the few human creatures remaining who
owns not a computer and cannot even type, I am an anachronism, a dinosaur, left
in amazement before it all. Through the enthusiasm and genius of one of our
young members, Christ Community has a Web Site. On August 22,1996, an
article appeared on the front page of The New York Times describing our
controversy with the Muskegon Classis. The Times puts their copy on the Internet
and they referenced our Web Site. Within the next 12 hours, our Web Site went
crazy recording over 200 'Visits" from around the world. There are no walls high
enough or impermeable enough to stifle the word that goes out into space and
returns to earth as the falling rain.
A world marked by global consciousness, bound together in community through
communication and bowing in worship to God in churches, temples, mosques,
ashrams and a variety of shrines - that is our present state.
In her book, Encountering God, Diane Eck narrates her own pilgrimage from
Montana Methodism to immersion in Hindu religious culture in the Holy City of
Banares. Teaching at Harvard, she has a task force of students fanning out over
this nation of ours taking photographs of the places of worship of the multiplicity
of faiths that are now a part of the American scene. The landscape is marked by
religious pluralism - that is the fact of our time.
How will we respond to our time - named by many as Post-Modern? That term
becomes almost useless because it is attached to such diverse dimensions of the
present, but it may yet be usable for us if we define it in the context of our present
focus on the movement we have described as Liberalism.
As mentioned above, Liberalism reacted against the stubborn orthodoxy of the
17th century. It welcomed the throwing off of authoritarianism and the
ascendency of human rationality as it emerged in the Enlightenment. But the
Enlightenment reduction of reality to the measure of human rationality proved
inadequate. There was a loss of the Mystery of the transcendent and the rule of
human rationality was proven false by the eruption of evil in our century. The
Modern period, marked by confidence in human reason to shape and control
human destiny, gave way to a post-modern era, which in some forms denies the
© Grand Valley State University
�On Being Civil and Committed
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
existence of absolutes and dissolves into an abyss of relativism which allows of no
claims to absolute certitudes.
In a more humble expression, post-modernism is marked not by the denial of the
Absolute or of absolute truths, but by the denial that humankind rooted in
concrete historical circumstance is able to grasp the Absolute or formulate
absolute truth statements. Rather, there is a recognition that being human is to
be limited to a relative grasp of the Absolute and that every truth claim is
provisional, that human knowledge is cumulative, growing, and that human
religious tradition must be living, open-ended and in need of constant revision.
If our world and our age is at all as I have set it forth, then it must be obvious that
a brittle orthodoxy that claims a revelation of propositional truths that move
through history unaffected by development and a strident fundamentalism that
reiterates yesterday's answers to today's questions cannot meet the challenge of
the reality of our world, cannot address with openness and sensitivity the moving
target of the human condition.
It is for that reason that I affirm the posture and spirit of the UCC and urge you
not to take it for granted and not to be intimidated by the raspy rhetoric of the
Religious Right. I would encourage you, rather, to be faithful to your vision and
be firm in your resolve to stand for those causes that represent the grace of God
as it was embodied in the way of Jesus.
It is not for me to set your agenda; I call you, rather, to confidence in your
historic posture and spirit. Yet, lest I leave everything vague and fuzzy, let me
suggest some concrete challenges that will concretize how your posture and spirit
might find expression.
Continue to lead the way in the matter of the ordination of gay/lesbian persons. I
really do not know the history of how you came to your prophetic stance, but you
lead the way on an issue that vexes those church bodies that are wrestling with
the issue, to say nothing of those bodies that have not yet openly dealt with the
issue. You are in ecumenical discussions with Lutheran and Reformed bodies and
I know from my former church body you have been called to turn from your
practice before some kind of union would be considered. Stand firm. Continue to
lead the way.
The matter of sexual orientation tears the Church apart. Homosexuality is one of
the most volatile issues with which the Church must deal. I did not choose to
champion the cause of those of homosexual orientation. Ours was an act of
hospitality to the MCC group. But, when confronted with the challenge to our
action, I had to be true to my conviction. And my position is clear:
It is not a moral issue. For claiming that, I have been assaulted by a blind
biblicism that fails both to take seriously the knowledge available to us today
from the sciences and to exercise a responsible biblical hermeneutic.
© Grand Valley State University
�On Being Civil and Committed
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
In regard to the instance of the Byron Center teacher, also, we see the incendiary
effect of the discussion of sexual orientation. When an issue elicits such response,
one can be sure there is great fear, ignorance, and insecurity operating.
Out of that situation has arisen a group called Concerned Clergy in which the
UCC is well represented. We must continue to stand for reasoned understanding,
justice and compassion. I have been moved by the stories that have been told to
me by those who have suffered from discrimination and rejection, spurned as less
than human. You are the people to take the lead and break down the walls of
suspicion and misinformation and replace walls with bridges of compassion and
embrace.
I mention a second area in which I believe you have been prophetic and call you
to continue - standing for and with the most vulnerable of society.
On the Sunday following the passage of the Welfare Reform Bill, I said in the
sermon, "Congratulations, Mr. President. Congratulations, members of Congress.
You have changed the face of welfare in this country. Now, when will you deal
with the big issues facing this nation?"
Well, I got a little response to that. I was asked if I thought the state of welfare did
not require change - was I arguing for the perpetuation of the current system?
That, of course, was not my point. Rather, I was trying to indicate that we are
selective in our indignation; that a stealth bomber or two would cover all the
abuse of the system. And further, while I'm sure reform is needed, who, in the
meantime, will watch for those who fall through the cracks?
The Church must make its voice heard on behalf of the voiceless ones. While we
must be engaged in concrete aid and support to the poor and disadvantaged, we
cannot make such efforts a substitute for an ongoing struggle for a more just and
humane and compassionate social-economic order.
Finally, let me challenge you to the critical importance of interfaith dialogue.
Hans Küng has said there will be no peace in the world without peace among the
religions. Religion is a powerful force in the human situation and the militancy of
the respective fundamentalism of Christianity, Islam and Judaism puts our world
at risk.
In our world where the other is our neighbor, we cannot continue with a blind
exclusivism that dogmatically affirms its truth to be the only truth, its way to
God, the only way. Not only does that fail to build broad community and mutual
respect, it also fails to realize the enrichment of spiritual insight and the
enhancement of human wellbeing that dialogue affords.
I just returned from two weeks in Spain. I visited Toledo, site of the Council of
Toledo in 589 - an important early Christian center that was conquered by the
Moors in the 8th century, bringing with them their Moslem faith. For centuries
© Grand Valley State University
�On Being Civil and Committed
Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
the Jewish, Christian and Islamic communities lived peacefully together until the
13th century when Christian forces conquered, driving out the Jews and
Moslems, instituting the Inquisition, where it was convert or be banished or lose
your life. We moved on to Cordoba where, in the middle of a magnificent mosque,
the conquering Christians raised a cathedral towering over the surrounding
mosque, sign of Christianity's triumph. And then it was Seville. There, the
cathedral took over the mosque site. The tower of the mosque was kept intact, but
the huge silver monstrance that served the cathedral was replicated on top of the
mosque's tower - again a sign of the triumphalism of the Church. And when the
Jews were driven out, the Jewish quarter was renamed Santa Cruz - The Holy
Cross. In all of this I was struck by the arrogance of the triumphalist spirit that
has marked so much of Christendom in its history, and I felt deeply the need for a
different spirit to mark the Church in our day.
Just as the early Jesus movement discovered the wide embrace of God's grace for
the Gentiles without demanding they become Jews, so is not the God of Israel,
the God of Jesus calling us today to recognize that the grace that flows from the
heart of God embraces peoples beyond the Christian Church?
These matters I mention are illustrative, not exhaustive. I use them simply as
example of a spirit, a perspective.
My concern is, as I began, to call for a resurgence of a liberal tradition chastened, to be sure - humble, acknowledging our limited insight and knowledge
as part of our human condition; gracious, open to the other, the alienated, the
vulnerable; passionate, finding in the way of Jesus the way of compassion; a
liberal tradition that combines intellectual integrity with evangelical passion.
Intellectual integrity - We need to think the Faith - to reflect on the biblical story
in light of our historical context. We must know the story and the tradition that
has shaped us. And we must be open to contemporary human experience, to all
the knowledge afforded us in the full spectrum of human learning. Out of that
reflection on the biblical story and the faith tradition in light of our present
human experience, we have something to say and action informed by insight.
A mind open to the Word and the world. A heart passionate with the grace of God
embracing the world in all its connectedness. A liberal tradition marked by
humility, passionate, and full of faith. As we traveled through Spain we stopped
in La Mancha and visited the windmills challenged by Don Quixote. Lunching in
the village that was the setting for Cervantes' novel, I had my picture taken near a
bronze sculpture of the strange warrior and I thought to myself, here was a fit
hero for our time - Calling for the resurgence of the liberal tradition in our culture
marked by a conservative tide laced with mean spirit, defensiveness and fear, we
must dare to dream the impossible dream.
Do you remember Eldonza, the kitchen maid whom Quixote named Dulcinea,
against her protest that she was nothing but a slut - no lady at all? Do you
remember that scene where Quixote lies dying, disillusioned? She comes to him,
© Grand Valley State University
�On Being Civil and Committed
Richard A. Rhem
Page 9
now having become the lady he saw in her while still in her rags, saying to him,
"I'm your Lady Dulcinea," transformed by his naming her not as she was, but as
she might become. Be true to yourselves. In an age of quite a different spirit, I
challenge you to make your own these stirring lines from "The Man From
LaMancha."
To dream the impossible dream,
to fight the unbeatable foe,
to bear with unbearable sorrow,
to run where the brave dare not go.
To right the unrightable wrong,
to love, pure and chaste from afar,
to try when your arms are too weary,
to reach the unreachable star.
This is my quest, to follow that star,
no matter how hopeless, no matter how far,
To fight for the right without question or pause,
to be willing to march into hell for a heavenly cause.
And I know if I'll only be true
to this glorious quest
that my heart will lie peaceful and calm,
when I'm laid to my rest.
And the world will be better for this:
that one man, scorned and covered with scars,
still strove with his last ounce of courage,
to reach the unreachable stars.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Event
Address to Fall UCC Conference
Series
Lecture
Location
The location of the interview
St. John's United Church of Christ, Grand Rapids, MI
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-3-19961006
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1996-10-06
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
On Being Civil and Committed: Reclaiming a Great Tradition
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Talk created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on October 6, 1996 entitled "On Being Civil and Committed: Reclaiming a Great Tradition", as part of the series "Lecture", on the occasion of Address to Fall UCC Conference, at St. John's United Church of Christ, Grand Rapids, MI. Tags: Universal Grace, Religious Pluralism.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Religious Pluralism
Universal Grace
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/cc40c3f4dfac3402bcfd854d2261eaf1.pdf
509624808df6453e49bd6b4166addf28
PDF Text
Text
The Emergence of the Sacred in Human Being
For the Muskegon Council for the Arts & Humanities Festival,
On the theme “Freedom and Privacy”
Richard A. Rhem
Torrent House
Muskegon, Michigan
October 4, 2004
Prepared text of the lecture
It is an honor to be the tenth Marguerite Holcomb lecturer and to be included on
the program of the 2004 Muskegon Arts and Humanities Festival. In all my years
of preaching, even though I observed the Church Year calendar and loved the
great festivals of that calendar, I resisted using the Lectionary which provided a
four-fold set of scripture readings for each Sunday and all Feast Days. For me, it
was part of the creative process to wrestle with season, scripture and theme. And
so, when Mr. Ford called me to invite me to give these lectures and gave me, as
well, the theme “Freedom and Privacy,” my only hesitation in accepting the
invitation was the assignment of the theme.
I have insisted on determining my themes in private, with freedom, you see!
Freedom and Privacy? What qualifies me to address such a subject? But, then, in
his own inimitable fashion, Mr. Ford continued, suggesting I could really develop
the subject in any way I chose, even if the theme was not at all evident.
I was also encouraged by a gracious letter from Martha Ferriby in which she
wrote:
The theme of the 2004 Festival is “Freedom and Privacy.” With that theme
in mind, we have no preconceived approaches you should take. We
encourage you to develop your own presentation consistent with your area
of specialization ... You are encouraged to consider the wide range of
subjects touching our contemporary world within your area of expertise.
That was the permission I needed to think about “Freedom and Privacy”
philosophically and theologically. I suspect, although I do not know, that the
theme was determined in light of our contemporary situation which has been so
largely shaped by 9/11. The terrorist attack on this nation and the worldwide
terrorist phenomenon has required governmental measures to attempt to provide
security in an increasingly dangerous world and security measures inevitably
threaten human rights. Especially in a nation that has been marked by the
Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, the creation of a Department
© Grand Valley State University
�Emergence of the Sacred
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
of Homeland Security and the passage of the Patriot Act create tension with
fundamental human rights as we have enjoyed them. Surveillance cameras
becoming a fact of life, along with provisions of the Patriot Act create a chill as
the possibility of an Orwellian world emerges.
I am a technological dinosaur, but I am learning slowly to use the computer. I
know enough to go to Google and with one finger type in words. For “Freedom”
and then “Privacy” and then for “Freedom and Privacy,” I found a few million
entries. Not being up to researching that vast field, I did linger long enough to
realize that not only the terrorist threat but also the Internet has created a whole
new threat to Privacy. One’s profile as to habits and tastes can now be filled out in
details and, as we are all aware, the tension between freedom and control has
created one of the great contemporary debates.
You may have heard of the comment made by Scot McNealy, Co-founder,
Chairman and CEO of Sun Microsystems. He was asked at a press conference
about the need for privacy and said:
You have no privacy. Get over it.
Well, he caused a firestorm, but the response clearly indicates that he touched a
raw nerve and the issue at stake will not be solved by raising the decibels of
emotional retort.
As I said earlier, I do not know how our theme was selected, but I suspect our
contemporary situation marked by terrorist threat, security measures, as well as
the whole new complex of issues raised by the Internet may well have played into
the discussion.
As critical as this whole complex of issues is for the well-being of present and
future society, I have no special knowledge or experience to offer a full analysis of
the problems nor to offer solutions to the new threats to our freedom and our
privacy. What does interest me, however, and what I have spent much time
thinking about is the nature of human being. And one cannot think long and
deeply about the human without recognizing the critical importance Freedom
plays and the right to Privacy, as well.
The first point I would like to make is that the American Experience grounds its
core values of Freedom and Human Dignity in a religious-metaphysical
understanding.
The American experience in its formation rooted human freedom in the Sacred
Source of Being itself. In the familiar words of the Declaration of Independence,
We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal; that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that
among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure
© Grand Valley State University
�Emergence of the Sacred
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just
powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of
government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people
to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its
foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form as
to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
Chief architect of that great document, Thomas Jefferson, in his first Inaugural
Address contended,
Equal and exact justice to all ... of whatever state or persuasion, religious
or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations,
entangling alliances with none. ... Freedom of religion, freedom of the
press, and freedom of person ... These principles form the bright
constellation which has gone before us, and guided our steps through an
age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and the blood
of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the
creed of our political faith, the text of civil instruction, the touchstone by
which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from
them in moments of error or alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and
to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety.
In our day, advocates of the Christian Religious Right claim ours is a Christian
nation, but such a claim is unwarranted. The foundation of human dignity issuing
in human freedom transcends any particular religious creed while rooting that
claim more profoundly in a shared religious conviction that human worth and
human freedom are given by the Creative Source of Being, however that Sacred
Mystery is conceived or named.
The authors of our forming documents were Enlightenment thinkers whose
Christian faith found particular expression in a Deistic creed. God, Creator, other
than creation, was the Source and guarantor of human dignity, human rights and,
thus, human freedom. The claim that these truths are self-evident may well be
challenged as one observes the human story. Obviously, accident of birth, to say
nothing of innate giftedness would seem to call in question the surface claim that
all are created equal. But, certainly this is not a recent recognition; it must have
been evident, as well, when these words were penned.
What, then, is the claim of equality, of certain inalienable rights? Surely those
claims must point to that which is universally shared - the sacredness of human
being in the created order of Being itself. This was the fundamental conviction of
the Deist who had moved beyond Christian orthodoxy but held, nonetheless, to a
conception of God as Creator. In this understanding, God is the great Clockmaker
who creates the universe, endows it with the Laws of Nature, and sets it on its
way without intervention or interruption.
© Grand Valley State University
�Emergence of the Sacred
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
The Deists, as their orthodox predecessors, were thus shaped by the biblical story
- the profound Creation mythology of the early chapters of Genesis in which God,
the Creator of all Being or Reality creates all that is, including the human being in
the Divine Image. Volumes have been written about the meaning of the Image of
God. I will not attempt even to summarize that discussion, but only claim that it
would seem obvious that the ancient Hebrew author was reflecting the sense of a
profound connection between the Divine and the Human in terms of conscious
awareness and moral sense.
Attempting in those first eleven chapters of Genesis to set Israel’s salvation
history in the context of a universal history, the human condition is described in
narrative form as one of rebellion and revolt with all the negative consequences
that mark humanity. In traditional theological language, we speak of the human
condition as Fallen. The whole ensuing biblical story, continued in the Christian
scriptures, particularly in the writings of St. Paul, is a story of redemption deliverance from that fallen state of estrangement from the God of Creation,
restored to communion with God.
The Deism of the authors of America’s founding documents reflected a move
beyond a traditional orthodox Christian theology, but the Deist was still locked
into a God “out there,” a Supernatural Being who created and endowed the
Creation with Natural Law, thereby calling in question the engagement of God
with Creation - challenging the traditional understanding of God’s immanence.
The Deist, in other words, moved from a traditional Theist position which marks
biblical religious understanding, including the Islamic conception of Deity, but
Deism was only a halfway house to modern atheism which denied a transcendent
Ground of Being.
In his book, Does God Exist?, (1978), Hans Küng traces the development of
modern atheism, from Feuerbach through Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, to the
nihilism of Friedrich Nietzsche. Beginning with Feuerbach’s projection theory
claiming,
The consciousness of the infinite is nothing else than the consciousness of
the infinity of the consciousness.
That is:
In the consciousness of the infinite, the conscious subject has for his object
the infinity of his own nature.
Küng explains,
This, then, is how the notion of God emerges, and it seems entirely
understandable. Man sets up his human nature out of himself, he sees it as
something existing outside himself and separated from himself; he
© Grand Valley State University
�Emergence of the Sacred
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
projects it, then, as an autonomous figure - so to speak - in heaven, calls it
God and worships it. In a word, the notion of God is nothing but a
projection of man: “The absolute to man is his own nature. The power of
the object over him is therefore the power of his own nature.”
... God appears as a projected, hypothesized reflection of man, behind
which nothing exists in reality. (Küng, p. 200)
Feuerbach’s projection theory provided the “Climate of opinion” for those
thinkers who accepted that theory uncritically and assumed its truth as they
pursued their respective areas of special focus: Marx’s socio-political atheism;
Freud’s psychoanalytic atheism and Nietzsche’s nihilism.
Rather than engaging the amazing discoveries of the natural sciences about the
universe in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and the advent of historical
consciousness in the nineteenth century, the Church hardened the lines of
orthodoxy, claimed absolute authority in tradition, institution and scripture and
absolutized its dogmatic creedal declarations, all of which had been conceived on
the basis of a worldview that was rapidly dissolving before the unrelenting
movement of new knowledge exploding across the spectrum of the disciplines of
human research.
The war between science and religion is both familiar and unfortunate and need
not be recounted here, other than to say that it is incredible that there continues
to be vocal claims from Fundamentalist religious quarters for obscurantist views
of the universe, literalizing the profound biblical myths and sagas and thus
draining them of their symbolic value.
I relate this historical development of the modern period because it ended with
an impasse; much of institutional Christianity continuing to perpetuate the
biblical worldview that could not stand the test of empirical research and
verification and much of the intellectual leadership and the academic community,
not willing to make the sacrifice of the intellect demanded by the Church, simply
giving up on the formal religious observance.
Even the movement of Liberal Theology continued the biblical paradigm of
theism - the Supernatural God “out there,” Creator in perfection and Fall - the
human creatures fallen, their nature needing redemption. The Liberal
Theological movement did attempt to accommodate its religious understanding
to the findings of modern science, but like the Deists we spoke of earlier, it was a
halfway house, trying to preserve the biblical worldview in an age whose
breakthroughs in discovering the nature and history of cosmic reality could not
be accommodated in that worldview.
Thus I come to my major contention: The freedom and dignity of the human will
be best affirmed and protected if the biblical worldview is replaced by a
© Grand Valley State University
�Emergence of the Sacred
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
worldview that is conceived and imagined in light of our present knowledge of
the cosmic reality into which our lives are woven.
Specifically, the biblical paradigm of a Creator God “out there,” calling into being
a created order separate from the Being of God and over against God should be
replaced by a model that sees Reality as one, the emergence of its Sacred Source
and creative center.
Secondly, and following on that conception, the Human must be conceived as the
emergence of the Sacred in the one cosmic totality. The sacredness, the worth,
dignity and the freedom of the human being is not something conferred on the
creature by a God “wholly other” in the language of Karl Barth, but rather
intrinsic to the creature, the creature being the emergence of the Sacred in the
evolving cosmic reality.
The human then is not a creation in perfection in an initial state of innocence
from which the creature “fell,” marking the human race as fallen. Rather, the
human is the product of a process of billions of years of cosmic unfolding, the
emergence of consciousness, of awareness, the emergence of spirit.
We who are human are not marked by all the negativity that clings to us because
we have fallen from some state of perfection, but rather, because we are animals
who have arrived through the exercise of the survival instincts we have practiced
in order to prevail. We have come to our present state through millennia of
evolution from the slime and the jungle from which we have emerged.
If I claim that the biblical worldview must be replaced by an understanding that
accords with our best scientific knowledge of cosmic reality of which we are a
part, I do not mean to say that the great religious traditions that look to the Bible
have not provided profound insight into the human situation. Earlier I
mentioned that intuitive insight in the Genesis stories that the human is created
in the image of God. I now add a second insight which is at the heart of the
Christian tradition, namely, that God has become human.
The Christian claim of the incarnation of God in the humanity of Jesus is
expressed profoundly in the Johannine writings. In the Gospel of John we have in
the prologue the claim that the Word or logos that was in the beginning, became
flesh or human. John 1:1 can be translated “in the beginning was the Divine
Intention.” Then in 1:14, we could read “The Divine Intention became human.”
This would seem to be a claim of the Divine becoming human in the unfolding of
history.
Of course, the biblical writer had no sense of a cosmic process of 13.7 billion
years. Still, the emergence of the Divine in the Human is clearly there.
© Grand Valley State University
�Emergence of the Sacred
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
That is a profound and radical claim. Of course, what the Church has done with
that insight is to isolate that event of God becoming human to the once-for-all
event of Jesus, thus leading to Christian exclusivism and absolutism. Such
exclusivism can no longer be reasonably maintained in a world awake to the
pluralism of religious understanding and observance. Nonetheless, this was an
amazing claim and all we have to do is recognize the claim as a moment in the
evolving process of the Sacred emerging in the human and the human as the
location for the concretizing of the Sacred in the cosmic process.
Perhaps one might counter that the human is a very questionable manifestation
of the Sacred, to which I would respond that that is because we are not yet fully
human, carrying with us as we are the marks of our evolutionary movement in
the violent struggle for survival. We are animals still on the way to the human, to
the realization of Spirit. One of the most vivid descriptions of the human being I
know was penned by a great preacher and theologian, Carlyle Marney:
Man is the most dangerous and savage of the beasts: His bite is poisonous;
his hand is a club; his foot is a weapon; knives, clubs, spears are projectiles
to bear his hostility. Nothing in nature is so well equipped for hating or
hurting. Confuse him and he may lash out at everything. Crowd him and
he kills, robs, destroys, for his crime rate increases in proportion to his
crowding. Deprive him and he retaliates. Impoverish him and he burns
villas in the night. Enslave him and he revolts. Pamper him and he may
poison you. Hire him and he may hate both you and the work. Love him
too possessively and he is never weaned. Deny him too early and he never
learns to love. Put him in cities and all his animal nature comes out with
perversions of every good thing. For greed, acquisitiveness, violence were
so long his tools for jungle survival, that it is only by the hardest [effort]
that these can be laid aside as weapons of his continued survival.
And that, you say, is the emergence of the Sacred? And I would answer, “Yes,
precisely,” for Marney’s description needs to be put within a larger picture.
The biblical story begins with a “let there be ...,” the recognition that all there is is
not a chance accident, nor a self-creation, but a gift, a grace, if you will, that has
been evolving for 13.7 billion years. That evolving cosmic process lately issuing
(in the last ten thousand years or so) in a human cultural history unfolding before
our eyes in amazing fashion. It is within the cosmic evolution that history has
emerged and is unfolding, and it is within history’s unfolding that the Creator
Spirit moving the process from within becomes flesh - human flesh. Thus,
Incarnation is Spirit enfleshed or God embodied - not an alien invasion but an
immanent emergence. David Tooland expresses it with power and grace:
Offspring of stars, children of earth, we are great mothering nature’s soulspace, her heart and vocal chords - and her willingness, if we consent to it,
to be spirited, to be the vessel of the Holy One. When we fail in this soul-
© Grand Valley State University
�Emergence of the Sacred
Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
work, nature fails/falls with us. But when it happens, when we say yes to
the Spirit who hovers over our inner chaos, the mountains clap their
hands, the hills leap like gazelles. They and the quarks have a big stake in
us. Remember, though, to be patient: in the condensed astronomical time
of a cosmic year, our species has only been around for a minute or two,
and for much of that time we’ve been sleepwalking. Our cosmological task
takes some waking up to, and getting used to.
Nonetheless, we represent a turning point for nature, and a turning point
for the Great Dispatcher, as well. Two significant events happen
simultaneously, or converge, once humans emerge from the prebiotic
soup. First, as the team of Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and Aquinas would
say, consciousness or mindedness - of whatever fleeting sort - would not
be there except for participation in the mindfulness of the Poet-Maker of
all things. Darwinian evolution only explains our hard wiring, not how it is
that we are aware or minded. Secondly, as I have said, consciousness is
also nothing else than great nature more or less awake and reflective.
That’s a beginning; the spiritual task is to deepen our inwardness and,
therewith, our imaginations. In this sense, we are nature’s black box, her
soul-space - and hence her last chance to become spirited, to be the vessel
of God, the carrier of the message that all creation is not only “very good,”
but to be glorified. That’s the script, the big drama.
... Like us, Jesus is the cosmos become conscious; he provides it with soulspace. But in him the cosmos finally finds adequate soul-space, a cavern of
interiority big enough to contain the fullness of divine love and
compassion. (Unlike us, he isn’t a shallow container; he doesn’t babble
nonsense or go haywire under the strain of the dawn that is trying to break
through in our species.) The Torah, the big dreams of the Hebrew
prophets, and the poetry of the Wisdom literature stand behind him,
within him; Jesus is intelligible only within this lineage. He represents an
intensification of what God has particularly chosen the people of Israel to
meditate and mediate: the meaning of everything from quarks to cities;
nothing is too small or big or unclean as not to merit passionate interest
and attentive understanding. Through this son of Israel Christians
discover that the Ur-Mystery lives in human blood, would act through us,
speak through us. (From Cross Currents, Winter 1996/97, by David
Tooland (p. 464)
Such is the Human - stardust, the cosmos becoming conscious, the awareness of
the wonder, miracle, glory and joy of life, the Voice of Being, for the Human is the
emergence of the Sacred in the ongoing cosmic process. The Human therefore
becomes co-creator with the Eternal Spirit coming to embodiment. It is ours then
to recognize our true nature and vocation, not to find meaning, but to create it,
recognizing that we are not passive passengers on some cosmic journey, but the
© Grand Valley State University
�Emergence of the Sacred
Richard A. Rhem
Page 9
agents through which the truly Human as the emergent of the Divine is coming to
be.
The biblical writers had no sense of our cosmic home, but they did sense that the
human is the creation of the Divine. The authors of our founding documents who
brought to expression the American Creed with Freedom as its core value labored
still with a paradigm of cosmic reality we can no longer affirm. Nonetheless, they
did recognize that the Human can be fully realized only in Freedom - a freedom
that was intrinsic to Being and thus essential for Human Being.
We are not robots marked by an inevitable fate, cogs in a cosmic machine
grinding on its way. We are Sacred, for we are the emergence of the Sacred
Ground and the Source of Being in the concrete drama of cosmic unfolding, the
drama of History whose future lies in our hands. We possess the terrifying gift of
Freedom to create paradise or destroy the human experience as the emergence of
the Sacred in the cosmic story.
Will we be able to break free from old paradigms and patterns of behavior that
have written a history of violence, war and destruction? Is human transformation
possible, given the entrenched ideologies that continue to find expression?
Barbara Marx Hubbard in Conscious Evolution (p. 10) provides an image with
which I would leave you. She writes,
Let’s compare our situation with the metamorphosis of a caterpillar into a
butterfly. When the caterpillar weaves its cocoon, imaginal disks begin to
appear. These disks embody the blueprint of the butterfly yet to come.
Although the disks are a natural part of the caterpillar’s evolution, its
immune system recognizes them as foreign and tries to destroy them. As
the disks arrive faster and begin to link up, the caterpillar’s immune
system breaks down and its body begins to disintegrate. When the disks
mature and become imaginal cells, they form themselves into a new
pattern, thus transforming the disintegrating body of the caterpillar into
the butterfly. He breakdown of the caterpillar’s old system is essential for
the breakthrough of the new butterfly. Yet, in reality the caterpillar neither
dies nor disintegrates, for from the beginning its hidden purpose was to
transform and be reborn as the butterfly.
When it seems the darkness can never be overcome, let us not despair. Let us
remember the hidden purpose for which we were born.
References:
Hans Küng. Does God Exist? 1978.
David Tooland, Cross Currents, Winter, 1996-97, p. 464.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Event
Muskegon Council for the Arts & Humanities Festival
Series
First Talk of Two
Location
The location of the interview
Torrent House, Muskegon
References
Hans Küng. Does God Exist? 1978. David Tooland, in Cross Currents, Winter 1996-97, p. 464.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-3-20041004
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
The Emergence of the Sacred in Human Being
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Talk created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on October 4, 2004 entitled "The Emergence of the Sacred in Human Being", as part of the series "First Talk of Two", on the occasion of Muskegon Council for the Arts & Humanities Festival, at Torrent House, Muskegon. Tags: New Paradigm, freedom, divine intention. Scripture references: Hans Küng. Does God Exist? 1978. David Tooland, in Cross Currents, Winter 1996-97, p. 464.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2004-10-04
Divine Intention
Freedom
New Paradigm
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/ddc155b6533655547c7ae7d49becf601.pdf
cec48942478c6d9084ae3ef3ce811b26
PDF Text
Text
Human Being in Freedom
Marguerite Holcomb Lecture
Muskegon Council for Arts and Humanities 2004 Festival
On the Theme Freedom and Privacy
Richard A. Rhem
Torrent House
Muskegon, Michigan
October 11, 2004
Prepared text of the lecture
I want to express my appreciation to the Muskegon Council for Arts and
Humanities for being invited to be a part of the 2004 Festival and to the
Marguerite Holcomb Lecture Committee for the opportunity to be the tenth
lecturer in this series. I am honored to be a part of this Muskegon community
event.
The theme for 2004 is Freedom and Privacy and I’m certain that theme is coming
to expression in various ways through the multiple events and media of the
Festival. Recognizing that the selection of the theme may well have been
influenced or determined by our present societal and global situation with the
threat to our freedom and privacy through government measures to counter the
terrorist threat, as well as the whole new set of complex issues arising from the
worldwide Internet that has created the Information Highway, turning our global
home into a neighborhood, I have chosen to think about the theme
philosophically, theologically, reflecting on the nature of Human Being and thus
the ground of freedom and privacy in the Creative Source of the cosmic drama of
which we are a part.
In the last lecture entitled “The Emergence of the Sacred in Human Being,” I
sought to establish the claim that the freedom and privacy, the dignity and worth
of the human being lie in the Creative Source and Ground of Being which I refer
to as the Ultimate Mystery of Being, however that Ultimate Mystery may be
experienced and named in the respective religions of the human family.
This was clearly expressed in the American Declaration of Independence, as well
as other writings of those Enlightenment thinkers who were the shapers of a new
experiment in human government. These authors of our founding documents
were shaped by the biblical story of Creation found in the early chapters of
Genesis. The explosion of knowledge of the natural world and the rise of
historical consciousness called in question the biblical paradigm and, in leading
intellectual circles, unhinged the human from its grounding in the sacred.
© Grand Valley State University
�Human Being in Freedom
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
Those who divide the human drama into periods claim the Modern period is over
and we are in the post-modern period - a period so named because its contours
are not yet definite enough to define. Clearly, the term post-modern indicates
movement beyond those centuries which witnessed the unfortunate and
unnecessary conflict between Science and Religion and the emergence of modern
atheism.
If, indeed, we have moved philosophically and culturally into a new period in the
human story, it is time for the religions and, in my case, the Christian tradition,
to let go of those pre-scientific religious sagas and myths which conveyed
profound religious/spiritual insight and wisdom, finding new language with
which to speak of the spiritual dimension of Reality, language that is reflective of
the best knowledge we have of the nature of cosmic reality.
Thus, my major thesis in the previous lecture was: The freedom and dignity of
the human will be best affirmed and protected if the biblical worldview is
replaced by a worldview that is conceived and imagined in light of our present
knowledge of the cosmic reality into which our lives are woven.
Specifically, the biblical paradigm of a Creator God “out there,” calling into being
a created order separate from the Being of God and over against God should be
replaced by a model that sees Reality as one, the emergence of its Sacred Source
and creative center.
Secondly, and following on that conception, the Human must be conceived as the
emergence of the Sacred in the one cosmic totality. The sacredness, the worth,
dignity and the freedom of the human being is not something conferred on the
creature by a God “wholly other,” in the language of Karl Barth, but rather
intrinsic to the creature, the creature being the emergence of the Sacred in the
evolving cosmic reality.
The human then is not a creation in perfection in an initial state of innocence
from which the creature “fell,” marking the human race as fallen. Rather, the
human is the product of a process of billions of years of cosmic unfolding, the
emergence of consciousness, of awareness, the emergence of spirit.
I concluded the previous lecture with the contention that we are not robots
marked by an inevitable fate, cogs in a cosmic machine grinding on its way. We
are sacred, for we are the emergence of the Sacred Ground and the Source of
Being in the concrete drama of cosmic unfolding, the drama of history whose
future lies in our hands. We possess the terrifying gift of freedom to create
paradise or destroy the human experience as the emergence of the Sacred in the
cosmic story.
Our world is at a crisis point because we have not only emerged to this stage of
consciousness with the gift of freedom, but we have the technology that can either
transform the Earth into a Garden of Eden or into an uninhabitable wasteland
© Grand Valley State University
�Human Being in Freedom
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
cutting short the human story. I closed the last lecture with a question as well as a
beautiful image. I asked:
Will we be able to break free from old paradigms and patterns of behavior
that have written a history of violence, war and destruction? Is human
transformation possible, given the entrenched ideologies that continue to
find expression?
Barbara Marx Hubbard in Conscious Evolution (p. 10) provides the image. She
writes,
Let’s compare our situation with the metamorphosis of a caterpillar into a
butterfly. When the caterpillar weaves its cocoon, imaginal disks begin to
appear. These disks embody the blueprint of the butterfly yet to come.
Although the disks are a natural part of the caterpillar’s evolution, its
immune system recognizes them as foreign and tries to destroy them. As
the disks arrive faster and begin to link up, the caterpillar’s immune
system breaks down and its body begins to disintegrate. When the disks
mature and become imaginal cells, they form themselves into a new
pattern, thus transforming the disintegrating body of the caterpillar into
the butterfly. The breakdown of the caterpillar’s old system is essential for
the breakthrough of the new butterfly. Yet, in reality the caterpillar neither
dies nor disintegrates, for from the beginning its hidden purpose was to
transform and be reborn as the butterfly.
I have been working in this area of the human as the emergence of the Sacred,
Creative Center of being, what I speak of as the Ultimate Mystery of being, for
some time now because I see this complex of ideas as providing an understanding
of God, the human, and contemporary cosmology. The Ultimate Mystery of being
is the Creative Source of the one cosmic reality, immanent within it and coming
to extrinsic manifestation as consciousness and spirit, as awareness and creativity
in the Human.
I was pleased to come on a book just a short time ago written from the
perspective of a scientist who was probing the same ideas. Harold Morowitz has
written The Emergence of Everything, published by Oxford University Press in
2002. A reviewer, Philip Clayton, gives a concise summary and affirmation of the
work:
This is a brilliant book. Biophysicist Harold Morowitz has provided the
first state-of-the-art overview of the theory of emergence across the
scientific disciplines. Neither too detailed nor too abstract, his 28 stages of
emergence trace the history of the universe from the Big Bang through the
appearance of cuture, philosophy and spirituality. No other work has laid
out the core case for emergence - and hence against the ultimacy of
reductionism - across the whole spectrum of science. This introduction to
emergence theory should guide philosophers of science and
© Grand Valley State University
�Human Being in Freedom
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
anthropologists, theologians and metaphysicians, as they reflect on the
nature of Homo sapiens and our place in the cosmos.
It is always exciting to discover that one is not alone in wrestling with questions
of profound significance for the understanding and destiny of Human Being.
Much of the scientific data is beyond my capacity to comprehend, but Morowitz
not only chronicles the emergents that mark the history of the universe, but goes
on to reflect philosophically and theologically on the data and comes to a view
very similar to what I have been setting forth. For example, in a chapter entitled
“Science and Religion,” he writes,
Thus far we have been dealing with 15 billion years of emergence.
Sometime over the last 5 million years, something radically different
occurred: the emergence of a species capable of attempting to understand
cosmic history and purpose and capable of altering some small portion of
the universe in ways far more radical than anything in the past....
Twelve billion years of emergence finally led to a creature who had the
ability and chose to ask, “What does it mean?” Eating at the tree of
knowledge seems like an inevitable consequence of the development of the
universe. There is little doubt from current understanding that there must
be a large number of planets upon which intelligent beings may be asking
for the meaning of the universe. (P. 194)
Morowitz points to the emergence of consciousness as I have above, although my
concern has been to create the context for the Freedom of the Human Being. But
he acknowledges the same possibility for good or evil that inheres in the
magnificent emergence of the Human. He writes,
But the kind of transcendence that comes with the human mind is a twoedged sword. The same kind of activity that leads to antibiotics can lead to
germ warfare. With transcendence comes the awesome power to choose
good or evil.
Choice emerges with consciousness. We have argued that the fitness of
consciousness is that, given the huge variety of environments, one can
distinguish far more states than can be encoded for. Making the fit choice
then becomes advantageous. This is the beginning of free will. When it is
finally combined with the ability to understand the consequences of
interactions, our collective behavior becomes transcendence.
I am aware that this is a startling, frightening, and thoroughly heretical
conclusion. If our evolving minds are the transcendence of the immanent
God, then the responsibility of making a better world is ours, as is the
responsibility of figuring out what we mean by a better world. Our
exemplars, Moses, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, and many more are those
who have struggled the most in the search for the path of life. We have no
© Grand Valley State University
�Human Being in Freedom
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
one to turn to except ourselves and our exemplars. We are the third
branch of the trinity. We dare not turn away from the task. There are no
limits. Computers and genetic engineering give us whole new pathways in
our transcendence. Emergence is not through with us or our universe. We
must celebrate our divinity and go on with the nitty-gritty of the world.
We can change the world for the benefit of mankind. We, Homo sapiens,
are the transcendence of the immanent God.
“We are God,” the best and worst of us. The statement embodies such
hubris that it is hard even to announce, but I believe it contains a profound
truth. The immanent God is knowable to us through our science, and the
transcendent God is knowable to us through our actions. It is not the God
of our ancient and revered faiths, but the world has changed, and we too
must change our thinking. The intermediate emergent, God, must be
understood next. (Pp. 194-95)
Morowitz’s final chapter is entitled “The Task Ahead,” which concludes:
To those who believe that we are the mind, the volition, and the
transcendence of the immanent God, our task is huge. We must create and
live an ethics that optimizes human life and moves to the spiritual. To do
this, we must use our science, our knowledge of the mind of the immanent
God. I am reminded of the words of the Talmudist: “It is not up to you to
finish the task: neither are you free to cease from trying.” (P. 200)
Perhaps by now you are thinking that all of this is a long way from the assigned
theme, “Freedom and Privacy,” and I acknowledge that. However, I began with
the intention of reflecting on that theme philosophically and theologically. I have
attempted to establish that the Human is the emergence of the Sacred and that,
although operating with what for us is an untenable worldview, a worldview
dissolved by the discoveries of modern Science, the American Creed of “certain
inalienable rights,” among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, rooted
as it was in the Biblical Story, was grounded in the conviction that the Sacred
Ground of Being is the Guarantor of Human Freedom and Dignity.
We have rooted those inalienable rights, the freedom and dignity of the Human
in the Ultimate Mystery of Being as well, but I have argued, in contrast to
traditional theism, that the Human is the Emergence of that Sacred Source of
Being - indeed, that the Human Being in Freedom is the incarnation of that
Ultimate Mystery, now become the agent of ongoing Creation responsible for the
future unfolding of the Cosmic Story. The awesome truth is that the gift of
creativity and the freedom that we possess by the very nature of being human,
place the future in our hands.
One might respond that such a responsibility and such a task to create the
Human Future in the unfolding Cosmic Drama is more than the Human can bear.
© Grand Valley State University
�Human Being in Freedom
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
No wonder the religions that claim an omnipotent God who creates, grounds, and
guarantees the universe and cares for the human creature has had such an
attraction. But, knowing what we know, fleeing to such a refuge is irresponsible
wishful thinking. There will be no dramatic intervention from some imagined
Beyond to save us from our destructive, warring ways.
What will we do with our freedom and privacy? As I have wondered about this
question, I have come to the realization, in light of what rests in our hands, that I
must re-think Freedom and Privacy.
We have experienced the precious heritage of freedom and privacy in this nation.
Not only is the Human free as emergent of Ultimate Being and not only does the
human possess privacy because finally the inner sanctum of the mind and spirit
cannot be penetrated, but in the American experience, in contrast to so many of
Earth’s children, we have lived the human experience in a nation whose
constitutional structures were expressly shaped to protect our freedom from the
encroachment of government and to guard our Privacy from invasion by the
agencies of the State.
We have shared a precious heritage in a grand tradition of constitutional
liberalism - understanding liberalism in the classic nineteenth-century sense,
meaning concerned with individual, economic, political, and religious liberty.
In light of our discussion, placing the Future in our hands, I suggest that we must
think again about Freedom and Privacy as they relate to what we might envision
as a more humane human future in the emerging cosmic drama. I am nudged in
this direction by the German theologian Jürgen Moltmann in an essay entitled
“God Means Freedom,” appearing in a volume, Humanity in God. Moltmann
does not develop cosmology and emergence as I have done here; he operates out
of a traditional theistic conception of God. His discussion of Freedom, however, is
most helpful as I think about the task before us. Moltmann distinguishes between
Freedom as Lordship and Freedom as Fellowship, an important distinction, I
must say, of which I had never thought. In his words:
Politicians and revolutionaries, pietists and atheists - many people talk
about freedom, but they do not mean the same thing. Obviously, it is not
easy to define freedom. There are so many freedoms: freedom of religion,
freedom of conscience, freedom of thought, freedom of trade, free
economic exchange, free enterprise, free love, and even alcohol-free
drinks. There are many things we call free. What then do we mean by
freedom? And what is true freedom?
The first definition we know from political history defines freedom as
lordship. Since all previous history can be interpreted as a continuing
battle for power, the so-called free, the victors in battle, are those who rule.
Those who lost, who are subjected and exploited, are called unfree ...
© Grand Valley State University
�Human Being in Freedom
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
When we say today that people who can do or have what they want are
free, then we understand freedom as lordship, a lordship of people over
themselves. When we say today that someone who is not pressured by
inner or outer forces is free, then we understand freedom as lordship...
Modern liberalism involves possessive individualism. It replaced royal
absolutism and feudalism in Western Europe and remained cast in the
mold of the feudal lord. The liberals say that everyone who carries the
human face has the same right of freedom. The limit of the freedom of
each individual is only the freedom and property of the other. Those who
claim their own freedom must respect the same freedom for others. But
that means also that for modern liberalism, freedom is defined as lordship.
Each one sees the other as a competitor in the battle for power and
ownership. Each one exists for the other only as the limitation of freedom.
Each one is for himself or herself free, but no one takes interest in the
other. This results in a society of freer, but lonelier, people. No one cares
for the other; everyone cares for himself or herself. Freedom has then
really become public. Every person has a right to freedom. But is this really
true freedom? Is this not the narcissism of the modern Western world?
The other definition we know from social history defines freedom not as
lordship but as community. In my earlier comments on the glory and
misery of modern liberalism, I said that the truth of freedom is love. Only
in love does human freedom come to its truth. I am free and feel myself to
be free when I am recognized and accepted by others and when I, for my
part, recognize and accept others. I become truly free when I open my life
for others and share it with them, and when others open their lives for me
and share their lives with me. Then the other person is no longer a
limitation of my freedom but the completion of it. A communal and
mutual freedom - that is, our freedom - evolves out of your freedom and
my own freedom. In this mutual participation in life, individuals are freed
from the limitations of their own individuality. They can transcend
themselves in the open community. This is the social side of freedom. We
call it love or solidarity...
Divide et impera - divide and conquer - this is and was the well-known
method of lordship. As long as freedom means lordship, people must
separate, isolate, segregate, and differentiate everything in order to control
it. But if freedom means community, then one experiences the wholeness
of all separated things.
The history of German and Anglo-Saxon languages confirms that
community is the root of the word freedom: Whoever is free is friendly,
well disposed, open, delightful, and loving. This understanding is found in
the concept of hospitality - in the German gastfrei, which means, literally,
“free for guests.” Those who are hospitable never rule over their guests and
© Grand Valley State University
�Human Being in Freedom
Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
they are never without them. They are capable of community with
strangers. They let strangers participate in their life; they are interested in
the lives of others.
Freedom as lordship destroys community. Freedom as lordship is freedom
in its untruth. The truth of human freedom lies in love. It leads to
unrestricted, solid, and open communities of mutual help. Only this
freedom as community can heal the wounds, which freedom as lordship
has caused and continues to cause. (Pp. 62-65)
I am struck by Moltmann’s distinction between Freedom as Lordship and
Freedom as Community. Having taken for granted the Freedom defined by
classic nineteenth-century Liberalism as the highest human possibility, I must
face Moltmann’s claim that it does have the element of Lordship at its core and
thus I am wondering if we do not need to think again about our present human
situation which has become a Global Village. Is it not time to give up Freedom as
Lordship and begin to work for Freedom as Community which, at its heart, is love
that creates unity rather than Lordship that divides?
Let me speak personally; I am a Christian and a religious pluralist. I reject all
Christian exclusivism and triumphalism. But, I find my human vision in the Way
of Jesus of Nazareth, the Jewish Rabbi whose life and death became the
inspiration of the Christian Religion.
I have been working in another area besides the imagining of the Human as the
emergence of the Sacred, as the incarnation of the Ultimate Mystery of Being.
That other area of concern has been the possibility of Peace in a dangerous world
teetering on the brink of disaster. I see our only hope in pursuing a path such as
that that came to expression in the Way of Jesus, that is in a concrete human
existence that was so remarkable that those who encountered him saw in him the
embodiment of God.
And here I connect my two claims:
that the Divine has emerged in the human;
that the Way of Jesus is an instance of emergence that holds hope for our
world.
What do we see in Jesus? Obviously, I cannot begin here to spell that out, except
to say, here was a teacher and leader who in that historical context of Roman
Imperial power dominating and exploiting the life of the Jewish people, ordering
the everyday life of the people through the collaboration of the Sadducean
Priestly elite, dared to speak truth to power. In the finest tradition of the Hebrew
prophets, Jesus made a prophetic protest against the domination system that
held the Jewish people hostage. I need not flesh that out more than to say, as I
have so often said,
© Grand Valley State University
�Human Being in Freedom
Richard A. Rhem
Page 9
He died the way he died because he lived the way he lived.
Death through crucifixion was the imperial response to Jesus’ prophetic
challenge, even though that challenge was non-violent, an instrument of
prophetic protest used by Gandhi in India’s freedom drive and Martin Luther
King’s civil rights movement.
That Jesus captured my imagination and the passion of my heart. No longer was
my mission the salvation of souls for an eternal reward in heaven. No longer was
the main event in another place and another time, but rather the creation of a
new humanity for global community marked by justice and compassion and
issuing in Shalom where no one would hurt or destroy and all would dwell
without fear in Freedom.
It was at this point that I began to feel compelled more and more to follow the
Way of Jesus in concrete human existence. Where once I avoided the Sermon on
the Mount because I did not know what to do with the impossible ethic there
advocated, I now came to see Jesus’ teaching not as hopelessly idealistic and
wholly unrealistic, but as truly the only hope of the world. My Lenten preaching
pointed more and more to the Way of Jesus that led to his death with the painful
recognition that in our present situation we are the Imperial Power which once
was Rome.
I was troubled when our President began to speak of the “Axis of Evil” and in a
sermon I suggested it was our place as the concentration of power - the only
superpower - to attempt to sit down with these so-called “rogue nations” and ask
about their hopes and dreams, to learn of their humiliation and their frustration
that were driving them to dangerous desperation.
And then the group of Neo-Conservatives presently dominant in the
Administration released their working document on that New American Century
advocating the Pax Americana and American Empire, advocating the build-up of
military might in order to create and dominate a “unipolar world.”
The horror of 9/11 was the opening these ideologues needed to actualize their
vision. The tragic debacle of Iraq is the consequence which now hangs as an
albatross around our neck - and the world is more dangerous than ever.
Being absorbed with the Iraqi misadventure, we turned our focus and our
resources from the real issue - dealing with terrorism - its perpetrators and its
roots and we have provided the greatest motivation possible for further terrorist
recruitment, while alienating most of the international community.
So, I come in this consideration of Freedom and Privacy to a place I could not
have predicted - recognizing the Freedom conceived in our founding documents the Freedom of classic Liberalism which, for all the benefits it has provided and
all the amelioration of the human situation it has effected, is finally a freedom of
© Grand Valley State University
�Human Being in Freedom
Richard A. Rhem
Page10
Lordship in a world that has progressed to a point where that is a dangerous
enterprise that must be replaced with a movement toward the Freedom of
Community whose heart is Love.
The Human is the emergence of the Sacred, the coming to expression of the
Divine, the Ultimate Mystery of Being. The Human is thus sacred marked in
essence by creativity, freedom, worth and dignity. But, the freedom and privacy
of the Human must begin to be understood and actualized not in narrow
individualism, but in community - global community bonded in love.
Hopelessly idealistic?
No, rather, utterly realistic and the most urgent imperative of our time:
The only hope for a Human future!
References:
Barbara Marx Hubbard. Conscious Evolution: Awakening our Social Potential.
New World Library, 1998.
Jurgen Moltmann, “God Means Freedom,” a chapter in Humanity in God,
authors Elizabeth Moltmann-Wendel and Jurgen Moltmann. Pilgrim Press, 1983.
Harold Morowitz. The Emergence of Everything. Oxford University Press, 2002.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Event
Muskegon Council for the Arts & Humanities Festival
Series
Second Talk of Two
Location
The location of the interview
Torrent House, Muskegon
References
Barbara Marx Hubbard. Conscious Evolution: Awakening our Social Potential, 1998. Jurgen Moltmann, "God Means Freedom," in Humanity in God, 1983. Harold Morowitz. The Emergence of Everything, 2002.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-3-20041011
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Human Being in Freedom
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Talk created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on October 11, 2004 entitled "Human Being in Freedom", as part of the series "Second Talk of Two", on the occasion of Muskegon Council for the Arts & Humanities Festival, at Torrent House, Muskegon. Tags: Emergence of the Sacred, Immanence. Scripture references: Barbara Marx Hubbard. Conscious Evolution: Awakening our Social Potential, 1998. Jurgen Moltmann, "God Means Freedom," in Humanity in God, 1983. Harold Morowitz. The Emergence of Everything, 2002..
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2004-10-11
Emergence of the Sacred
Immanence
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/cbc0e12d266a22e60485ff407f172b1a.pdf
70c191248b665197dabd857234bf6747
PDF Text
Text
The End of the Human Story
Humanity and Technology
2005 Muskegon Arts and Humanities Festival Lecture
Richard A. Rhem
Torrent House, Muskegon, Michigan
October 17, 2005
The title of this lecture is “The End of the Human Story” – a title of intentional
ambiguity. My Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary (second
edition, 1983) lists ten meanings for the word “End.” Two of the ten meanings
afford me the opportunity to reflect on the Human Story with all of the ambiguity
to which my reflection has driven me.
The theme “Humanity and Technology” has forced me to think in concentrated
fashion on our present human experience about a broad range of issues of which
we are all aware but whose implications we seldom take into consideration. The
result of my reflection on the theme has left me with the ambiguity reflected in
the title. One could take the title to suggest that I am using “End” defined as “the
last part of anything; final point; finish; completion; conclusion,” meaning that I
will be claiming that the human story is approaching its last days.
On the other hand, “End” in the title might point to “the object intended to be
reached or accomplished by any action or scheme; purpose; scope; aim;” or,
“consequence; issue; result; outcome.” Therein lies the ambiguity of my title: will
the explosive expansion of technology lead to humanity’s demise – the end of the
story? Or, might technology be the means whereby humanity realizes its Divine
intention, its purpose in process?
Put another way: will technology lead us to the gates of Hell, the final
conflagration, or usher us into Edenic bliss, the Garden of Paradise, the City of
God?
Lest I build too great expectations with such cosmic queries, let me say at the
outset that both consequences are possible –
Coming to our end,
or
Realizing our End.
Which possibility will prevail I do not know. No one knows. But the value of
reflection on the theme “Humanity and Technology” is bringing to awareness
what must be the critical issue confronting the human family - not simply what as
yet undreamed of possibilities there are for technological development but,
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
rather, given whatever technological advances that emerge, how will humanity
respond in terms of control, utilization and application?
Technology is not a neutral instrument; it has and it will radically transform a
cultural paradigm. Yet, at this moment in our cosmic journey, human decisionmaking can still determine whether technological development will spell our end
or be a means of realizing the full blossoming of the human spirit – which would
be simply Divine.
It is in coming to a sharpened awareness of the critical nature of the choices that
even now confront the human family that the value of our theme lies. As one
whose whole life has been given over to contemplating the human before the Face
of God, I must admit that I have been shocked into a new awareness of the real
situation of our present existence, literally teetering between the end and the End
–between extinction and the next stage of human development.
I suspect I have hid my head in the sand regarding the present crisis of the
human project because I am a Humanist; I am a member of “the lead pencil
club.” Indeed, though I read this lecture from a typed copy which I first received
on my computer, it first found the light of day one word at a time, written in my
barely legible hand-scrawl, as did all of the hundreds and hundreds of sermons,
articles and letters I have written over my lifetime. Never having learned to type,
the actual writing out of every form of communication I have produced has
become part of the creative process for me.
Further, I should alert you; I often refer to myself as a Dinosaur, indicating my
total lack of technological savvy and my belligerent pride in being “out of it.” And
thus you should hear me with deep skepticism – I am not a well-balanced
commentator on things technological; I have been dragged kicking and
screaming into century twenty-one. Yet, I have found, in the intensive
concentration on our theme, that even a Dinosaur can be born again. I will always
remain technologically challenged, but I know now that I cannot hide from the
wrestle of the Human with human potential for good or ill that technology holds
forth.
Let me begin to address the subject by putting the issue of humanity and
technology in an historical context. The tension between human values and
technological development has a long history. Without attempting a full account
of that history, let me simply point to what for me was new insight and
understanding –the beloved Robin Hood of English legendary saga was not
simply one who with his band of merry men took from the rich to aid the poor. In
his Rebel Against the Future, Kirkpatrick Sale points out that the Robin Hood
legends recount the struggle against the early English wool industry.
It is probable that one of the real figures at the center of the legend was the
victim of an early industrial policy of the rising English monarchy to
encourage a native wool industry by transforming some of the commonly
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
held central forests into private grazing lands for sheep, and his troubles
with the Sheriff of Nottingham no doubt stemmed from a clash between
his desire to keep on using the woods for food and fuel, as his father and
forefathers had before him, and the royal policy (proclaimed in 1217•18) of
cutting them down for pasturage. This conflict between old and new,
custom and commerce, was dramatic enough to fix itself in the stories of
the locals, take life in several early narrative poems (most effectively in the
Lytell Geste of Robyn Hode of 1495), and eventually be resurrected by
several early 19th-century Romantic novelists (notably Scott, in Ivanhoe),
from where it passes into modern films and fables …
But for all the enduring resonance of this tale, in historical fact it was the
royal policy of clear-cutting and wool manufacturing over the forest
commons that prevailed. The heartland forests were enclosed and
harvested, laid bare for grazing, and within a few centuries nothing much
was left of either the great Barnsdale or Sherwood forests but a few
scattered clusters of conifers and a few stately oaks in tracts deemed
unsuitable for development; wool weaving became the key industry of
England and woolen cloth for centuries its most important export, an
enterprise nurtured and protected by a succession of kings and
parliaments down to the 19th century. Robin Hood’s name may have
lasted, and a legend about heroic commoners resisting the noble and the
powerful may have become burnished by time, but in truth it was not the
practice of robbing from the rich, nor the benefaction of the poor, that
became the principle means of enterprise in middle England. (p. 2F)
Sale recounts the Robin Hood legend of the 13th and 14th century to introduce
his history of the Luddites who are his “Rebels” whom he uses to address our
contemporary crisis created by the present explosive technological advances.
It is fitting, and perhaps not accidental, that this triangle of central Britain, seven
centuries after it immortalized Robin Hood, was precisely the site of the risings of
the Luddites.
The Luddites – many of them weavers and combers and dressers of wool, but
many of them artisans in the cotton trades that became increasingly important at
the end of the 18th century – were, like Robin’s Merry Men, victims of progress,
or what was held to be progress. Having for centuries worked out of their cottages
and small village shops on machines that, though far from simple, could be
managed by a single person, assisted perhaps by children, they suddenly saw
new, complex, large-scale machines coming into their settled trades, or
threatening to, usually housed in the huge multistory buildings rising in their
ancient valleys. Worse still, they saw their ordered society of craft and custom
and community begin to give way to an intruding industrial society and its new
technologies and systems, new principles of merchandise and markets, new
configurations of countryside and city, beyond their ken or control. And when
they rose up against this, for fifteen tempestuous months at the start of the
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
second decade of the 19th century, they did so with more ferocity and intensity
than anything Robin Hood ever mustered, and were put down with far more force
than anything King John ever commanded.
The Luddites took their name from a mythical Ned Ludd – whose origins
are still obscure … – but they were conscious throughout that they were
traveling on ground trod by an earlier set of courageous troublemakers;
one of the earliest Luddite letters was posted from “Robin Hood’s Cave,”
another was said to have come from “Ned Ludd’s office, Sherwood Forest,”
… (p. 3)
Sale writes of the critical nature of the Luddite rebellion as the Industrial
Revolution was transforming English life. The response of the English
establishment threatened to betray the very character of the nation, sensing as
they did that the whole future of industrialization was at stake. Sale writes, … the
various Luddite armies that operated in 1811 and1812 were so carefully organized
and disciplined and so effective in their attacks, causing damage to machines and
property … that they seemed a strong and highly threatening movement of a kind
Britain had not known before – of “a character of daring and ferocity,” the
Annual Register for 1812 said, “unprecedented among the lower classes in this
country.”
Then, too, they had enough popular support in the manufacturing districts to be
able to carry on their secret, illegal activities for months on end without being
betrayed, despite official bribes and threats, nighttime arrests, and
interrogations, suggesting to certain minds at least that they were only the most
visible part of a very widespread insurrectionary – possibly revolutionary –
tendency in the land. Moreover, their threat to the established order, both real
and exaggerated, called forth the greatest spasm of repression Britain ever in its
history used against domestic dissent, including batteries of spies and special
constables, volunteer militias and posses, midnight raids, handing judges, harsh
punishments, and a force of soldiers stationed in the troubled regions greater
even than that which had sailed to Portugal with Wellington to fight Napoleon’s
armies four years before.
Last, and perhaps most important, the Luddites were understood to represent
not merely a threat to order, as riotous mobs or revolutionary plotters of the past,
but, in some way not always articulated, to industrial progress itself. They were
rebels of a unique kind, rebels against the future that was being assigned to them
by the new political economy then taking hold in Britain, in which it was argued
that those who controlled capital were able to do almost anything they wished,
encouraged and protected by government and king, without much in the way of
laws or ethics or customs to restrain them. The real challenge of the Luddites was
not so much the physical one, against the machines and manufacturers, but a
moral one, calling into question on grounds of justice and fairness the underlying
assumptions of this political economy and the legitimacy of the principles of
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
unrestrained profit and competition and innovation at its heart. Which is why the
architects and beneficiaries of the new industrialism knew that it was imperative
to subdue that challenge, to try to deny and expunge its premises of ancient rights
and traditional mores, if the labor force were to be made sufficiently malleable,
and the new terms of employment sufficiently fixed, to allow what we now call
the Industrial Revolution to triumph unimpeded.
The impact and implications of the Industrial Revolution were creating serious
questions and deep foreboding in the minds and hearts of many of the thoughtful
and reflective English folk of that time. Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin (living with
but as yet not married to the poet Percy Bysshe Shelley), Shelley, his friend Lord
Byron and Byron’s physician, Dr. John Polidori, spent the summer of 1816 in
Switzerland, a summer of perpetual rain. Creating their own entertainment, they
decided to see who could write the most frightening ghost story. Mary Shelley
was 18 when she began to write her story and 21 when the book was published
under the title Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus (1818). The numerous
film versions of the story are in the horror film genre and mask Shelley’s real
intention in the novel.
The name Frankenstein has been switched to the Monster in the dramatic
versions of stage and film; whereas, in the novel, Victor Frankenstein is the
student experimenter fascinated with the power of electricity in lightning. He
determines to pursue the secret of life. The reference in the title to Prometheus
reveals what was on Shelley’s mind as she wrote – a modern Prometheus, not
thief of fire, but attempting to become the Creator.
Patricia A. Neil, in an essay entitled “Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein: Myth for
Modern Man,” stresses the serious intention of the author about concerns which
continue very much with us as we wrestle with the tension between human values
and the explosive technological advances we are witnessing. Neal writes,
The power of the myth of an unattended scientific creation, left to destroy
innocent lives, assumes importance in the final decade of the twentieth
century. The book questions the morality of Frankenstein’s actions. Did he
have a right to create and abandon the creature? In her novel, Mary
Shelley anticipated the problem of a destructive force created by man, a
force with no genuine means of control.
Kirkpatrick Sale likewise recognizes Shelley’s serious purpose in writing of her
myth –
… Mary Shelley’s prescient tale of techno-madness, Frankenstein,
published in 1818, was so vivid a message of the dangers of mechanization
and the problems of scientific invention – “You are my creator,” the
monster tells the scientist at the end, “but I am your master” – that it has
survived to today, unforgettable. Basically the same message, more
philosophically put, would continue to be expressed as the century went on
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
by men like Thomas Carlyle, William Morris, John Ruskin, G. K.
Chesterton, and Hilaire Belloc, and from time to time, in more literary
form, by Charles Dickens.
Thus, the recognition of the potential and peril of scientific knowledge and
technological development has a long history, but the pace and peril of that
development is increasing in our day, not gradually, but exponentially, creating,
according to Kirkpatrick Sale, more passion and urgency than at any time in the
past two centuries. He claims,
… it stems from the now incontestable understanding that, as Business
Week put it not long ago, “the United States is in the midst of an economic
transformation on the order of the Industrial Revolution” – a
transformation, like the first one, driven by swift technological and
economic change and, like the first one, accompanied by vast social
dislocations and environmental destruction. Call it “third-wave” or “postmodern” or “multinational” capitalism, this new order is something
paradigmatically different, a high-tech industrialism of ever more complex
technologies – computerization, robotics, biotechnology, artificial
intelligence, and the like – and served by ever more remote institutions,
notably the multinational corporation. And this new industrialism is sped
along by the ministrations of the developed nation-states, especially the
American one that generated the second Industrial Revolution, nurtured it
with Cold War weaponry and space adventurism, and is now, with the
Clinton Administration, prepared to launch it onto an “information
superhighway” and an “automated battlefield” with unprecedented
technological consequences. (p. 20)
And what Sale saw emerging a decade past has arrived with a vengeance such
that one of the key players on the technology stage is worried. In the journal,
Wired, April 2000, Bill Joy, co-founder and chief scientist at Sun Microsystems, a
large and leading computer company, wrote a powerful essay in which he
expressed his shock at the rapid advance of the technology in which he himself
was engaged and the potential for bringing the human story to its end. The essay
is entitled “Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us,” and a bold print subtitle gives the
essence of the piece – Our most powerful 21st-century technologies – robotics,
genetic engineering, and nanotech – are threatening to make humans an
endangered species.
Bill Joy relates the moment that his unease with the whole current direction in
which new technologies are being created arose. At a telecom conference, he
listened to a Berkeley philosopher, John Searle, discuss with the famous inventor
and futurist, Ray Kurzweil, the acceleration toward the time we were going to
become robots or fuse with robots or something like that. John Searle said it
couldn’t happen because the robots couldn’t be conscious, but Kurzweil said
such a phenomenon was a near-term possibility. Joy writes,
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
I was taken aback, especially given Ray’s proven ability to imagine and
create the future. I already knew that new technologies like genetic
engineering and nanotechnology were giving us the power to remake the
world, but a realistic and imminent scenario for intelligent robots
surprised me. Kurzweil gave Joy a preprint of his then forthcoming book,
The Age of Spiritual Machines in which he described the utopia he
foresaw – one in which humans gained near immortality by becoming one
with robotic technology.
Joy was sobered and his unease intensified; he felt certain the dangers were being
underestimated, failing to understand the potential of a tragic outcome. He found
himself most troubled by a passage detailing a dystopian scenario – that is a
scenario of a state or situation in which conditions and the quality of life are
terrible. This is the disturbing passage which Joy introduces with the subheading “The New Luddite Challenge.”
First let us postulate that the computer scientists succeed in developing
intelligent machines that can do all things better than human beings can
do them. In that case, presumably all work will be done by vast, highly
organized systems of machines and no human effort will be necessary.
Either of two cases might occur. The machines might be permitted to make
all of their own decisions without human oversight, or else human control
over the machines might be retained.
If the machines are permitted to make all their own decisions, we can’t
make any conjectures as to the results, because it is impossible to guess
how such machines might behave. We only point out that the fate of the
human race would be at the mercy of the machines. It might be argued
that the human race would never be foolish enough to hand over all the
power to the machines. But, we are suggesting neither that the human race
would voluntarily turn power over to the machines nor that the machines
would willfully seize power. What we do suggest is that the human race
might easily permit itself to drift into a position of such dependence on the
machines that it would have no practical choice but to accept all of the
machines’ decisions. As society and the problems that face it become more
and more complex and machines become more and more intelligent,
people will let machines make more of their decisions for them, simply
because machine-made decisions will bring better results than man-made
ones. Eventually a stage may be reached at which the decisions necessary
to keep the system running will be so complex that human beings will be
incapable to making them intelligently. At that stage the machines will be
in effective control. People won’t be able to just turn the machines off,
because they will be so dependent on them that turning them off would
amount to suicide.
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
On the other hand, it is possible that human control over the machines
may be retained. In that case, the average man may have control over
certain private machines of his own, such as his car or his personal
computer, but control over large systems of machines will be in the hands
of a tiny elite – just as it is today, but with two differences. Due to
improved techniques, the elite will have greater control over the masses;
and because human work will no longer be necessary, the masses will be
superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite are ruthless, they
may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are
humane, they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological
techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes
extinct, leaving the world to the elite. Or, if the elite consist of soft-hearted
liberals, they may decide to play the role of good shepherds to the rest of
the human race. They will see to it that everyone’s physical needs are
satisfied, that all children are raised under psychologically hygienic
conditions, that everyone has a wholesome hobby to keep him busy, and
that anyone who may become dissatisfied undergoes “treatment” to cure
his “problem.” Of course, life will be so purposeless that people will have to
be biologically or psychologically engineered either to remove their need
for the power process or make them “sublimate” their drive for power into
some harmless hobby. These engineered human beings may be happy in
such a society, but they will most certainly not be free. They will have been
reduced to the status of domestic animals.
And, now here is the shocker, in Joy’s words: In the book, you don’t discover until
you turn the page that the author of this passage is Theodore Kaczynski – the
Unabomber. … Kaczynski’s actions were murderous and, in my view, criminally
insane. He is clearly a Luddite, but simply saying this does not dismiss his
argument; as difficult as it is for me to acknowledge, I saw some merit in the
reasoning in this single passage. I felt compelled to confront it.
Kaczynski’s dystopian vision describes unintended consequences, a well-known
problem with the design and use of technology, and one that is clearly related to
Murphy’s Law –“Anything that can go wrong, will.”
… The cause of many such surprises seems clear: The systems involved are
complex, involving interaction among and feedback between many parts. Any
changes to such a system will cascade in ways that are difficult to predict; this is
especially true when human actions are involved.
I started showing friends the Kaczynski quote from The Age of Spiritual
Machines; I would hand them Kurzweil’s book, let them read the quote, and then
watch their reaction as they discovered who had written it. At around the same
time, I found Hans Moravec’s book, Robot: Mere Machine to Transcendent
Mind. Moravec is one of the leaders in robotics research, and was a founder of the
world’s largest robotics research program at Carnegie Mellon University. Robot
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page 9
gave me more material to try out on my friends – material surprisingly
supportive of Kaczynski’s argument.
According to Moravec, … our main job in the 21st century will be “ensuring
continued cooperation from the robot industries” by passing laws decreeing that
they be “nice,” and to describe how seriously dangerous a human can be “once
transformed into an unbounded superintelligent robot.” Moravec’s view is that
the robots will eventually succeed us – that humans clearly face extinction.
Joy wonders why more people do not share his concern and unease
and suggests an answer:
… Accustomed to living with almost routine scientific breakthroughs, we
have yet to come to terms with the fact that the most compelling 21stcentury technologies – robotics, genetic engineering, and nanotechnology
– pose a different threat than the technologies that have come before.
Specifically, robots, engineered organisms, and nanobots share a
dangerous amplifying factor: they can self-replicate. A bomb is blown up
only once – but one bot can become many, and quickly get out of control.
Much of my work over the past 25 years has been on computer
networking, where the sending and receiving of messages creates the
opportunity for out-of-control replication. But while replication in a
computer or a computer network can be a nuisance, at worst it disables a
machine or takes down a network or network service. Uncontrolled selfreplication in these newer technologies runs a much greater risk: a risk of
substantial damage in the physical world.
Each of these technologies also offers untold promise: the vision of near
immortality that Kurzweil sees in his robot dreams drives us forward;
genetic engineering may soon provide treatments, if not outright cures, for
most diseases; and nanotechnology and nanomedicine can address yet
more ills. Together they could significantly extend our average life span
and improve the quality of our lives. Yet, with each of these technologies, a
sequence of small, individually sensible advances leads to an accumulation
of great power and, concomitantly, great danger.
Joy summarizes what he sees as the clear and present danger that confronts us:
The 21st-century technologies – genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics
(GNR) – are so powerful that they can spawn whole new classes of
accidents and abuses. Most dangerously, for the first time, these accidents
and abuses are widely within the reach of individuals or small groups.
They will not require large facilities or rare raw materials. Knowledge
alone will enable the use of them.
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page10
Thus we have the possibility not just of weapons of mass destruction but
of knowledge-enabled evil whose possibility spreads well beyond that
which weapons of mass destruction bequeathed to the nation-states, on to
a surprising and terrible empowerment of extreme individuals.
That is a sobering conclusion from a very responsible and well-informed scientist
who has made his mark as one of the chief architects of the present state of
cybertechnology. And he declares, “… I trust it is clear that I am not a Luddite.”
Rather, he affirms a strong belief in the value of the scientific search for truth and
the ability of great engineering to bring material progress. Why is he surprised to
find himself in his present state of unease and foreboding? Because, he writes,
Perhaps it is always hard to see the bigger impact while you are in the
vortex of a change. Failing to understand the consequences of our
inventions while we are in the rapture of discovery and innovation seems
to be a common fault of scientists and technologists; we have long been
driven by the overarching desire to know that is the nature of science’s
quest, not stopping to notice that the progress to newer and more powerful
technologies can take on a life of its own.
This is what he sees developing before our eyes. As this enormous computing
power is combined with the manipulative advances of the physical sciences and
the new, deep understandings in genetics, enormous transformative power is
being unleashed. These combinations open up the opportunity to completely
redesign the world, for better or worse, The replicating and evolving processes
that have been confined to the natural world are about to become realms of
human endeavor.
In designing software and microprocessors, I have never had the feeling
that I was designing an intelligent machine. The software and hardware is
so fragile and the capabilities of the machine to “think” so clearly absent
that, even as a possibility, this has always seemed very far in the future.
But now, with the prospect of human-level computing power in about 30
years, a new idea suggests itself: that I may be working to create tools
which will enable the construction of the technology that may replace our
species. How do I feel about this? Very uncomfortable. Having struggled
my entire career to build reliable software systems, it seems to me more
than likely that this future will not work out as well as some people may
imagine. My personal experience suggests we tend to overestimate our
design abilities.
Given the incredible power of these new technologies, shouldn’t we be
asking how we can best coexist with them? And if our own extinction is a
likely, or even possible, outcome of our technological development,
shouldn’t we proceed with great caution?
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page11
There is much more in Joy’s essay, but what I have lifted up is surely enough to
answer his question in the affirmative. Let me be clear – in all of this discussion
of the accelerating pace of technological breakthroughs, I am over my head;
nanotechnology is beyond my capacity to conceive. When I read of molecular
level “assemblers” and that “one kind of nanomachine is the assembler, which is a
tiny factory that can manufacture other machines, including replicas of itself,” I
confess I am in a deep fog. But, I can at least catch some sense of the frontiers on
which research and development is being executed. What it means that there will
be robotic humans or human robots, I can hardly imagine, but I am now aware
that this is no longer the stuff of science fiction; this is where we have arrived and
where the next two or three decades will bring us if we survive – an open
question!
Joy puts is this way:
The nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) technologies used in 20thcentury weapons of mass destruction were and are largely military,
developed in government laboratories. In sharp contrast, the 21st-century
genetic, nanotech, robotic technologies have clear commercial uses and
are being developed almost exclusively by corporate enterprises. In this
age of triumphant commercialism, technology – with science as its
handmaiden – is delivering a series of almost magical inventions that are
the most phenomenally lucrative ever seen. We are aggressively pursuing
the promises of these new technologies within the now-unchallenged
system of global capitalism and its manifold financial incentives and
competitive pressures.
This is the first moment in the history of our planet when any species, by
its own voluntary actions, has become a danger to itself – as well as to vast
numbers of others.
And then he continues:
“It might be a familiar progression, transpiring on many worlds – a
planet, newly formed, placidly revolves around its star; life slowly
forms; a kaleidoscopic procession of creatures evolves; intelligence
emerges which, at least up to a point, confers enormous survival
value; and then technology is invented. It dawns on them that there
are such things as laws of Nature, that these laws can be revealed by
experiment, and that knowledge of these laws can be made both to
save and to take lives, both on unprecedented scales. Science, they
recognize, grants immense powers. In a flash, they create worldaltering contrivances. Some planetary civilizations see their way
through, place limits on what may and what must not be done, and
safely pass through the time of perils. Others, not so lucky or so
prudent, perish.”
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page12
That is Carl Sagan, writing in 1994, in Pale Blue Dot, a book describing his
vision of the human future in space. I am only now realizing how deep his
insight was, and how sorely I miss, and will miss, his voice. For all its
eloquence, Sagan’s contribution was not least that of simple common
sense – an attribute that, along with humility, many of the leading
advocates of the 21st-century technologies seem to lack.
For Bill Joy, there must be relinquishment – the limiting of development of the
technologies that are too dangerous, by limiting our pursuit of certain kinds of
knowledge. And, positively, he cites the Dalai Lama in his Ethics for the New
Millennium as a guide to a more humane future – the call to conduct our lives
with love and compassion for others, developing a stronger notion of universal
responsibility and recognizing our interdependency.
It is either such a course, or we stand in the shadow of catastrophe, the end of the
Human Story.
As much as I affirm Bill Joy in his recognition of the threat with which we live
and his call for relinquishment of the pursuit in which we are engaged, I wonder
if that is either realistic or even the best course to follow.
Freeman Dyson, from 1953-1994, Professor of Physics at the Institute for
Advanced Study, Princeton, and now Professor Emeritus, was invited to address
the assembly of the world’s major players at the World Economic Forum in
Davos, Switzerland, in January, 2001, as was Bill Joy. Bill Joy took the
precautionary side of the question, “Is our technology out of control?” Freeman
Dyson took the libertarian side. There were no votes taken on who won the
debate; however, as much as I am in sympathy with Bill Joy, I must admit to
voting for Dyson’s libertarian position. I surprise myself. I will not detail Dyson’s
arguments, but let me cite only his conclusion in which he appeals to none other
than John Milton in his Areopogitica.
The last part of my reply to Bill Joy concerns remedies for the dangers
that we all agree exist. Bill says, “Internationalize control of knowledge,”
and “Relinquish pursuit of that knowledge … so dangerous that we judge it
better that [it] never be available.” Bill is advocating censorship of
scientific inquiry, either by international or national authorities. I am
opposed to this kind of censorship. It is often said that the risks of modern
biotechnology are historically unparalleled because the consequences of
letting a new living creature loose in the world may be irreversible. I think
we can find a good historical parallel where a government was trying to
guard against dangers that were equally irreversible.
Three hundred and fifty-nine years ago, the poet John Milton wrote a
speech with the title Areopagitica addressed to the Parliament of England.
He was arguing for the liberty of unlicensed printing. I am suggesting that
there is an analogy between the seventeenth-century fear of moral
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page13
contagion by soul-corrupting books and the twenty-first-century fear of
physical contagion by pathogenic microbes. In both cases, the fear was
neither groundless nor unreasonable. In 1644, when Milton was writing,
England had just emerged from a long and bloody civil war, and the Thirty
Years’ War, which devastated Germany, had four years still to run. These
seventeenth-century wars were religious wars, in which differences of
doctrine played a great part. In that century, books not only corrupted
souls but also mangled bodies. The risks of letting books go free into the
world were rightly regarded by the English Parliament as potentially lethal
as well as irreversible. Milton argued that the risks must nevertheless be
accepted. I believe his message may still have value for our own times, if
the word “book” is replaced by the word “experiment.” Here is Milton:
I deny not, but that it is of greatest concernment in the Church and
Commonwealth, to have a vigilant eye how books demean
themselves as well as men; and thereafter to confine, imprison, and
do sharpest justice on them as malefactors … I know they are as
lively, and as vigorously productive, as those fabulous dragon’s
teeth; and being sown up and down, may chance to spring up
armed men.
The important word in Milton’s statement is “thereafter.” Books should
not be convicted and imprisoned until after they have done some damage.
What Milton declared unacceptable was prior censorship, prohibiting
books from ever seeing the light of day. Next, Milton comes to the heart of
the matter, the difficulty of regulating “things, uncertainly and yet equally
working to good and to evil”:
Suppose we could expel sin by this means; look how much we thus
expel of sin, so much we expel of virtue; for the matter of them both
is the same; remove that, and ye remove them both alike.
This justifies the high providence of God, who, though he
commands us temperance, justice, continence, yet pours out before
us even to a profuseness all desirable things, and gives us minds
that can wander beyond all limit and satiety. Why should we then
affect a rigor contrary to the manner of God and of nature, by
abridging or scanting those means, which books freely permitted
are, both to the trial of virtue, and the exercise of truth. It would be
better done to learn that the law must needs be frivolous which goes
to restrain things, uncertainly and yet equally working to good, and
to evil.
My last quotation expresses Milton’s patriotic pride in the intellectual
vitality of seventeenth-century England, a pride that twenty-first-century
Americans have good reason to share:
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page14
Lords and Commons of England, consider what Nation it is
whereof ye are, and whereof ye are the governors: a Nation not slow
and dull, but of a quick, ingenious, and piercing spirit, acute to
invent, subtle and sinewy to discourse, not beneath the reach of any
point the highest that human capacity can soar to … Nor is it for
nothing that the grave and frugal Transylvania sends out yearly
from as far as the mountainous borders of Russia, and beyond the
Hercynian wilderness, not their youth, but their staid men, to learn
our language, and our theologic arts.
Perhaps, after all, as we struggle to deal with the enduring problems of
reconciling individual freedom with public safety, the wisdom of a great
poet who died more than three hundred years ago may still be helpful.
(From The New York Review of Books: “The Future Needs Us!” February
13, 2003.)
Preacher that I am, I suspect Dyson got to me with his argument based on the
great Milton that the whole Creative Process has been fraught with risk. In the
mythic story of Eden’s test, the human failed; yet, it was Milton who spoke of the
paradox of “The Fortunate Fall.” Was it not in the fruit’s seductive lure that the
human became like God, knowing good and evil? And throughout the human
story of triumph and tragedy there remains that sense expressed in the Genesis
myth that the human is created in the image of God. Volumes have been written
on that conviction and I will not attempt to discuss it further here, except to
remark that such a conception of the human expresses a profound sense of the
dignity, nobility and potential of the human creature. It speaks, as well, of the
connectedness of the Divine and the Human, as the human mirroring in some
significant manner the Creative Source and Ground of Being.
Again, as much as I affirm the call of Bill Joy to serious discussion about where
technology is leading us and awareness of the risks and potential peril of the track
we are on, I must say I simply do not believe the quest will be relinquished and
further development halted.
But, acknowledging that I am incapable of conceiving the spectors Joy envisions,
I want to contend that, not only will his call for relinquishment not be heeded,
but to do so would be to halt the emerging Creative Process that is unfolding
through the human. The potential catastrophe to the human endeavor must be as
great as has been portrayed by such responsible seers – we may be on the
threshold of effecting our end; we may be bringing down the curtain on the
human story. But, what if relinquishment short-circuited the emerging process in
which the Human Story might reach its End –that is, its purpose, its full
blossoming in the great cosmic dance?
In the rapid pace of technological development, studies of over a decade
ago may seem ancient. Yet, the questions with which we wrestle are not
new, even if they suddenly appear more urgent. The Harvard scholar,
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page15
Professor of Divinity, Gordon D. Kaufman, wrestled with these questions
in his wonderfully titled In Face of Mystery (1993). In a chapter, “The
Corruption of Historicity: Freedom and Evil,” he claims it is possible to
draw some notions about why and how our historicity becomes corrupted.
After surveying the “corruptions of history,” he declares,
The central point with which we must come to terms is this: whether in the
West or in more traditional societies, the processes of modernization (into
which the development of our historicity and agency has brought us) now
confront us with dilemmas that seem to be increasingly unmanageable by
us, dilemmas which can eventuate not only in the extinction of various
cultural traditions but in the annihilation of humankind itself. Our
historicity, that which gives us our distinctiveness among all living beings,
has proved to be a mixed blessing. But it is no longer possible to retreat
into non-historical, non-agential modes of being (as we have seen): human
life has become so thoroughly historicized that such moves backward into
a simpler form of animality are inconceivable. We must, then, attempt to
take responsibility for this situation in which we find ourselves, no matter
how great its complexity and incomprehensibility. We have no choice but
to move forward into a further widening and deepening of our historicity,
and of the agency and responsibility which it makes possible.
There are further frightening problems. We will, for example, soon have to
decide what kind of beings we should seek to become in the future, into
what sorts of beings we should seek to transform ourselves. The most
obvious point where this question is beginning to make itself felt is in
recent developments in biology. We can now conceive the possibility of
bringing about changes in the very genetic basis of human life, and we
shall soon need to decide whether we want to do that. If so, in what
directions should the biological substructure of human existence be
moved? Should we think of our desired future as some sort of continuation
or extension of the historical existence which is now ours? Or would some
other mode of being, something above or beyond historicity, be more
desirable? Can we even imagine a transhistorical mode of human
existence? Would it be a form of life “beyond freedom and dignity,” to use
B. F. Skinner’s famous phrase? – an existence in which we were
conditioned or programmed in such a way as to function perfectly, without
anxiety, stress, guilt, failures, crime, insanity; in short, without the
enormous human problems which we have just been noting? If we could
make the necessary genetic modifications to bring off a mode of existence
of that sort, would that really be a gain? Or a tremendous loss? Are
anxiety, guilt, failure, the threat of meaninglessness inseparable from the
powers of creativity and freedom which make responsible historical
existence possible? And is self-responsible historicity, with all its
problems, more desirable than a perfectly programmed life, well tuned
and adjusted, in a society without major issues that need to be addressed?
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page16
It is difficult to know how to answer such questions, or even to grasp what
they mean. We have no concepts for thinking clearly about what we are
here trying to conceive. The imaginative works of science-fiction writers
may provide some suggestions, but it is difficult to know what should be
taken seriously there and what is just fantasy. The old religious dreams
about a heaven in which human life goes on in a perfected form, without
any problems or difficulties, express the attempts of earlier generations to
imagine a form of human existence beyond historicity; but the
fundamental absurdities and incoherences of all such pictures simply
confirm the difficulty (or impossibility?) for humans either to conceive or
imagine a genuinely transhistorical mode of existence. This might seem to
argue that in posing questions of this sort we have simply moved beyond
our depth, and that we should, therefore, not bother ourselves with them.
But that option is really not available to us, for the possibilities of actually
changing the biological base of human life are clearly opening before us,
and we shall have to make decisions about these matters soon. The human
movement through a long history into historicity has always been a
movement into the unknown; it has often involved fearful dangers and has
resulted in tragic losses. To be historical beings means to take risks in face
of unknown futures. Who is in a position to say that gaining some degree
of genetic control over human evolution is not an appropriate next step in
the development of our humanity, a next major move forward toward our
fuller humanization? Our evolving into historical beings in the first place
involved massive evolutionary modifications in the central nervous system
and the brain, the development of the hand, the change to an upright
posture, and the like. Why suppose these biological modifications are now
completed?
Clearly, we are in fact ill-adapted in many ways. We have bodies which
gained their fundamental form and capacities during the long period when
humans lived in small packs or hordes, the form of their life shaped largely
by activities like hunting and food-gathering. But modern civilization is far
removed from those sorts of patterns; historical changes in human
existence have far outstripped the biological evolution which produced the
physical organisms undergirding our existence. If it is becoming possible
now to more directly adapt the biological organisms of future generations
to match the character and strains of modern life, why not attempt it?
Would this not be an important – even necessary – extension of the whole
evolutionary-historical development which has produced humanity?(pp.
221-223)
Kaufman is speaking of biological modification which sounds less threatening
than the nanotech and robotics of which Bill Joy speaks; yet, his argument, I
think, would be the same – in this risky cosmic dance into which our lives are
woven, the story is of creative, evolving emergent forms and structures that
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page17
introduced radical transformations along the way. Was there any way to predict
at the moment of the Big Bang that creatures of conscious awareness would
evolve billions of years in the future? To cite Kaufman once more: …The
traditional notion that God works through all of cosmic history – and is working
in human history in particular toward the creation of a thoroughly humane order
(that is, toward human salvation) – now becomes understood in terms of the
modern notion of the evolutionary-historical process within which humanity has
emerged and developed: the serendipitous creativity underlying and working
through all reality is expressing itself here (over many aeons of time) in a
trajectory toward human and humane orders of being. In a slow, long-term
development of this sort the direction in which things are moving may, of course,
remain unclear for a very long time. Not until a stage of considerable
differentiation and specification has been reached is it possible to imagine, or
make judgments about, what is really happening; and even then many quite
diverse possibilities remain open. But each new stage of the ongoing biohistorical
process specifies a bit more precisely what directions the movement is going and
what outcomes may be expected, as some possibilities are cut off and eliminated,
and others are opened up and increasingly realized; and there may come a
moment of decisive “revelation” of what is going on in the process as a whole.
Thus, for example, at the moment of cosmic time in which the earth was
gradually cooling and solidifying from the ball of fire it had earlier been, there
would have been no way to anticipate or predict that in due course it would
become a womb and home for living creatures. Later on, when living organisms
began to appear in the sea, it would hardly have been possible to guess that they
would eventually evolve into myriads of species of life – birds, insects, animals,
plants with infinite varieties of flowers and fruits, and so on. Even with the
appearance of mammals it could hardly have been suspected that anthropoids
would appear further down the road. And with the emergence of fully formed
Homo there was still no sufficient basis to foresee the development of ancient
Egypt, Babylon, India, China, Greece, or Rome – and certainly not the various
forms of modern civilization. However, if from the vantage point of modern
humanity we look back over this long cumulation of events, we may begin to
discern what appears to be a more or less continuous line of development up to
the present.
It is striking to realize that this line was not visible until the last half of the
nineteenth century; before that (even one hundred years earlier) it could not be
seen at all. It seems, thus, that with a trajectory of this sort what is going on is by
no means evident at all points along the way; the events which give it its distinct
character and significance become determinate only in the course of the process
itself. Only as certain crucial thresholds were crossed did new possibilities appear
and in due course become realized; and only after many such decisive thresholds
were crossed did beings appear with a vantage point enabling them to see that it
was possible to interpret this whole development as somehow implicit from the
beginning. One speaks of a “process of development” when one can specify
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page18
certain points or stages through which a particular trajectory has proceeded, the
process as a whole being marked off and defined by some (at least implicit)
beginning and end. “End” and “beginning” and “process of development” are thus
all logically interconnected with one another; they illuminate and determine one
another conceptually, and no one of them can be clearly understood –as the
“end” or the “beginning” of “this particular process” – without the others.
Because of these conceptual interconnections we are inclined to think of the end
of a particular process of development as implicit from its beginning; and if it
happens to be the process of our own development into humanness that we are
considering, it will be of importance to us to attempt to see, on the basis of the
direction it seems to have followed up to the point at which we humans now find
ourselves, where it may be going.
In a fascinating essay, “Praying in a Post-Einsteinian Universe,” David S. Tooland
writes,
What we think of as matter – whether it be a subatomic quark, a yellow
low star like our sun, or a beehive – must be thought of as bound and
condensed energy, captured in an eddy out of the torrential, buzzing flow
set loose by the first chord of our cosmic symphony. We, the plants and the
stars are warps or disturbances in the field of this ballooning, random
energy.(Cross Currents, Winter 1996-97, p. 450)
Tooland writes,
We are all thermodynamic systems (heat users), and that means we are
precarious balancing acts, moment by moment converting random energy
into information/organization and, in the enterprise, loosing structured
energy in the form of waste. …The universe is a gigantic communications
network, a complex circuitry of instructions – most of which we can barely
decipher. Consequently, the gap between nature and human culture has
increased considerably … The natural sciences, we may now say, do
archeological digs into the primitive signs and protolanguages of atoms
and DNA molecules; the humanities deal with the more developed sign
systems and meanings of the animated star dust we call human cultures.
(p. 452F.)
Animated stardust! What a magnificent image of the human –stardust that has
over billions of years evolved/emerged in human consciousness. In poetic
expression, Tooland declares,
Offspring of stars, children of earth, we are great mothering nature’s soulspace, her heart and vocal chords – and her willingness, if we consent to it,
to be spirited, to be the vessel of the Holy One. (p. 464)
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page19
In his book, Sodom and Gomorrah, Charles Pellegrino concludes with a chapter
entitled, “God, the Universe, and Everything,” in which he begins by describing
the immensity of the energy of nuclear power, and then writes,
These are the realities of the world we are creating. The same fire that
warms and lights our homes can, at any moment, be turned against us.
This is how it has been since Homo erectus times. The difference is that
now we are handling much stronger fires. Our rocks contain traces of
metals forged in the hearts of supernovae. They are the ash of stars that
lived and died when our solar system was dust. Refined, arranged in
specific geometries, and tweaked in just the right way, the primordial ash
of Creation can be made to echo, billions of years later, the last shriek of an
exploding star. If we have retained as much dryopithecine savagery as
Bronze Age and Iron Age Scriptures suggest, then the shriek may yet
manifest as brief reincarnations of distant suns burning hellishly in the
centers of our cities. If we are wise, and perhaps even if we cling to some of
the lessons contained in those very same Iron Age Scriptures (“Thou shalt
not kill,” would be a good start), the shriek will be harnessed, for decades
to come, as a warm, steady glow in the reactor core. Born of Auschwitz,
Pearl Harbor, and Hiroshima, Indian Point 3 (especially in this era of
American and Russian nuclear disarmament) stands to become the
ultimate realization of Isaiah’s beating swords into plowshares.
There seem to be no limits to what the human mind is capable of dreaming
and producing. But the one thought that stands foremost in my mind, as I
study the cyclic collapse of past civilizations and dream of new machines
for the advancement of our own civilization, is that as we begin forging the
keys to the universe, we must be very, very careful that those same keys do
not also open the gates to hell. (p.334F)
Pellegrino’s book was instigated by Father Fernando, a Jesuit and director of Sri
Lanka’s Institute for Integral Education, along with his colleague Arthur C. Clerk.
The book closes with a dialogue with Father John MacQuitty and explorer Robert
Ballard. Pellegrino speaks of the human evolutionary story. By the time of the
dryopithecines – only a few seconds ago, by a rock’s standard of time – the
numbers of nerve cells and the complexity of synaptic connections in the savage
brain had been rising for millions of years. When the australopithecine “Lucy”
stood upon the shores of Lake Turkana, the columns of her neocortex were
already more alive with neurotransmitters, neuromodulators, and electrical
charges than anything yet seen upon the Earth. As if following some true
compass, the australopithecine lineages were diversifying into newer, even
larger-brained tribes. Sooner or later one of those diverse branches was bound to
reach a neural threshold. By the time Mitochondrial Eve appeared, the threshold
had been reached and exceeded. Out of inanimate carbon, hydrogen, phosphorus,
and sulfur had emerged consciousness. Carbon and calcium knew fire and flint,
and most important, it knew itself. Knowing itself, and lonely, it amassed in the
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page20
river worlds. With consciousness and massing behavior, both promise and dread
entered the world. Anything that thinks can build. Anything that builds can
destroy. “The first thing that must be asked about future man,” Charles Darwin
said, “is whether he will be alive, and will know how to keep alive, and not
whether it is a good thing that he should be alive.”
“The first thing I’d like to ask about future man,” Father Mervyn Fernando once
told me, “is whether the evolutionary process stops with our present civilization
or are there further stages ahead? If you look back to the origins of man, if you
are really paying attention, you can get bearings and sights to peer into the
future. As the diversity of life on Earth increased, some organisms became
increasingly complex. Increasing complexity brought increasing consciousness,
and now one conscious organism has spread from pole to pole, over the oceans
and under them, enclosing the Earth in a single thinking envelope. And the
envelope is becoming more and more unified. We see this happening before our
very eyes.”
The way Father Fernando viewed civilization, five billion people, seemingly
mindless of what was actually happening, were creating a world mind connected
by a network of satellites, telephones, and fax machines. The planet was
acquiring a nervous system, and there was no telling what shape it would
eventually take. What surprised me is how closely the priest’s vision of man’s
ascent and ultimate fate agreed with the news of NASA scientist Jesco von
Puttkamer:
“The origin and persistence of consciousness are the key to our
evolutionary vocation,” said von Puttkamer, who was part of the rocket
team that put Scott Carpenter into orbit. “And it may be that we are
already creating our next evolutionary stage.”
For more than a decade von Puttkamer had been speaking about what he liked to
call “the soul in the machine.”
“It is an attempt,” he told me, “to explain why machines, in my opinion, as they
get more complex, do become more responsive to humans. They become more
sophisticated. They become more automatic. They become more independent.
The robot spacecraft Voyager 2, as it flew past Saturn, was in a sense very
independent from humans. One command beamed up from Earth triggered a
whole chain of commands. So if you look at the inanimate matter all these
automatic systems are made from –“
“Oh, my God!” I remember cutting him off in mid-sentence; then we both trailed
off. The soul in von Puttkamer’s machine had raised something new in my mind
and was raising a chill, a gooseflesh on my arms.
“Do you mean,” I said at last, “that as biology has done with carbon and
phosphorus and sulfur, so, too, are we doing with silicon, plastic, and steel? A
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page21
computer’s circuits, and the nerves bundled in my neocortex, move pulses of
electrons around in organized fashion. Are you suggesting that by creating
artificial intelligence, we may actually be creating our next evolutionary offshoot,
that we are creating life?”
“In a sense, yes. The computer chip is still inanimate matter, but it is obviously
more than sand.”
“But what is it that is more?”
“An ever-increasing complexity,” said von Puttkamer,“which shows itself in terms
of a consciousness.” As he followed the neural networks of modern computers
backward through time, back through the ancestral and already primitive brain of
Voyager 2, back past the human brains that had created the machines, and into
the Earth itself – all the way back to atoms of carbon or silicon – he began to see
that there must have been a continuing chain of increasing degrees of
consciousness, which started with the simplest form of matter. “It has to start
somewhere, and I figure it starts at the electron. The electron could actually be
the unit of consciousness, meaning that human brains are simply the electron’s
way of reaching increased complexity.”
“You make it sound as if electrons do this by design,” I said.
“And who’s to say there is no grand design?”
“I try not to view nature that way.”
“You wear the badge of Darwin with too much pride, Charlie. Be careful. It can
blind you. A good scientist leaves all possibilities open, even the possibility that
there is a grand design. Look at us, for example. We are building more and more
complex machines, and we really don’t know why. We are just doing it.
Somewhere we think it’s the right thing to do, almost as if we were following
some deep-rooted instinct. We build Voyager 2 and plan to follow it with a whole
generation of more sophisticated space-faring robots. We are forever reaching on,
and if somebody asks us why we are doing it, basically we have no answer. We are
just supposed to be doing it.”
I never was able to stop thinking about those electrons …the way von
Puttkamer had spoken about them. How is it that certain nerve fibers
arranged in certain ways allow us to think? A lot of matter from diverse
places (salts from Antarctica, calcium from a Triassic pond) was
assembled, not very long ago, into the first diploid cell of the yet-to-beborn, from which unfurled genetic blueprints for a gridwork of brain cells.
And although the electrons coursing through the neural grid are the basis
of every thought we have, they somehow produce a mind that, as it asks
questions and designs computers to help answer them, feels quite separate
from the cells themselves. The electrons are working in our best interest,
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page22
supposedly. But when I imagine what I would look like if all the organic
molecules in my body could be made invisible, so that I could look in a
mirror and see only the paths of freely moving electrons, I know that the
outline of my entire body would be there in every detail, brightest at the
brain and spine; even the nerves in my fingertips and eyelids would show
up as streams of electrons. As von Puttkamer would have it, the electrons,
being among the very first particles to come out of the Big Bang, waited
more than twelve billion years for planets like Earth to form and then to
sprout life, waited for moments such as this. Perhaps it is really the
electrons who are thinking these words. Perhaps our bodies are little more
than vessels serving their interests, and as we set forth to design
increasingly advanced artificial brains, it is possible to believe that the sine
qua non of our existence is to build larger, faster electron vessels, perhaps
even to eventually clear the decks for them, as the dinosaurs once cleared
the decks for us.
Viewed in this light, the history of the universe has been a tremendous
waiting game. In the beginning, electrons emerged as the perfect parasites,
fresh and hot from the Big Bang, awaiting only the arrival of the perfect
host. If this is true, it is not I but the electrons coursing through my brain
… who are looking back across all time and asking, “Where did we come
from?” (p. 337F.)
Father MacQuitty asked Charles Pellegrino where he saw humanity going.
Pellegrino answered:
“I’m not as optimistic as the others,” I said. “I’ve known Karnak, Jericho, BetShe’an, and Babylon too well to think we’ve got that much of a shot. There is a
long, difficult road ahead, and it diverges here, near the border of the third
millennium A.D. A thousand years from now we will either be an archaeological
curiosity that our own descendant star farers look back to and ask, ‘How did they
ever accomplish so much with so little?’ or we will be another in a long line of
vanished civilizations – mysteriously advanced for our time and full of promise –
just another lost Eden, romanticized and over-glorified forever. It’s the doors of
heaven and Earth or the gates of hell, the universe or nothing. That is the choice
man is coming to.”
“Then you were wrong about something,” MacQuitty said. “What do you mean?”
“You once told me that if this is how far we’ve come, we have not come very far.
But that is not the whole story, my friend, is it?”
“No,” I conceded. “That is not the whole picture. I’m afraid the real story is this:
Whatever we’re coming to, we’re almost there.”
Is there an End for the human story, an End in terms of an intention arising from
a Creative Spirit as the Font of Being with a bias toward Life, Conscious Life with
© Grand Valley State University
�The End of the Human Story
Richard A. Rhem
Page23
awareness stumbling on its way toward an End of Love and Peace and cosmic
wellbeing? Or, will we creatures who find ourselves at this point in the
evolutionary trajectory, consciously holding the keys to the City of God as well as
the Gates of Hell, instead of realizing our End, end the story in technological
catastrophe?
One will live in hope or fear not by an analysis of technological potential, not by
peering into the depths of space or probing the mysteries of microbiology.
Finally, this is a spiritual decision, a matter of trust or not. I do not think we can
simply halt the ongoing march of the human quest; that will go on. The issue of
the ongoing quest will depend not on whatever technology is devised, but on the
human spirit, the human family that has become the co-creator of the future. In
our conscious awareness, we know we are “animated stardust,” creatures in
process, on the way to an as yet unimagined future which is our End.
I know we can end it all;
I choose to believe and so to bet that, rather, we will realize our End – by God!
References:
Freeman Dyson, “The Future Needs Us!” New York Times Review of Books,
February 13, 2003.
Bill Joy, “Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us: Our most powerful 21-st century
technologies…are threatening to make humans an endangered species,” Wired,
April, 2000.
Kirkpatrick Sale. Rebels Against the Future: The Luddites and Their War on the
Industrial Revolution: Lessons For the Computer Age. Basic Books, paperback
edition, 1996.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Event
Muskegon Council for the Arts & Humanities Festival
Series
Technology & Humanity
Location
The location of the interview
Torrent House, Muskegon
References
Freeman Dyson,"The Future Needs Us!" New York Times Review of Books, February 13, 2003. Bill Joy, "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us," Wired,April 2000. Kirkpatrick Sale. Rebels Against the Future: The Luddites and Their War on the Industrial Revolution, 1996.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-3-20051017
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
The End of the Human Story
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Talk created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on October 17, 2005 entitled "The End of the Human Story", as part of the series "Technology & Humanity", on the occasion of Muskegon Council for the Arts & Humanities Festival, at Torrent House, Muskegon. Tags: Potential and peril of scientific technology, . Scripture references: Freeman Dyson,"The Future Needs Us!" New York Times Review of Books, February 13, 2003. Bill Joy, "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us," Wired,April 2000. Kirkpatrick Sale. Rebels Against the Future: The Luddites and Their War on the Industrial Revolution, 1996..
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2005-10-17
Potential and peril of scientific technology
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/c98ddff5e0281a6ac7b2dd3aa05db2b1.pdf
432379cb00559019784c1cb69552a8c6
PDF Text
Text
On March 27, 2014
At the Kaufman Interfaith Institute’s
First Annual Interfaith Leadership Dinner
at Grand Valley State University
Sylvia Kaufman presented Richard A. Rhem with
The First Sylvia Kaufman Interfaith Leadership Award
Citation for Richard Allen Rhem
You were raised in a Michigan Dutch community surrounded by the
love of family which included not only your mother and father but
also three older sisters. You described it as “like having four
mothers”. It was a deeply spiritual environment that called forth your
serious and authentic engagement which led you to your study at
Hope College and then to preparation for ministry at Western
Theological Seminary. You were ordained and called to the First
Reformed Church in Spring Lake, Michigan. Following post-graduate
study at the University of Leiden, in the Netherlands, you returned to
the church in Spring Lake which later voted to change its name to
Christ Community Church. Your commitment to inclusion and to an
understanding of the expansive grace of God led you into controversy
but did not thwart your journey of where God was leading you and the
congregation.
You spoke of a God of love, without presuming to know of limits of
that love.
You were called to serve, but not to judge.
You were on a quest, without assuming certainty or superiority over
those whose journey had a different language and practice.
As one who early on embraced interfaith understanding and
acceptance you are hereby acknowledged as the first recipient of the
Sylvia Kaufman Interfaith Leadership Award.
© Grand Valley State University
�Response to Interfaith Leadership Award
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
A Response Upon Receiving the Sylvia Kaufman
First Annual Interfaith Leadership Award
Richard A. Rhem
First Annual Interfaith Leadership Award Dinner
Grand Valley State University
March 27, 2014
Transcription of the handwritten document
When I received the call from Dr. Kindschi that I was being awarded the First
Annual Interfaith Leadership Award, I was quite overwhelmed and my wife,
Nancy, says it was the first time she ever saw me speechless. I had to have a few
moments to take it in. I was so honored, so humbled, so grateful. I had no
knowledge that such an award was being contemplated. Thus I was taken
completely by surprise.
As the fact of the award began to sink in, I realized that if my ministry was to be
noted and honored for any aspect of it, I would value most the dimension of
interfaith engagement. And thus let me express my heartfelt gratitude for this
honor.
The one whose name names the award, Sylvia Kaufman, is one of the very
significant persons in my life. My years with her on the West Shore
Jewish/Christian Dialogue Committee were rich and, for me, life changing. I have
valued the friendship and hospitality of Sylvia and Dick Kaufman – so much rich
experience we have shared.
It goes back to 1991, the first Interfaith Dialogue in Muskegon. Dr. Frank and Sue
Pettinga provided for our Christ Community Pastoral Team registrations for the
all-day dialogue between Rabbi David Hartman and Bishop Krister Stendahl. It
turned out to be for me one of the peak religious-intellectual-spiritual
experiences of my life.
The theme was “Faithful Interpretation: A Jew and a Christian Reflect on
Continuity and Change”. I still remember it with goose bumps! I remember Rabbi
Hartman asking,
“To experience your joy do you need to deny my joy? To hold your truth,
must you deny my truth?”
And deep inside me I knew the answer was No.
© Grand Valley State University
�Response to Interfaith Leadership Award
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
In the wrap-up evening session – I can visualize it still – Rabbi Hartman, who
loved Bishop Stendahl deeply, asked, “Krister, must I become more than the Jew
I am to be a child of God?” That was the question, of course, and Krister, who
loved David, put his head in his hands and said, “David, I’m so tired!”
And David said, “No, Krister, you are not too tired.”
And of course, everything in me said, “No, David, you need be nothing more than
you are.” It was a transforming day for me and the timing was right.
I had written an article for a theological journal, Perspectives, published by the
Reformed Church in America, of which I and my congregation were a part. The
article entitled, “The Habit of God’s Heart,” probed the question of the extent of
God’s Grace. I wrote cautiously but indicated my hope that God’s Grace was of
wide extent – perhaps even universal. And so the day with Rabbi Hartman and
Bishop Stendahl was a catalyst for moving me from religious exclusivism to
pluralism.
It wasn’t long before Sylvia had me on the West Shore Jewish/Christian Dialogue
Committee, a committee I thoroughly enjoyed, with wonderful people from the
Muskegon Jewish community as well as Catholic and Protestant communities.
And every three years, another stimulating all-day Dialogue.
In the mid-90’s some in the Reformed Church challenged our ministry at Christ
Community. The catalyst was our hospitality to the gay community, but it soon
moved to a challenge to my understanding of the universal extent of God’s Grace
– a recognition of the wide embrace of God of all, no matter their creed or
observance.
I mention this because during those difficult times when we at Christ Community
felt alienated from our own religious family, we were embraced by the Muskegon
Jewish community. I felt the love and care of Rabbi Alpert, Sylvia and the West
Shore Committee and the Temple family. To this day I feel the warmth and care
they extended.
Eventually the conflict with the Reformed Church was resolved and we gained
our independence and we flourished as a place of Grace, open, accepting,
celebrating the Grace of God that embraces the whole human family.
I close with two stories. Before the local RCA moved against us, I was asked by
our General Secretary in New York to be the RCA Representative to a “Think
Tank on Congregational Affiliation.” Christian congregations and Jewish
congregations were involved, seeking to determine why congregational
participation was falling off. The workshop was held at the Center for Modern
Jewish Studies at Brandeis University. I was invited to lead a Vesper Worship to
begin the workshop. Preaching at Christ Community that morning (October 25,
© Grand Valley State University
�Response to Interfaith Leadership Award
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
1992), I shared with my people what I would bring to the Vesper Worship at
Brandeis.
I concluded by suggesting we Reformation Christians stemming from Geneva
should go to Rome and heal the Reformation wounds. Then together Protestants
and Catholics should go to Constantinople to heal the East/West split. Then,
together we should go to Mecca to express our unity with Islam and, bringing
them along, all go to Jerusalem to reunite with Israel – all of us embraced by the
Grace of our Covenant God.
You know what happened! The whole congregation rose to their feet and
applauded – my first ever standing ovation! My people felt it in their hearts – the
people know!
One more story of an experience that confirms the intuitive sense of the people
that we are all God’s children. I recounted this true experience in a sermon I
preached at Christ Community on August 31, 2003, which was printed in a book
of my sermons entitled Re-Imagining the Faith.
This story happened to me last weekend. About a year ago a member of the
church called and wanted to come in with his daughter, who wanted to be
married. There was a problem. She fell in love with a young Jewish man. I
said it was no problem for me; I’d be glad to do a joint service with the
rabbi.
A little while later the problem occurred on the eastern side of the state in
one of the large Jewish congregations. The groom’s rabbi didn’t feel he
could do a service with a Christian minister. I said to the couple, “Well, my
friend Alan Alpert in Muskegon – Rabbi Alpert – I think he would do it.”
They talked to him; they loved him. To make a long story short, we worked
out a service which happened last week in the Amway Grand, and it is
always great to work with Rabbi Alpert, such a dear man. We spent a
couple of hours putting the service all together, all the pieces – who would
do this and who would do that. (He did the Hebrew parts.) In my little
meditation, I said,
“One of my favorite musicals is Fiddler on the Roof, and when I first
experienced it as a musical, I loved it. Someone asked about the
significance of the fiddler, and I was embarrassed to say I didn’t
have the slightest idea. So when it came out in the film, I was
watching for a clue. The opening scene shows the fiddler on this
steep roof, fiddling, and to be fiddling on a steep roof is precarious.
But life is precarious, and how do you keep your balance?
Tradition.”
So I said to these two, “You both have wonderful traditions that have
shaped and formed you. Now, don’t do as so many have done who come
© Grand Valley State University
�Response to Interfaith Leadership Award
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
from different traditions – just let them both go – because they are so
important. They give you a life map, tell you who you are and guide you.”
I told them sharing traditions is nothing new. In the Hebrew Scriptures in
the Book of Ruth there is such a story, the story of Naomi and Elimelech.
There was famine in Israel, they went to Moab with their two sons to get
food, and the two sons fell in love with Moabite young women and got
married. What were the boys going to do? They stretched tradition a little
bit.
Then Elimelech died and the two sons died. Naomi was left with two
Moabite daughters-in-law. She wanted to go back to Israel. She started
back and the daughters-in-law followed. Naomi says, “Look, I don’t have
any more sons in my womb. Please, just go back. Why should you come
and share my bitterness? Go to your people.”
Orpah kisses her and leaves, but Ruth says, “Implore me not to depart
from you for where you go, I will go. Where you dwell, I will dwell. Your
people will be my people and your God will be my God, and where you are
buried, I will be buried, and even in death we will not be parted.” Well, in
this beautiful expression of a Moabite young woman to a Jewish motherin-law, traditions were transcended in love. So I said to these young
people, “What a fortunate time for you to have fallen in love, because your
parents flank you here and neither one of them are embarrassed about this
or wish it wasn’t so.”
There were 350 people at the wedding and white yarmulkes all over the
place, for there were about 200 Jewish people from the other side of the
state. I said that this was a beautiful celebration because we know today
that religious traditions are to shape us and form us and help us find
meaning, but not to isolate us and divide us, for they can be transcended in
love and therefore be mutually enriching.
The wedding concluded, they broke the glass, and away they went. Rabbi
Alpert and I remained under the chuppa together and I looked at him and
said, “Alan, when we step from under the chuppa, I’m going to give you a
hug.”
He smiled and said, “Okay.” So we did.
You know what happened? The place erupted. It erupted in applause, and
the applause didn’t quit until we got way down at the end of that long aisle.
The wedding party had already exited the hall. They didn’t know what
happened, and the applause didn’t quit because the people had seen a
symbol, they had experienced a symbol of what in their hearts was a deep
truth.
© Grand Valley State University
�Response to Interfaith Leadership Award
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
Then there was the grand reception. Jewish people know how to have a
party, how to do a wedding. There was wonderful music and a great band
and vocalists. It was just marvelous. All of a sudden it was quiet and one of
the uncles of the groom, a Jewish man, took the loaf of bread and said the
blessing in Hebrew. I said to Nancy, “Oh, they asked me to say grace! I put
the prayer in my portfolio which is in my room.” She said, “Go get it.” I
said, “There’s no time. Maybe they’ll forget about it.”
Just then the soloist said, “And now, Reverend Rhem.” I walked up there
and of course, in the joy and celebration of this moment, I just gave a little
prayer. You know what happened? The place erupted in applause again! It
did! As I went to my seat, they said, “Bravo! Bravo!” People were
experiencing a moment of truth. They were experiencing concretely what
they know down in their souls: that good religion does not divide, but
unites; that good religion does not denigrate, but affirms; that good
religion enables us to transform all that would divide us.
With the awarding of this Interfaith Leadership Award you honor me, and I
accept it with gratitude and with deep humility. And I accept it also including my
dear wife Nancy.
When I asked her to marry me she said, “Yes, if I don’t have to be president of the
Ladies’ Aid and you never ask me to pray out loud.” I agreed. But she has been at
my side, my unfailing support. There have been many wonderful times but
standing in our truth as we have, there have been some dark valleys as well. And,
through it all, Nancy has been there, a source of strength, always believing in me
when the way was hard. Together we thank you for this very great honor.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Event
First Annual Interfaith Leadership Dinner
Location
The location of the interview
Grand Valley State University
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-3-20140327
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2014-03-27
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Citation & Response On Receiving the First Sylvia Kaufman Interfaith Leadership Award
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Talk created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on March 27, 2014 entitled "Citation & Response On Receiving the First Sylvia Kaufman Interfaith Leadership Award", on the occasion of First Annual Interfaith Leadership Dinner, at Grand Valley State University. Tags: Interfaith.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Interfaith
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/be020c7fcf8cb03bfa426a4356089e08.pdf
895857fe09ab396a36d661fd1400712d
PDF Text
Text
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Richard A. Rhem
The Community Artist and Speaker Series
First Presbyterian Church
Grand Haven, Michigan
April 19, 2015
You might wonder why one would reach back to an obscure phrase taken from a
rather heavy theological writing nearly one hundred years old to entitle a lecture
today. I must admit I’ve shaken my head at myself many times in these past
weeks of preparation for this lecture – shaken my head for agreeing to speak in
the first place and, beyond that, for choosing this subject.
A couple of years ago I gave what I declared to be my last lecture. The idea of a
“Last Lecture” comes from a “Last Lecture” delivered at Carnegie Mellon
University by Dr. Randy Pausch on September 19, 2007. He had terminal
pancreatic cancer – a fact known at the time that he spoke. His lecture was
entitled “Really Achieving Your Childhood Dreams.” He died on July 25, 2008. I
really did think this kind of engagement was probably behind me. But with the
invitation to give this lecture I couldn’t refuse, in spite of the wise counsel of
Nancy, my wife. She probably didn’t want me to embarrass her in this fine
congregation where she was baptized, confirmed and where she faithfully
worshiped. When word got out that we were to be married, the pastor at the time
said to me, “You will do anything to get my members, won’t you!”
But, back to the question – why would I choose such an obscure subject? The
answer I know stems from my obsession with the question of God – the question
not whether God exists, but how to image God, how to speak of divine action,
how to experience God.
You might wonder how one could spend his whole life as a
pastor/preacher/teacher and not have that figured out at age 80. I might respond
that the problem of some pastors is that they figure it out too soon and avoid the
anguish of the wrestle for the truth of God. For me God is and has been a moving
target. From a wonderful home and family steeped in Reformed Christian faith
blanketed with deep Dutch pietism, I have been on a journey trying to
understand intellectually what I have always known experientially and that is the
clue to my title selection – The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails.
The title comes from a book, written by a German scholar, Rudolf Otto, a
university professor of theology. He was born in 1869 and died in 1937. The book,
Das Heilige, published in 1917, was translated into English by John W. Harvey in
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page
2
1923 as The Idea of the Holy. A second edition was published in 1949 in which
was included a Foreword to the first English edition by Rudolf Otto. In that
Foreword Otto wrote:
This book, recognizing the profound import of the non-rational for
metaphysic, makes a serious attempt to analyze all the more exactly the
feeling which remains where the concept fails….”
Otto defined the Holy as that which is numinous – in Otto’s definition, a “nonrational, non-sensory experience of feeling whose primary and immediate object
is outside the self.” Numinous derives from the Latin numin (divine power). The
numinous is a mystery marked by fascination and terror at the same time.
It must be noted that the terror and fascination is not simply an experience
within the being or mind of the human, but that which exists outside the one
experiencing the numinous as mystery. In his Preface to the second edition of his
translation of Otto’s work, Harvey writes:
The word ‘numinous’ has been widely received as a happy contribution to
the theological vocabulary, as standing for that aspect of deity which
transcends or eludes comprehension in rational or ethical terms. But it is
Otto’s purpose to emphasize that this is an objective reality, not merely a
subjective feeling in the mind; and he uses the word feeling in this
connexion not as equivalent to emotion but as a form of awareness that is
neither that of ordinary perceiving nor of ordinary conceiving. Certainly he
is very much concerned to describe as precisely and identify as
unmistakably as possible, by hint, illustration, and analogy, the nature of
the subjective feelings which characterize this awareness; but that is
because it is only through them that we can come to an apprehension of
their object.
The ambiguity attaching both to the English feeling and the German
Gefühl should not therefore mislead us. We do after all speak of feeling the
beauty of a landscape or feeling the presence of a friend, and our ‘feeling’
in these cases is not merely an emotion engendered or stimulated in the
mind but also recognition of something in the objective situation awaiting
discovery and acknowledgement. It is analogously to such uses that Otto
speaks of the ‘feeling of the numinous’ or (less aptly) the ‘numinous
feeling’. As one of his compatriots, the philosopher Rickert, put it: ‘by the
“numinous” is indicated not the psychological process but its object, the
Holy’.
So far then, from stressing the place of the subjective state of mind in the
religious experience, Otto’s emphasis is always upon the objective
reference, and upon subjective feelings only as the indispensable clues to
this. (p. xvi F)
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page
3
Thus the Holy Mystery is not something simply in our mind but it is the
experience in mind and heart that points beyond itself to the Mystery – to God. I
use heart and mind – perhaps better to speak of our being. Otto was saying
clearly the experience of God transcends the mind – reason cannot discover the
Holy Mystery – the concept fails! But reason hitting the ceiling, as it were,
feeling remains – we “know” what cannot be known but only experienced.
In answer to my opening question, why one would reach back to theological
writing nearly one hundred years old for a title to a lecture today – it identifies
my spiritual journey – an ongoing journey stimulated anew by this occasion – the
heart/mind wrestle for understanding the deep mystery of our human being
before the face of Mystery. As I said above, God has been for me a moving target.
I am probably only 180 degrees from the God of my childhood which I carried
into my early ministry. God was in heaven, having created the universe and the
human being along with all life on earth. In the fullness of time that same God
visited the planet Earth in the Word made flesh, Jesus: life, death, resurrection,
ascension and we await the grand finale – the great judgment morning, the issue
of which will be salvation or damnation – Heaven or Hell.
As I relate that vision of God and creation and its issue, it seems so far away and
long ago.
I was a theist. The term derives from the Greek theos, meaning “god.” I suspect
most of us at least began there and perhaps many of you are still there, you not
having wrestled with the God question. My early preaching and teaching were
from that perspective. But eventually that conventional conception of God was
called in question as I engaged in pastoral ministry. Questions arose. I won’t
bother you with the stories, the issues, the questions, but eventually I needed to
go back to school to get the education I never had, largely because I was not open
to learn.
I was most fortunate to be able to return to study, to engage in graduate work in
The Netherlands, the University of Leiden, with Professor Hendrikus Berkhof.
My choice of him was sealed when I first met him in his study in his home. A
widely recognized scholar, he was as well gracious and cordial. As I arose to leave
I noticed a mimeographed paper pinned to the drape that separated his study
from the rest of his house. I went to read what was written; what was written
changed my life. The lines were those of Alfred Lord Tennyson:
Our little systems have their day;
They have their day and cease to be;
They are but broken lights of Thee,
And Thou, O Lord, art more than they.
I remember the moment vividly. I had found my professor!
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page
4
For those who have been with me for some time, this is a familiar account but I
must, in this retrospection, underline it here because I was at a critical point in
my life and ministry. My “little system” had hit a wall. My whole ‘system’ was
based on the absolute authority of the Bible as the God-breathed, inerrant,
infallible truth. I was devoid of any sense of how the critical studies of Scripture
had revealed it as a very human product that was a witness to revelation – that is,
the report of an experience of unveiling, not the unveiling itself. I came to view
Scripture as a human, fallible witness whose purpose was not to teach history or
provide a scientific account of creation but in stories, myths and parables to
witness to the Creator, Redeemer God. I really had to start over, to begin again to
find a understanding of God, of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection – in a word, a
fresh understanding of Christian faith. My mind had been challenged to think
critically even though I never lost the sense of the grace of God that embraced
me.
Mind inquiring;
Heart resting.
That was my situation as I returned from four years of serious study and began
again to lead a congregation. The wrestle for the truth of God engaged my mind
as I experienced very great grace indeed from the people who invited me to
continue my quest as their pastor.
Along the way on one’s journey there are landmarks that one recognizes as
turning points in one’s journey. One such critical moment for me was reading a
book on Christology by the British New Testament scholar John Knox. In his
discussion of the pre-existence of Jesus, which he took as symbolic story, not
literal fact, he related how such a symbolic story functions for those who have
moved beyond a literal view of Scripture.
For a story like this can speak to us of matters beyond our understanding
only if it has also spoken to our understanding – and, within the limits of
our powers, been understood. There are two conditions under which a
significant symbol loses (or, perhaps better, is shown to have lost) its
vitality and power. One of these is when our hearts no longer need it, when
all we want to say or need to say (or to have said to us) can be said without
it. The other is when our minds, failing to discern in it the coherency of
truth, are forced to reject it. For our hearts cannot finally find true what
our minds find false. If they could, we should be hopelessly divided and
any firm grasp of reality would be impossible. What we mean by ‘the heart’
in this connection is not something alien or counter to the mind, but is the
mind itself quickened and extended. The wisdom the heart has found, if it
be wisdom and not fantasy, is the same wisdom the mind all the while has
been feeling after, if haply it might find it. It is a wisdom which, far from
by-passing the understanding, enters through the doors of it, fills and
stretches the space of it, and only then breaks through and soars above it.
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page
5
(The Humanity and Divinity of Christ, p. 106f)
For our hearts cannot finally find true what our minds find false.
I wrote it this way:
The heart cannot rest where the mind cannot follow.
If I were to have one statement to summarize my spiritual journey, that would be
it. That journey from far right orthodox conservative to the liberal left end I can
explain simply due to the fact that my mind, exercising critical rationality, creates
the only possibility for my heart to be at rest. I suspect someone might ask then
why I so value the claim of Rudolf Otto that the experience of God lies not within
reason’s grasp but only in the feeling that remains when the concept fails. To the
extent I understand myself, I desire to be fully aware of the amazing world of
exploding knowledge of which we are a part. An honest spiritual quest for the
experience of God must be open to the whole spectrum of human knowledge.
Otto’s claim is not that “the concept” not be preserved to the end but rather when
reason’s quest is exhausted, one will not have experienced God because, as he
insisted, God is not apprehended at the end of the human exercise of our critical
faculties but only in the feeling that remains when reason’s probe has come up
empty.
Yet, if faithfully persevered to its end, failing to come to the experience of God,
there is a feeling that remains. As we have noted earlier, Otto was saying the
experience of God transcends the mind – the concept fails, but beyond the mind
there is a feeling – not a subjective feeling, but a sense of the “numinous” – that
aspect of deity which transcends or eludes comprehension in rational terms. Otto
uses feeling not as an equivalent to emotion but as a form of awareness that is
neither that of ordinary perceiving or of ordinary conceiving. As noted above, one
of his contemporaries, the philosopher Rickert, explained “by the ‘numinous’ is
indicated not the psychological process but its object, The Holy. Otto’s emphasis
is always upon the objective reference, and upon subjective feelings only as the
indispensable clues to this.” (p. xvi f).
In her monumental study The Case for God, Karen Armstrong confirms Otto’s
thesis. She puts the God question, the whole human spiritual endeavor, in the
context of the whole human story. The persons, schools, movements to which she
points and which she discusses have long been familiar to me through long years
of theological work. But the picture she paints, the story she tells casts a fresh
light on the whole human effort of “groping after God.”
The book is divided into two parts. Part I deals with “The Unknown God,”
covering the centuries from 30,000 B.C.E. to 1500 C. E. Part II explains “The
Modern God” (1500 C.E. to the present). There is a richness and fullness in the
story she tells and I will in no way give a full analysis of the work. What I do hope
to do is lift up what is so striking in her work as it relates to our present theme _
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page
6
the relation of the heart to the mind, faith to reason, religion as a way of life and
practice and religion as a rational dogmatic system to be assented to by our
reason.
With voluminous documentation, Armstrong established her major thesis that
historically, from the earliest evidence of religious activity until the advent of the
modern period, religious practice as ritual found transcendence in myth. She
notes that many date the beginning of the modern period with Columbus’ voyage
in 1492. While still a solidly Christian nation with Catholic monarchs, Spain was
in an age of transition. Armstrong writes,
The people of Europe had started their journey to modernity, but the
traditional myths of religion still gave meaning to their rational and
scientific explorations. (p. 162)
But that would change in the Renaissance, the Protestant Reformation, the
Catholic Counter-Reformation and the early breakthroughs in the investigations
of the natural sciences, for example the work of Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo.
Armstrong gives a rich picture of the interplay of reforming religion – Catholic
and Protestant and the unlocking of the secrets of the universe. With the advent
of the modern period, religious practice changed and, Armstrong claims, has
brought us to the present unhappy place of aggressive, dogmatic fundamentalism
and equally aggressive, militant atheism. In the pre-modern period religion was
not primarily something people believed but something they did – its truth
acquired by practical action. For example, she explains it is no use imagining you
will be able to drive a car if you only read the manual or study the rules of the
road.
It is this perspective Karen Armstrong brings to the whole purview of religious
history. The insight, wisdom and comfort of good religion are not the result of
believing certain “truths” or creedal propositions but disciplined practice. She
points to the musician lost in her music or the dancer inseparable from the dance
– a satisfaction, she contends, that goes deeper than merely “feeling good.” It can
lead to “ekstasis” – a “stepping outside” the norm.
Religion is a practical discipline that teaches us to discover new capacities
of mind and heart. This will be one of the major themes of this book. It is
no use magisterially weighing up the teachings of religion to judge their
truth or falsehood before embarking on a religious way of life. You will
discover their truth – or lack of it – only if you translate these doctrines
into ritual or ethical action. Like any skill, religion requires perseverance,
hard work, and discipline. Some people will be better at it than others,
some appallingly inept, and some will miss the point entirely. But those
who do not apply themselves will get nowhere at all. Religious people find
it hard to explain how their rituals and practices work, just as a skater may
not be fully conscious of the physical laws that enable her to glide over the
ice on a thin blade. (p. xiii)
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page
7
For those who engage in religious practice – meditating, participation in liturgy
and ritual – witness to the discovery of a transcendent dimension of life. That has
been a fact of human life, but it was impossible to explain what that transcendent
dimension was in terms of reason. Armstrong writes,
During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, a time that historians call
the early modern period, Western people began to develop an entirely new
kind of civilization, governed by scientific rationality and based
economically on technology and capital investment. Logos achieved such
spectacular results that myth was discredited and the scientific method
was thought to be the only reliable means of attaining truth. This would
make religion difficult, if not impossible. As theologians began to adopt
the criteria of science, the mythoi of Christianity were interpreted as
empirically, rationally, and historically verifiable and forced into a style of
thinking that was alien to them. Philosophers and scientists could no
longer see the point of ritual, and religious knowledge became theoretical
rather than practical. We lost the art of interpreting the old tales of gods
walking the earth, dead men striding out of tombs, or seas parting
miraculously. We began to understand concepts such as faith, revelation,
myth, mystery, and dogma in a way that would have been very surprising
to our ancestors. In particular, the meaning of the word “belief” changed,
so that a credulous acceptance of creedal doctrines became the
prerequisite of faith, so much so that today we often speak of religious
people as “believers,” as though accepting orthodox dogma “on faith” were
their most important activity. (p. xv)
That paragraph really expresses the heart of Armstrong’s contention as she
addresses our contemporary situation with The Case for God. She does a
marvelous job of describing the rise of modernity as it emerged from the late
medieval period – the early development of the scientific method, the inductive
method of empirical research and experimentation. She chronicles with clarity
the triumph of logos in the mastering of the natural world, the growing
consensus that logos was the sole means of acquiring true knowledge and how, in
turn, the theologians sought by means of rational thought to express religious
truth.
Such a move by the religious scholars to abandon mythical thinking and seek to
establish God-talk and spiritual reality by means of the canons of human reason
– while understandable given the climate of opinion of modernity, especially the
Enlightenment – was a disaster for it is an impossibility. And, further, it has led
to the rejection of the spiritual dimension of our human experience and the
abandonment of religious practice wherein the human family had found hope,
comfort and healing. She describes the consequences of the move in the modern
age of religious discourse from myth to reason.
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page
8
This rationalized interpretation of religion has resulted in two distinctively
modern phenomena: fundamentalism and atheism. The two are related.
The defensive piety popularly known as fundamentalism erupted in almost
every major faith during the twentieth century. In their desire to produce a
wholly rational, scientific faith that abolished mythos in favor of logos,
Christian fundamentalists have interpreted scripture with a literalism that
is unparalleled in the history of religion. In the United States, protestant
fundamentalists have evolved an ideology known as “creation science” that
regards the mythoi of the Bible as scientifically accurate. They have,
therefore, campaigned against the teaching of evolution in the public
schools, because it contradicts the creation story in the first chapter of
Genesis. (p. xv)
Armstrong points out that atheism is rarely “a blanket denial of the sacred per se”
but most often a rejection of some particular conception of the Divine. This can
be demonstrated in the rise of classical Western atheism of the nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries as well as its present expression.
Atheism is therefore parasitically dependent on the form of theism it seeks
to eliminate and becomes its reverse mirror image. Classical Western
atheism was developed during the nineteenth and early twentieth
centuries by Feuerbach, Marx, Nietzsche, and Freud, whose ideology was
essentially a response to and dictated by the theological perception of God
that had developed in Europe and the United States during the modern
period.
The more recent atheism of Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and
Sam Harris is rather different, because it has focused exclusively on the
God developed by the fundamentalisms, and all three insist that
fundamentalism constitutes the essence and core of all religion. This has
weakened their critique, because fundamentalism is in fact a defiantly
unorthodox form of faith that frequently misrepresents the tradition it is
trying to defend. But the “new atheists” command a wide readership, not
only in secular Europe but even in the more conventionally religious
United States. The popularity of their books suggests that many people are
bewildered and even angered by the God concept they have inherited.
(p. xvi)
But the whole broad picture of human knowing has undergone and is undergoing
a major shift in understanding. Our era has no name except “post-modernity.”
Obviously the label points to the contention that we as a human family in the
pursuit of truth, knowledge of our world, have moved beyond the assumptions of
the modern age with its certainty of logos as the only and final arbiter of truth.
Postmodernity, the American philosopher John D. Caputo contends, should be “a
more enlightened Enlightenment, that is no longer taken in by the dream of pure
objectivity.”
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page
9
Armstrong concludes her chapter on “Death of God?” quoting Caputo:
If modern atheism is the rejection of a modern God, then the delimitation
of modernity opens up another possibility, less the resuscitation of
premodern theism than the chance of something beyond both the theism
and the atheism of modernity. (p. 317)
Armstrong concludes the section, “…how best can we move beyond premodern
theism into a perception of ‘God’ that truly speaks to all the complex realities and
needs of our time?”
That is really the question in my mind which called out these deliberations – the
need to move beyond the traditional theism which still prevails in much of the
Church and Christian practice and yet be alive to an experience of the Mystery
beneath, above and beyond our cosmic journey. Armstrong summed up our
contemporary human religious situation as “the present unhappy place of
aggressive dogmatic fundamentalism and equally aggressive, militant atheism.”
That being the case, how can we move beyond such an impasse in which situation
recent religious surveys indicate a growing percentage of people registering as
“nones” – simply dropping out of religious engagement. Armstrong suggests “the
only viable ‘natural theology’ lies in religious experience” and she counsels rather
than looking for God “outside ourselves”…in the cosmos, we should, like St.
Augustine, turn within and become aware of the way quite ordinary responses
segue into “otherness.”
Otherness – experience that creates the feeling that remains beyond all
intellectual pursuit, the sense of something that can only be trusted, never
proved, yet because of the experience no proof is required.
In the New Testament the Johannine writings have been most helpful to me in
wrestling with the God quest. John’s Gospel begins,
In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God.
Someone has translated that – In the beginning was the Intention. I find that
helpful because it removes the term with so much baggage; everyone “knows”
what God means. And then in verse 14, the Intention became flesh or human, and
in verse 18 we read, “No one has ever seen God but the Intention that became
human made God known.”
That Intention in flesh, of course, is Jesus. To be fair to the text, the writer
intends Jesus in flesh to reveal the God of Creation. Nonetheless imagine with
me. Could it be that the Intention behind creation is revealed in the Way of
Jesus?
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page 10
Cosmologists tell us that our cosmos reaches back 13.7 billion years and who
knows the future eons of time. And they speak of multiverses. Further, the more
they know, the greater the mysteries of the unknown grow. But that is not our
quest nor our problem. Here we are, the human race on planet Earth in all its
richness of plant and animal life.
What if the Intention for planet Earth, for humankind, was the Way of Jesus as
reflected in the Sermon on the Mount? For example,
Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called children of God.
And again,
You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate
your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who
persecute you, so you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he
makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the
righteous and on the unrighteous…Be perfect (mature), therefore, as your
heavenly Father is perfect (mature).
In Luke’s account of the Sermon on the Mount, we read,
Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.
In the First Letter of John we read,
Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God…. Whoever
does not love does not know God, for God is love.
The writer repeats the statement of the Gospel,
No one has ever seen God.
But then he greatly expands where God may be found – not just in Jesus but,
If we love one another, God lives in us, and his love is perfected in us.
He writes further,
God is love, and those who abide in love abide in God and God abides in
them.
Am I arranging John’s writings to say what I sense is a possible description of the
Creative Source of reality? Is reality the fruit of Love? Of course I am. But, what if
the biblical writer was trying to say more than he knew? What if the Intention of
the whole creative process is Love? We are not doing very well, one might
respond, and that is sadly true unless one takes the really long-range view from
human origins, the rise from savagery, to the present, once again beset by
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page 11
religious violence, yet with hope for a more humane world if only love’s way, the
Way of Jesus, were enfleshed.
Let me review: we are seeking beyond traditional theism and atheism some
ultimate that creates a feeling beyond reason, a feeling that remains and assures
us there is ultimate meaning to our human existence. I turned to the Johannine
writings suggesting the Divine Intention is Love embodied in the human.
Let me set before you a current situation facing our nation – the negotiation with
Iran and give some background on the whole nuclear threat. The big issue today
is trust. The President and Secretary of State insist it is not just trust but trust
and verify. Nonetheless trust is key.
In his book House of War, James Carroll gives the history of an early nuclear
critical decision. I addressed this history a few years ago, from which I quote.
Let me refer to just two critical moments in the history through which we
have lived. The first moment was what to do with the newly discovered
nuclear power. Secretary of War Henry Stimson wrote a memorandum to
President Truman. Carroll writes:
It was another of those events dated September 11, each one the
center of a world in collision with other worlds. The impact of such
collisions is our subject. On September 11, 1945, four years to the
day after the groundbreaking of the Pentagon, fifty-six years to the
day before the Al Qaeda attack on the Pentagon, less than a month
after Japan’s surrender, and just over a month after the detonation
of the Nagasaki bomb, Stimson composed an urgent “Memorandum
for the President,” which began, “Subject: Proposed Action for
Control of Atomic Bombs.”
First Stimson told the President what the dawning of the nuclear
age meant:
If the atomic bomb were merely another though more
devastating military weapon to be assimilated into our
pattern of international relations, it would be one thing. We
could then follow the old custom of secrecy and nationalistic
military superiority relying on international caution to
prescribe [sic] future use of the weapon as we did with gas.
But I think the bomb instead constitutes merely a first step
in a new control by man over the forces of nature too
revolutionary and dangerous to fit into the old concepts. I
think it really caps the climax of the race between man’s
growing technical power for destructiveness and his
psychological power of self-control and group-control – his
moral power. If so, our method of approach to the Russians
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page 12
is a question of the most vital importance in the evolution of
human progress… The crux of the problem is Russia.
Carroll comments further:
“To put the matter concisely,” Stimson wrote, he proposed
that the United States take immediate steps to “enter into an
arrangement with the Russians, the general purpose of
which would be to control and limit the use of the atomic
bomb.” He suggested that by bringing the Soviets into our
confidence, they would have reason to believe it when
Americans said that “we would stop work on any further
improvement in, or manufacture of, the bomb as a military
weapon, provided the Russians and the British would do
likewise.” This meant, and Stimson proposed it, that
Washington would “impound what bombs we now have in
the United States provided the Russians and the British
would agree with us that in no event will they or we use a
bomb as an instrument of war unless all three governments
agree to that use.” Give up the secret. Give up the monopoly.
Give up sovereignty over use. Give up control of existing
bombs. Stimson, in the cover letter that accompanied this
memo, summed up his proposal by using the word “share”
twice. (p. 113f)
Carroll relates how Stimson’s grasp of the situation with Russia in
light of the atomic bomb was countered by Secretary of State James
Byrnes. Carroll’s account is so fascinating because he gives us a
glimpse behind the scenes from the perspective of history as to the
tensions and arguments that raged at the time. Writing of Stimson,
Carroll relates,
So now he warned that relations with Moscow “May be
perhaps irretrievably embittered by the way in which we
approach the solution of the bomb with Russia. For if we fail
to approach them now and merely continue to negotiate with
them, having this weapon rather ostentatiously on our hip,
their suspicion and their distrust of our purposes and
motives will increase.” This reference to the atomic bomb
“ostentatiously on our hip” is a tip off that this memo was
essentially an argument against fiercely anti-Soviet positions
then being taken by Secretary of State Byrnes, who had
already proven to be something of a nemesis. Stimson had,
the week before, criticized the way Byrnes was preparing for
an upcoming meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers in
London: “Brynes [is] very much against any attempt to
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page 13
cooperate with Stalin. His mind is full of the problems with
the coming meeting of the foreign ministers and he looks to
having the presence of the bomb in his pocket, so to speak, as
a great weapon to get through the thing he has.”
Very much against Byrnes, in one of the most remarkable
statements ever made by an American statesman, Stimson
presumed to assert in his September 11 letter to Truman,
“The chief lesson I have learned in a long life is that the only
way you can make a man trustworthy is to trust him; and the
surest way to make him untrustworthy is to distrust him and
show him your distrust.”
I conclude the first critical moment by underscoring these last lines – the
matter of trust. Trust or fear leading to mistrust; fear that often blooms
into paranoia and a world community marked by paranoia is a dangerous
place.
Do you sense that the whole disastrous tragedy of the Cold War could have
been avoided? Do you sense that at that critical moment in the history of
the twentieth century trust could have changed the impasse of terror
through which we lived on the brink of disaster?
One more critical moment – the breaking down of the Berlin Wall and the
end of the Cold War. We remember it well – the euphoria, the relief, the
high hopes for a world at peace. From James Carroll filling in the
background of the Reagan/Gorbachev encounters, I was struck by the
stature of the Russian leader. It was he, not Mr. Reagan that created the
possibility and effected the reality of the end of the Cold War. But this I
point to because for the United States it was another missed opportunity –
a missed opportunity to disarm the nuclear weapons that both sides
stockpiled because of that earlier missed opportunity when we could have
averted that arms race before it began. Russia wanted to disarm; we did
not.
I find it fascinating – even amazing that we repeat the score over and over.
I am quite aware that much is at stake and I am far removed from centers
of power and the inner workings of international affairs. Nonetheless, I
will live and die in the Way of Jesus, the way of love, of grace calling for
trust.
Speaking thus, please understand I claim no divine insight or infallible truth.
This role for me is one of bearing witness to my best wisdom and understanding.
I am well aware the Way of Jesus is a costly way that goes against all worldly
wisdom.
Jesus was crucified.
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page 14
Following in his steps, Gandhi was assassinated.
Following in his steps, Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated.
Love as embodied in Jesus calls for loving the enemy, for trusting, for risking all
for peace. Costly to be sure, but it must be abundantly clear
Violence begets violence;
Hate begets hate;
Distrust begets distrust.
What if the Eternal Intention was really enfleshed in Jesus? Then living in radical
love is the only way to realize peace on Earth, in the cosmos.
God is not to be found in our rational inquiry. The quest hits a wall. If God is
Love, then to love is to come to an awareness of God in the feeling that remains
where our rational search has failed.
Sometimes our human experience itself would give us a clue to Love at the core.
Let me close with two illustrations – one from history, one from the arts.
Here is a report from Flanders, Belgium, December 24, 1914, as related by
Jeremy Rifkin in his book The Empathic Civilization.
The evening of December 24, 1914, Flanders. The first world war in history
was entering into its fifth month. Millions of soldiers were bedded down in
makeshift trenches latticed across the European countryside. In many
places the opposing armies were dug in within thirty to fifty yards of each
other and within shouting distance. The conditions were hellish. The bitter
cold winter air chilled to the bone. The trenches were waterlogged.
Soldiers shared their quarters with rats and vermin. Lacking adequate
latrines, the stench of human excrement was everywhere. The men slept
upright to avoid the mud and sludge of their makeshift arrangements.
Dead soldiers littered the no-man’s-land between opposing forces, the
bodies left to rot and decompose within yards of their still-living comrades
who were unable to collect them for burial.
As dusk fell over the battlefields, something extraordinary happened. The
Germans began lighting candles on the thousands of small Christmas trees
that had been sent to the front to lend some comfort to the men. The
German soldiers then began to sing Christmas carols – first “Silent Night,”
then a stream of other songs followed. The English soldiers were stunned.
One soldier, gazing in disbelief at the enemy lines, said the blazed trenches
looked “like the footlights of a theater.” The English soldiers responded
with applause, at first tentatively, then with exuberance. They began to
sing Christmas carols back to their German foes to equally robust
applause.
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page 15
A few men from both sides crawled out of their trenches and began to walk
across the no-man’s-land toward each other. Soon hundreds followed. As
word spread across the front, thousands of men poured out of their
trenches. They shook hands, exchanged cigarettes and cakes and showed
photos of their families. They talked about where they hailed from,
reminisced about Christmases past, and joked about the absurdity of war.
The next morning, as the Christmas sun rose over the battlefield of
Europe, tens of thousands of men – some estimates put the number as
high as 100,000 soldiers – talked quietly with one another. Enemies just
twenty-four hours earlier, they found themselves helping each other bury
their dead comrades. More than a few pickup soccer matches were
reported. Even officers at the front participated, although when the news
filtered back to the high command in the rear, the generals took a less
enthusiastic view of the affair. Worried that the truce might undermine
military morale, the generals quickly took measures to rein in their troops.
The surreal “Christmas truce” ended as abruptly as it began – all in all, a
small blip in a war that would end in November 1918 with 8.5 million
military deaths in the greatest episode of human carnage in the annals of
history until that time. For a few short hours, no more than a day, tens of
thousands of human beings broke ranks, not only from their commands
but from their allegiances to country, to show their common humanity.
Thrown together to maim and kill, they courageously stepped outside of
their institutional duties to commiserate with one another and to celebrate
one another’s lives.
An accident or reflective of the deepest core of our human nature – the
enfleshment of the Eternal Intention?
One more story from the drama Les Miserables. Jean Valjean finally free from
twenty years’ imprisonment for stealing bread to feed his sister’s family. He finds
hospitality at the house of the Bishop but in the night he steals the Bishop’s silver.
The police approach him, bring him to the Bishop, as he had claimed the Bishop
gave him the silver. The Bishop confirms his story claiming he did give the silver
to Jean Valjean. And then after this act of pure grace, the Bishop tells Jean
Valjean he has claimed his soul for God.
By grace transformed, Valjean goes on to live an extraordinary life marked by
grace upon grace. The drama ends with Valjean, an old man, sung to by the young
woman he rescued as a child. She sings,
To love another person is to see the face of God.
In the film version Valjean is greeted at the Gates of Paradise by the Bishop
whose act of grace transformed his life. Angels and those whose lives he touched
© Grand Valley State University
�Richard A. Rhem
The Feeling Which Remains Where the Concept Fails
Page 16
guide him into Eternal Light – one of the most powerful dramatic moments one
can imagine.
Indeed, to love is to experience beyond reason’s deepest probe, a feeling
beyond reason’s search or word to convey.
Two stories of love in human experience, one historical, one a drama. Do they not
move us at the core of our being? And might that feeling stem from an awareness
of something ultimate, of the Love that is at the core of Being?
Of course, there is no proof for that because reasoned proof has no place in the
quest for the Ultimate Reality, call it God or call it Love.
But I have a Feeling…!
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Event
Grand Haven First Presbyterian Church, The Community Artist and Speaker Series
Location
The location of the interview
Grand Haven, Michigan
References
Rudolf Otto, Das Heilige, 1917, John Knox, The Humanity and Divinity of Christ, Karen Armstrong, The Case for God, James Carroll, House of War, Jeremy Rifkin, The Empathic Civilization
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-3-20150419
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2015-04-19
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
The Feeling Which Remains Where The Concept Fails
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Talk created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on April 19, 2015 entitled "The Feeling Which Remains Where The Concept Fails", on the occasion of Grand Haven First Presbyterian Church, The Community Artist and Speaker Series, at Grand Haven, Michigan. Tags: Search for God; Mystery of God; Love at the Core of the Universe; Religious Practice. Scripture references: Rudolf Otto, Das Heilige, 1917, John Knox, The Humanity and Divinity of Christ, Karen Armstrong, The Case for God, James Carroll, House of War, Jeremy Rifkin, The Empathic Civilization.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/05e22bae18c1fb794aa9b4aca8aa08b8.pdf
3cc1344c12f6fe1e124a84ee3cac4066
PDF Text
Text
Microbes, Apples, Buttons and Bibles
A Dissertation on the Nature of a Mathematical System
Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Student
Western Theological Seminary
Holland, Michigan
The Ventilator
(Published fortnightly for the Students of Western Theological Seminary)
March 27, 1958
There are questions which loom large in one’s mind as he stops to contemplate
the nature of truth and the question of epistemology. Much has been written in
this area and there has been considerable interest from the standpoint of
theology. For example, questions involving proofs for the existence of God, the
noetic effects of sin, antithesis theology and indeed constructing a Christian
Philosophy of Education all concern themselves with the nature of truth and the
capacity of man to attain it.
There has appeared much bombast and blunder from both the Christian point of
view and the non-Christian perspective. We claim no authority in the field, nor
originality; however, interest has caused us to investigate a very small area of
human knowledge and seek to discern its nature. Let us consider the nature of
mathematical truth. Is this “purest of the sciences” based upon self-evident truth,
eternal principles with creation, or empirical data? Down through the history of
thought all of these answers have been given.
Probably the earliest answer to this question was that the truth of mathematics
rests upon self-evident truth in contrast to the hypothesis of empirical science.
Truths of mathematics demand no empirical verification because they are in
another realm - everyone accepts their truth because any questioning of simple
mathematical facts would be absurd. 2 + 2 = 4. What foolhardy person could
deny it? As this science came into the modern critical era, however, such a vague
foundational basis was hardly satisfactory. There was a sense of restlessness and
a cloud hung low over the science.
As dissatisfaction grew, a retreat was made from this once dogmatically asserted
position to a more defensible ground holding that mathematics is the most
general science. John Stuart Mill held that mathematics is an empirical science
which differs from the other branches of empirical endeavor in two ways: its
subject matter is more general and its testability and confirmation are higher.
Because the experience of every succeeding generation adds overwhelming
© Grand Valley State University
�Microbes, Apples, Buttons and Bibles
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
confirmation to the truth of mathematics, we have come to consider its theorems
as qualitatively different from those for example of biology, but they are not.
At this point let me add that those who hold that 2 + 2 = 4 is true because the
creator has so endowed the creation with a system and an order and this
statement of mathematics conforms to that order, must be grouped with the
above who hold to an empirical basis for mathematical truth.
It can be stated differently as follows: God created the universe in an orderly
fashion and as we reverently contemplate his revelation in nature we are able to
discern these eternal principles or order of which mathematical principles are an
important group. VanTil would therefore say that there is a Christian
mathematics. The regenerate will look differently at mathematics than the
unregenerate who looks through colored glasses cemented to his face and
therefore cannot see that these principles are innate in the created order finding
their source in the Creator.
With all due respect to the reality of the antithesis as an ultimate principle, we
would like to examine this view of the source or foundation of mathematical
truth. Does it rest upon an empirical base or not? In pursuit of our answer we will
follow Carl Hempel in his essay “On the Nature of Mathematical Truth” which
appears in Readings in the Philosophy of Science, Feigl & Brodbeck. Take a
typical example of an empirical hypothesis such as Newton’s law of gravitation.
From this hypothesis we make predictions – under conditions “a” result “b” will
follow. When in actual fact we experience the fulfillment of this hypothesis, i.e.,
when we see conditions “a” followed by results “b”, we say the hypothesis is
confirmed. Continual confirmation causes the hypothesis to take on the status of
law. However, suppose we find conditions “a” followed not by the results “b” but
results “c”, we say, the hypothesis is disconfirmed. If repeatedly conditions “a”
are not followed by results “b” as was originally hypothesized, we throw out the
hypothesis and set out to discover the results of conditions “a” anew. This is the
hypothetical deductive method of modern science.
Now let us move into the realm of mathematics. We hypothesize that 3+2 = 5. “If
this is actually an empirical generalization of past experiences, then it must be
possible to state what kind of evidence would oblige us to concede the hypothesis
was not generally true after all.” (p. 149) But this we never find in the area of
mathematics. Take the following example which Hempel gives:
“We place some microbes on a slide, putting down first three of them and
then another two. Afterwards we count all the microbes to test whether in
this instance 3 and 2 actually added up to 5. Suppose now that we counted
6 microbes altogether. Would we consider this as an empirical
disconfirmation of the given proposition, or at least as a proof that it does
not apply to microbes? Clearly not; rather we would assume we had made
a mistake in counting or that one of the microbes had split in two between
the first and second count. But under no circumstances could the
© Grand Valley State University
�Microbes, Apples, Buttons and Bibles
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
phenomenon just described invalidate the arithmetical proposition in
question, for the latter asserts nothing whatever about the behavior of
microbes; it merely states that any set consisting of 3 + 2 objects may also
be said to consist of 5 objects. And this is so because the symbols “3 + 2”
and “5” denote the same number. They are synonymous by virtue of the
fact that the symbols “2”, “3”, “5” and “+” are defined (or tacitly
understood) in such a way that the above identity holds as a consequence
of the meaning attached to the concepts involved in it. The statement that
3 + 2 = 5, then, is true for similar reasons as, say, the assertion that no
sexagenarian is 45 years of age. Both are true simply by virtue of
definitions or of similar stipulations which determine the meaning of the
key terms involved.” (p. 150)
Thus we see that there need be no empirical validation for this statement for the
fact that the symbols “3” and “2” added together equal the symbol “5” is true
whether or not there are any objects such as apples or buttons or microbes to
which to attach the symbols. Indeed we see the mathematical statement 3 + 2 = 5
to be devoid of all empirical content as it stands in itself. Such a statement is
called a true a priori or an analytic statement, thus indicating “that their truth is
logically independent of or logically prior to any experiential evidence.” (p. 150)
The above assertions may fall upon deaf ears because one might object that the
very method of teaching arithmetic is through empirical objects. The child is not
taught 3 + 2 = 5, but rather 3 apples plus 2 apples equals 5 apples. Therefore one
might conclude that the empirical data used in teaching is an integral part of the
system. However, we would counter that this is to confuse the logical and the
psychological basis. Psychologically speaking there may be an empirical basis for
arithmetic but as the mind matures the apples are dropped and one thinks
abstractly, 3+2 = 5. The fact that 3 + 2 = 5 does not stand in need of empirical
validation is because it is a logical statement concerned with manipulating
symbols. The analytic statement does not convey factual information. The
example used above that no sexagenarian is 45 years of age is an example of this.
This statement cannot in any way conflict with any factual data – it conveys no
information. It is true simply because its key terms are defined in a certain way.
We might further buttress our position by referring to geometry. That a straight
line is the shortest distance between two points was always thought to be selfevident and also it could be demonstrated. Again, however, scholars were not
satisfied and finally had to realize that Euclidian Geometry which had always
been considered to be a picture of reality as it is, was seen to be but one of many
possible pictures of space. Riemann constructed other systems logically
consistent and capable of explanation. Here again a discipline had to be purged of
empirical content and realize it was dealing with pure relations.
Coming back to mathematics: is there Christian mathematics? We hardly think
so. Mathematics is a logical system, a purely relational discipline, a manipulation
© Grand Valley State University
�Microbes, Apples, Buttons and Bibles
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
of symbols which are given definitions and which function as a tool which is
applied to empirical content but which itself is devoid of content. How to pour
Christian content into second grade arithmetic? Substitute Bibles for apples.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19580327
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1958-03-27
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Microbes, Apples, Buttons and Bibles, A Dissertation on the Nature of a Mathematical System
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The Ventilator, Western theological Seminary Student Paper
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on March 27, 1958 entitled "Microbes, Apples, Buttons and Bibles, A Dissertation on the Nature of a Mathematical System", it appeared in The Ventilator, Western Theological Seminary student paper. Tags: Logical Thinking, Nature of Truth.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Logical Thinking
Nature of Truth
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/67450db648a60e2c64f7cdb5a81fa11e.pdf
6134a1e45b48a65c513371461ff0c784
PDF Text
Text
A Theological Conception of Reality as History
Some Aspects of the Thinking of Wolfhart Pannenberg
Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
Reformed Review
A Theological Journal of Western Theological Seminary
101 East 13th Street, Holland, Michigan
Autumn, 1972
I. Pannenberg in the Context of Modern Theology
In his essay entitled “Evangelical Theology in the Nineteenth Century” Karl Barth
speaks with great respect of the daring with which the leading theologians of that
period, which was so replete with magnificent achievements in the arts and
sciences, wrestled with the challenges of the modern world. They displayed an
openness to the world which ought always to characterize theology and they
accounted themselves well, both as Christian men and as scholars. However,
Barth points out, their strength was also their weakness in that they allowed this
confrontation with contemporary culture to become their decisive and primary
concern. This, he maintains, was the key problem of nineteenth-century
Protestant theology.
This general assumption of openness to the world led necessarily to the specific
assumption that theology could defend its own cause only within the framework
of a total view of man, the universe, and God; which would command universal
recognition.1
One of the leading exponents of this point of view criticized by Barth was Ernst
Troeltsch, although his work extended well into the first quarter of the twentieth
century. Troeltsch was critical of the leading representatives of the liberal
tradition also, but for precisely the opposite reason. Though he, himself, had
much in common with the dominant Ritschlian school, he was nevertheless
critical of the Schleiermacher-Ritschl-Herrmann line of development because,
although they accepted fully the application and the results of the historicalcritical method in the investigation of Christian origins, they still maintained the
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
uniqueness of Jesus, rooting the redemption wrought by God through him in his
person. For all their openness to the modern world and their conviction that
theology must be restructured in the light of the modern world-view of the
natural sciences, the epistemology of Kant, and the newly prestigious science of
history, they nevertheless stubbornly maintained the necessity of the present
experience of redemption being indissolvably related to Jesus of Nazareth. To
Troeltsch this appeared to be a futile grasping after the last remains of dogmatic
thinking which located absolute and definitive revelation in a particular historical
phenomenon. He acknowledged that these theologians had broken with the old
dogmatics of Protestant orthodoxy, but in the light of the development of
historical thinking and the application of the historical method, he was convinced
that they were holding an impossible position. They were resisting the pressure of
consistent thinking by stopping short of admitting the relativity of each and every
historical appearance. For Troeltsch the decisive fact was not the historical
person of Jesus, but rather the idea which was concretized in him and from him
has issued forth into history. Once launched, the idea or principle is independent
of its initiator, its essence to be sought not in its initial embodiment but rather in
the pluriformity of its historical configurations at any given stage in its
development. In the Schleiermacher-Ritschl-Herrmann line of thought Troeltsch
saw a mixing of types of theological method and consequently a failure to
distinguish the person of Jesus from the principle he incarnated. He criticized the
failure sharply to distinguish person and principle, personality and idea, and
likewise the contention that the historical person and a personal relationship to
him were essential to saving faith in God. He saw this position rooted in the later
churchly Schleiermacher and being strongly advocated in his day by Ritschl and
Herrmann.2
In Troeltsch’s view the very historical-critical approach to Christian origins,
especially to Jesus himself, undercut any attempt to salvage from the uniformity
of history a final and absolute revelation of God. This was clearly demonstrated,
Troeltsch maintained, by the fact that the History of Religions school, of which he
claimed to be the dogmatician, had itself sprung from the Ritschlian school,
differing only in the greater consistency with which it pursued the consequences
of the very methods accepted by Ritschl, himself. Thus Troeltsch was convinced
that the theology of the future would have to purge away these last vestiges of the
old dogmatic approach and carry through more rigorously the requirements of
the historical-critical method which draws all historical phenomena, Jesus of
Nazareth not excepted, into the movement of historical process, allowing for no
absolute uniqueness in the midst of the relative.
Paradoxical as it may appear, Karl Barth quite agreed with Troeltsch—agreed,
that is, that to subject Jesus to historical-critical research behind the witness of
the New Testament is to bring him down to where he is one historical person
among others, one in whom there cannot possibly be found the final and
definitive revelation of God. Of course, agreement with Troeltsch, that having
followed the path they did, the great nineteenth-century theologians could not
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
consistently stop halfway, does not imply that Barth advocates with Troeltsch
that their successors should draw the logical conclusion, as Troeltsch counseled.
On the contrary, Barth examines the Schleiermacher-Ritschl-Herrmann Theology
and discovers their fatal error, not in their failure to follow consistently the
course on which they embarked, but rather in the course they chose to follow in
the first place. It was not their decision to grant recognition to the use of the
historical-critical method and then failure to draw the conclusions to which it led.
Rather it was their understanding of religion as an innate potential of the human
spirit and their failure to see that, defined in such terms, the Christian faith was
not being spoken of at all. If Christianity was a phenomenon of the religious
capacity of man, then it was one religion among others and could be understood
only as Troeltsch maintained, by a comparative historical study. In such an
instance there could be no talk of an absolute and definitive revelatory
significance or meaning in history. If one started where Troeltsch started, Barth
maintained, one would end where Troeltsch ended. But then, according to Barth,
we have to do not with the religion of revelation, but with the revelation of
religion3 and the application of the historical-critical method will discover in
Jesus no more than a man among other men and in Christianity no more than a
religion among other religions. The History of Religions school is only the logical
outcome of a theology that speaks of the believing man rather than of the
revealing God. Theology which takes itself seriously can speak only from the
revelation of God who has grasped it, paying homage to no world-view, be it
ancient or modern, no philosophical system or no anthropological analysis of the
religious capacity of man. Theology must speak from out of the revelation of God
in Jesus Christ.
Thus Barth completely repudiated the counsel of Troeltsch and pursued the
dogmatic method, reducing historical-critical research to a secondary, helpingrole in the explication of the biblical witness to Jesus Christ.
One of the young theologians in the 1920’s who joined with Barth in his revolt
from the theology of the nineteenth century was Rudolf Bultmann. He too
recognized the poverty of Liberalism and its failure to give centrality to the
decisive redemptive act of God in Jesus Christ. He criticized Liberalism for reducing Christianity to a system of timeless and eternal truths and the History of
Religions school for reducing Christ to a cultic symbol.4 However, what for Barth
was a secondary matter became for him the central concern, namely the
hermeneutical problem. Granting that Christian theology must start from the
Word of God, Bultmann could never emphasize too strongly that revelation must
be understandable to man. This man he found most adequately defined by the
analysis of existentialist philosophy as set forth by the early Heidegger. While he,
himself, was unexcelled in the application of the historical-critical method,
Bultmann denied that the results of such research were of any consequence for
faith, faith which was not belief in factual information about Jesus, his life, death,
and resurrection but rather obedience to the kerygmatic Word in the present
moment calling men to a new self-understanding. Bultmann the historian and
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
Bultman the theologian never met; for apart from the fact that Jesus appeared
faith has no relation to history.
Great differences separate Troeltsch, Barth, and Bultman from one another.
Troeltsch sees no alternative to pursuing the historical method in the analysis of
the phenomenon of religion. Barth rejects the idea that the Christian faith is first
of all a religion and he pursues the dogmatic method, judging all religion by the
norm and criterion of Jesus Christ. Bultmann interprets the Christian faith
within the possibilities afforded by an Existentialist analysis of man. Interestingly
enough, however, there is one point on which they all seem in agreement; that is
the understanding of the nature of history and the principles of historiography.
For Troeltsch, history and the methods by which it is investigated rule out in
advance any final and definitive revelation of God in history. The early Barth
agreed and moved revelation to the frontier of time and eternity. Later he
brought revelation back into history, defining history from the perspective of
Jesus Christ but at the same time he continued to recognize the validity of
historical science as defined by Troeltsch maintaining that it had no competency
to deal with God’s revelatory action in history. Bultmann as a practicing historian
followed the historical-critical method as defined by Troeltsch and, because he
saw history as the realm of the relative and transient, he removed revelation from
the sphere of history to the realm of human existence. All three agreed that
history and historical science are what the great historians of the nineteenth
century said they are and all three agreed that, that being the case, there was no
trace of God’s revelatory action discoverable in history by the historian.
In the last decade this whole conception of history and accompanying
historiography has been called into question by the German theologian Wolfhart
Pannenberg. German theology has often been characterized by drastic swings of
the pendulum and, as Pannenberg’s early writings appeared, it seemed that once
again the pendulum was swinging from the theology of the word which has
dominated the twentieth century in its various forms to a theology of history. As
Pannenberg has continued to address himself to the problems of revelation,
history, and theological method, however, it is evident that we have to do here
with more than simply a reaction to the one-sided emphasis of dialectical
theology, a reaction in its turn as one-sided on the other side of the issue. Much
rather, Pannenberg has sought to do justice to the valid insights of those who
have preceded him. Specifically, he acknowledges the valid insight of Troeltsch
that Christianity cannot be arbitrarily isolated from the rest of man’s religious
experience, but much rather can be understood only in relationship to the whole
of the history of religions. However, with Barth and Bultmann, over against
Troeltsch, he speaks of the priority of revelation in terms of which the respective
religious experience of man is to be judged, rather than seeing religious
experience as the expression of an innate potentiality within man.
With Troeltsch, over against Barth and Bultmann, Pannenberg sees the necessity
of relating the Christian faith to the whole of reality. But over against Troeltsch,
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
he does not interpret Christianity in subjection to the prevailing worldview of
modern man, but rather interprets the whole of reality theologically, submitting
his argumentation before the bar of human judgement, being convinced that a
Christian interpretation of the whole of reality is more rational than any other.
With Troeltsch and against Barth and Bultman, Pannenberg insists that the claim
of a revelation in history must be historically perceptible by means of historicalcritical research. The central revelatory event, the resurrection, serves as the
model for his understanding of the relation of historical reason and revelation.
But against Troeltsch, he affirms the historical verifiability of such revelatory
action.
In short, Pannenberg pursues the historical method as advocated by Troeltsch
but, rather than ending with the loss of a final and definite revelation of God in
history, he proclaims with Barth and Bultmann the finality of Jesus Christ in the
definitive self-revelation of God. How is this possible? The answer lies in the fact
that precisely where Troeltsch, Barth, and Bultmann were one, Pannenberg parts
from all three; that is at the point of the understanding of the nature of history
and the principles by which the past is known. Troeltsch gave definitive
statement to the understanding of nineteenth century historiography. Barth and
Bultmann recognized that in those terms the final revelation of God could not be
posited within history and, rather than subjecting the understanding of history to
a thorough critique, they removed revelation from the competency of the
historical-critical method (Barth) and from the arena of history itself (Bultmann).
By a critique of Troeltsch’s understanding of history and the principles of
historiography Pannenberg attempts to do justice to Troeltsch’s demand to
pursue the historical method while leaving room for a definitive revelation of God
in history which Barth and Bultmann in their respective manners recognized as
essential to the Christian tradition.
Thus, in a sense, by tracing the understanding of revelation, history, and
theological method in these four thinkers, we come full circle but, through Pannenberg’s critique of Troeltsch, the whole perspective is turned around and,
rather than understanding Jesus in terms of the modern worldview of reality,
reality is understood from the perspective of Jesus, the end of history, who has
appeared proleptically in the midst of history.
II. The Universality of Systemic Theology
The theology of Wolfhart Pannenberg is characterized by a tension which, in his
view, is given with the task of systematic theology itself.5 Systematic theology
always resides in a tension between the two poles of the subject matter with
which it has to do. On the one hand, there is the Christian tradition itself for
which it is responsible, specifically, the revelation of God in Jesus Christ as
witnessed to in the Scriptures. On the other hand, Systematic theology must be
concerned with all truth in general as represented in its various facets by all nontheological disciplines. Systematic theology cannot, as is the case in other
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
disciplines, devote itself exclusively to the investigation of its special subject
matter, for inherent in its task is a universality which impels it to take up the
question of truth per se. This universality follows inevitably from the fact that
theology purports to speak of God. “One uses the word God meaningfully only
when one intends thereby the Power determining everything that is.”6 To speak
thus of God as the author of all reality brings with it the intellectual obligation to
relate all truth to the God of the Bible and then to understand it anew from him.
Pannenberg acknowledges that the theological task thus conceived may appear
presumptuous. Yet, to the extent that the theologian is conscious of what he is
doing when he speaks of God, he has no alternative. Pannenberg acknowledges
further that the task can never be consummated once for all. But if this
responsibility appears as an almost unbearable burden, it likewise constitutes the
peculiar dignity of theology, especially in an intellectual situation which is
characterized by fragmentation as a result of the present high degree of
specialization, for it falls to theology to seek truth in its unity.
Such a conception of the task of systematic theology is by no means generally
accepted. Particularly in the last hundred years theology has been conceived
rather as an independent science alongside of the other sciences with its own
special subject matter, the revelation of God in Jesus Christ witnessed to in the
Scriptures. Pannenberg counters, however, that the revelation of God is only
really conceived of as the revelation of God when it is understood in relation to all
truth and knowledge and when all truth is integrated into it. Only thus is it
possible to speak of the biblical revelation as the revelation of the God who is the
creator and perfecter of all things.
Since Harnack’s famous characterization of the apologist’s assimilation of the
Greek philosophical quest for the true structure of the divine into the Christian
tradition as the “hellenization” of the gospel, that endeavor has been generally
judged in a negative light. Pannenberg, however, rejects that negative judgement.
While he grants that the apologists were not, in fact, successful in carrying
through the assimilation in all respects, he disputes the idea that their efforts
resulted in a complete capitulation to the philosophical quest. But apart from the
degree to which the early church fathers were successful or unsuccessful in what
they undertook to do, the real issue, as far as Pannenberg is concerned, is the fact
that they undertook the task of offering the Christian gospel as the answer to the
Greek philosophical quest. This undertaking is generally recognized as having
been inevitable in that the Hellenistic world into which the gospel came was
dominated by the Greek philosophical conception of God. Thus, in spite of the
disastrous mingling of the Christian message with Greek metaphysics, there was
no alternative. But such a view, Pannenberg insists, misses the primary point,
which is that the Christian message itself necessitated the encounter with the
Greek philosophical quest. He contends:
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
The discussion with the philosophical question of the true form of the
Divine was, indeed, occasioned by the encounter with the Hellenistic
Thought-world, but it was also inwardly rooted in the biblical witness of
God as the universal God, responsible not only for Israel, but for all
people.
In the claim of the God of Israel to be the God, alone having jurisdiction
over all men, it was, therefore, theologically rooted that the Christian faith
had to enter into the philosophical question of the true nature of God and
until today must give an answer to it.7
The ancient church fathers as well as the authors of the great scholastic summas
understood the universality of theology, the responsibility that rests upon him
who would speak of God.
That modern theology has not so conceived of its task can be traced to Albrecht
Ritschl’s attempt to carve out for theology its own sphere, the sphere of religious
experience, rejecting all metaphysical elements of the Christian tradition in the
face of the critique rendered by Positivism. Liberal Protestantism passed this
heritage along to Dialectical Theology which had reacted so strongly against it.
Pannenberg observes that Barth’s struggle against every vestige of natural
theology is really in many respects an extension and radicalization of Ritschl’s
idea of an independent theology with its own special theme.8
If we would discover where theology lost its universality, however, we must go
back much further. Evangelical theology has never had a universal character
since it inherited the Scripture-positivism which has been its hallmark from the
doctrine of Scripture formulated in the late Middle Ages in, for example, the
School of Occam. It has been axiomatic in the Protestant tradition that the
theological task consists in the exegesis of Scripture. Thus to find the root of the
loss of universality we must go back into Scholasticism, specifically to the
thirteenth century and Thomas’ careful demarcation of two spheres of
knowledge, natural and supernatural. Pannenberg recognizes the exigencies
under which this bifurcation took place. Aristotelian philosophy prevailed, being
generally acknowledged as the embodiment of all “natural” thought. If one would
hold to the truth of the Christian tradition, one could do so only by setting it
alongside the summation of “natural” truth as unfolded in Aristotelianism.
Aristotelian philosophy represented that truth which could be discovered by
man’s natural faculties; the Christian faith represented that truth which could
only be bestowed by revelation. Neither Aristotelian philosophy nor the Christian
tradition was intended for this kind of reciprocal supplementation, according to
Pannenberg, but he asserts:
It would seem much rather to have been the expression of a compromise
of theology with the intellectual power of Aristotelianism. In this compromise lie the historical roots of the last of the universality of theology.9
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
For Thomas, who was responsible for the consummate expression of the naturalsupernatural division of the spheres of knowledge, the two spheres were carefully
coordinated into a systematic whole. In the course of time, however, the structure
fell apart rendering the sphere of natural knowledge independent of any
reference to the truth of revelation, the consequence of which was increasingly to
render “supernatural” knowledge superfluous for a knowledge of the world and to
make of theology a positivistic science of Scripture. Such a state of affairs hardly
accords with Paul’s struggle to “take every thought captive to obey Christ” (II Cor.
10:5) and, with the unparalleled explosion of knowledge in the modern period in
the wake of the development of the scientific method, the division of spheres of
knowledge formulated by Thomas has resulted in an almost unbridgeable gulf.
The task of understanding the whole of reality in its unity from the perspective of
its author, the God of creation, is formidable indeed, and yet unless it is
undertaken, the universality of theology will never be realized and theology, as an
independent science with its own special theme, the exegesis of Scripture, will
fade increasingly into the background of man’s pursuit of truth. Concentration of
its own special theme has about it a pious sound and it makes for a comfortable
co-existence of theology with the other sciences. It can only signify, however, the
utter failure of theology to carry out its peculiar intellectual responsibility which
is to take in claim all truth as witness to the one true God as the author of reality
and, in turn, to understand all truth anew from him.
Where does one begin? How can such an overwhelming task be undertaken? It is
Pannenberg’s conviction that the conception of theology as an independent
science alongside others with its own special subject matter must be rejected and
that its universal character must be recognized by its addressing itself to the
second pole of its dual concern, namely, to the questions which concern man in
his experience of reality in the present cultural situation. Only by seeking the
truth per se can theology do justice to its special subject matter, the revelation of
God in Jesus Christ as witnessed to in the Scriptures; for in that it purports to
speak of God, it purports to speak of the Power determining all reality. Implicit in
the responsibility of speaking of the Power determining all reality is the necessity
of thoroughly grasping how modern man experiences reality, for only by speaking
of the Power determining reality as it is presently experienced can theology speak
convincingly. It is, therefore, incumbent upon theology to speak of God in terms
of the present experience of reality. Thus the most general question which
theology must answer is how one can speak of God in the present cultural
situation. Only by determining this can theology once again undertake to exercise
its universal function.
III. Revelation As History
Pannenberg’s unique contribution to contemporary theological discussion has
had to do primarily not with the content of revelation so much as the mode of its
occurrence. Stated theologically the question has been, How does God manifest
himself to man? Stated anthropologically it is the question of how man perceives
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page 9
that self-revelation. The theological question has issued in the debate as to
whether God reveals himself directly or immediately through his word, that is,
through an act of speaking the content of which is God himself, whether he
himself speaks, or another speaks in his name; or whether God reveals himself
indirectly or mediately through his activity, his activity being conceived not in
terms of a series of special acts next to other events explainable as “natural” as
opposed to “supernatural” but rather his continuous dynamic relationship to the
whole of reality as its Creator, transcendent Ground, and Destiny. In
oversimplified terms, it is a question of whether God “speaks” to man directly,
thus making known his essence to man, or whether God’s essence can be known
only indirectly from what he does. Obviously, when stated thus “word” and “act”
are placed in a falsely antithetical relationship and a biblical theology will rather
understand them in a positive relationship with the priority given to word or act
depending on the point of view of the biblical writer. Nonetheless, setting the
question up in terms of the two poles, word and act, is helpful in identifying the
problem.
If we approach the problem from the anthropological side, that is, if we ask how
the revelation of God is perceived by man, then we are asking whether God in his
self-manifestation can be known by man through the exercise of his rational
faculties or whether God can be known only through the means of some suprarational faculty however that may be understood. Essentially this is a question of
whether God in his self-manifestation can be perceived by reason or whether he
can only be perceived by faith. It should be underlined here that this is not a
question of whether man by his own rational faculties can discover God or
whether God must make himself known to man. If the question we are asking is
misunderstood in this way—a not uncommon misunderstanding—the real issue
will be missed. The point rather is: Granted that God can be known by man only
through his self-disclosure, is that self-disclosure rationally perceptible or only
supra-rationally perceptible.
Again, it is not a question of whether the content of God's revelation is rational or
supra-rational. It is possible to hold, as does Karl Barth, that the self-revelation of
God is highly rational and yet deny that man through the exercise of his rational
faculties can discover that revelation apart from an illuminating act of the Holy
Spirit which can be described only as a miracle. For Barth, to be more accurate,
revelation is never “there” to be perceived, but rather it “occurs” in the
illuminating act of the Holy Spirit, although once it is given it is rationally
comprehensible.
From this it should be evident that of the two questions, or rather the two aspects
of the one question concerning the revelation of God, the most basic question is
not whether God reveals himself through word or event but whether man as a
rational creature is able through the exercise of his rational faculties to
comprehend the revelation of God. Whether that revelation takes the form of
spoken word or historical event is to be determined subsequently. The primary
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page10
division of opinion will occur on the anthropological or epistemological question
as to whether man as man can perceive the revelation of God. This point is
illustrated by the fact that, for example, Bultmann and Cullmann represent two
radically different positions in regard to the question of where God reveals
himself, in word or event. However, in spite of their differences on the mode of
revelation, they both agree in their own way that man comes into the possession
of knowledge of God through an illuminating act of the Holy Spirit and not
through the exercise of his reason over against the “proclaimed word”
(Bultmann) or the “acts of God” (Cullmann). On this question Kerygmatic
Theology and Heilsgeschichtliche Theology are in agreement.
With regard to the first question as to how God reveals himself, whether through
word or event or in combination of the two, we have an inter-theological debate.
With regard to the second question, as to how man perceives the revelation of
God, we are dealing with a matter that has wide-ranging implications for the
whole sphere of human knowledge, depending on how we answer the question. If
we answer it as do Barth, Bultmann, or Cullmann, to name only three
representative figures, holding that man as man, by the exercise of his rational
faculties can never achieve a knowledge of God apart from a supplementary
illuminating act of the Holy Spirit, then, to employ Kantian terms, we remove
theology as an independent science, into the realm of practical reason; or, in
Ritschl's terms, we make theological statements as value-judgments; or, in Existentialist terms, we make theological truth equivalent to the truth of expression of
the existing individual. If, on the contrary, we hold that although man by his own
creative reason could never discover the knowledge of God, yet, given the fact
that God has revealed himself and that man as man can achieve the knowledge of
God so revealed, then we place theology squarely in the center of human
knowledge wherein it will be obliged to demonstrate the revelation of God before
the court of human judgment in terms of the generally accepted canons of
rationality. For if the theologian is convinced that God is and that he has
disclosed himself, and, further, that that revelation is available to rational
reflection, he will not be content simply to affirm his conviction, nor will he be
able to appeal to some sort of esoteric experience wherein his knowledge was
ascertained, but he will find it incumbent upon himself to support the truth of his
knowledge of God through rational argumentation.
The case as stated here is intentionally stated in the sharpest possible contrasts in
order most clearly to isolate the central problem we wish to discuss in our
critique. It is our conviction that only in such a posing of the problem does the
real significance and urgent importance of Pannenberg’s theology become
evident. We have sketched in brief outline the crisis which developed in
evangelical theology with the loss of the authority of Scripture. We have seen that
that authority was undermined through the rise of historical thinking although,
paradoxically, historical thinking itself and consequent secularism are in part
fruits of the Christian tradition. Protestant theology over the last century and a
half can best be understood as an attempt to come to terms with historical
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page11
thinking, but to the present no satisfactory solution has been found. We
concentrated particularly on the attempt of Dialectical Theology as formulated
respectively by Barth and Bultmann to disengage the revelation of God from the
sphere of history thus removing theology from the lordship of historical thinking.
More and more, however, it has become clear that the creation of a special
sphere of theological truth inaccessible to the judgment of reason is selfdefeating, leaving theology in the position of affirming an existential truth
(Bultmann) or a revelational truth (Barth) neither of which can claim generally
binding power. Theological truth is reduced to private truth.
We have attempted in our exposition of Barth and Bultmann not only to
understand what they were saying, but why they were saying it. If we come to
conclusions differing from theirs this is not because we have seen the problem
more clearly than they saw it, but rather because we view it in a changed climate
of opinion, changed at least in part through the genius of their labors. We are
convinced that it is possible today in a climate of opinion radically different than
that which prevailed in the opening decades of our century, to affirm the
universality of theology. We are further convinced that in the systematic theology
of Pannenberg we have the most adequate and most comprehensive attempt yet
made to integrate the true insights of post-Enlightenment or modern thought
into a theological understanding of reality. In the theology of Pannenberg we
have the revolutionary truth of historical thinking, which is the hallmark of
modern thought, incorporated into a conception of the Christian tradition which
at the same time maintains the essence of the latter.
We have seen both in our introductory discussion of the rise of historical thinking
and in our exposition of Pannenberg’s theology that western thought shows
widespread agreement on the fact that the whole of reality must be conceived as
history, as dynamic process in contrast to the cosmological thinking of Greek
philosophy which conceived Being as static. It was the greatness of Ernst
Troeltsch that he recognized the fundamental revolution in human thinking
which historical thinking occasioned. He was convinced that historical thinking
was incommensurable with the Christian theological tradition because that
tradition was formulated in terms of Greek metaphysical conceptually which had
been undercut by post-Enlightenment thought. He was so certain that historical
thinking was irreversible that he felt compelled to re-formulate the Christian faith
in accommodation to it. In so doing he gave up the idea of a final, definitive
revelation of God in the course of history, specifically in the history of Jesus.
Troeltsch’s conception of the nature of history and his formulation of
historiographical principles was so much the consummate expression of the
prevaling intellectual climate that for a considerable period they were viewed as
axiomatic. This was the climate of opinion when the young theologians who were
to be grouped together as constituting the dialectical movement came on the
scene. They were not prepared to challenge Troeltsch’s conception of the nature
of history nor his formulation of the principle of the historical-critical method. Of
one thing, however, they were certain: in such a view of history and
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page12
historiography there was no room for the definitive revelation of God in Jesus
Christ. Therefore, being convinced that they must speak of God in his deity, his
sovereignty, and his freedom in his revelation, they removed that revelation from
the history whose nature Troeltsch described and from the access of the
historical-critical method whose principles Troeltsch formulated.
We noted above the self-defeating consequence of the removal of revelation from
history. Theology pursued as an independent science becomes a matter of private
truth. The widespread questioning, particularly of the position of Bultmann by
his own eminent students, is an indication of the dissatisfaction felt with his
handling of the problem of revelation and history, and, while Barth has indeed
moved the occurrence of revelation back into the sphere of history, his existence,
the subjectivity of truth, the openness and contingency of the historical process,
reality itself as historical process—into a theological conception of history which
finds in Jesus the definitive revelation of God, that we have contended that
Pannenberg’s theology is the most adequate formulation of the truth of historical
thinking and the Christian tradition yet attempted. His theological conception of
history is not simply a rejection of and reaction against the prevailing dialectical
theology as that theology had been over against the nineteenth century Protestant
Liberalism and the historicism of Troeltsch. While Pannenberg rejects the
authoritarianism and revelational positivism of dialectical theology, he
nevertheless is concerned to preserve the essence of what that theology was
saying, namely, that God in his sovereign freedom has disclosed himself in Jesus
Christ. He recognizes the justification of dialectical theology’s reaction against
Troeltsch’s historicism and he too is critical of Troeltsch. However he is equally
aware that Troeltsch had a grasp of something which theology simply cannot bypass, the recognition of the revolutionary nature of historical thinking whose
truth must be incorporated into the Christian tradition. In Pannenberg’s
theological conception of history there is a meeting of the best insights of
Troeltsch with the best insights of the theology of the Word, and the result is a
significant advance, a breakthrough in theological understanding.
IV. Dogmatic Theses Drawn From Pannenberg’s Thinking
Thesis I: Utilizing the best insights of twentieth century historical science,
Pannenberg has presented a valid critique of both Troeltsch’s understanding of
the nature of history and his formulation of the principles of historiography
thus creating the possibility of a theological conception of history and asserting
once again theology’s universal function.
It is characteristic of Pannenberg’s theology that he speaks of God in relation to
the whole of reality. In so doing he seeks to integrate the best insights of the
respective disciplines into a theonomous conception of reality. It is equally
characteristic of his procedure, however, that he claims no privileged perspective
as a Christian theologian when discussing, for instance, the anthropological
structure of human existence or the nature of history. When discussing historical-
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page13
critical thinking he does not begin with some theological requirement to be
forced on the historian, but rather listens to how the historians themselves
understand their subject. How do they understand the nature of history? How do
they conceive of the task of the historian? How do they justify the
historiographical principles with which they carry out their investigation? His
own critique of the science of history is then an immanent critique. Given an
understanding of history as advocated by Collingwood, for example, principles of
historiography as formulated under the impact of positivism must be modified.
This is but one illustration of his method throughout. Only after he has
determined what the leading thinkers in the various disciplines themselves have
to say about the nature of their subject and their methodological principles does
Pannenberg begin his theological reflection on that subject matter. He claims that
if he is seriously to speak of God, which as a theologian he must do, then he
cannot allow the historian’s truth to stand in isolation as simply the truth about
history. Rather, if God is God then the historian’s truth which he has discovered
by means of investigation and reflection must be relatable to the one unifying
ground of truth, namely, God. What he does argue in this dialogue with the
various disciplines of science is that, given their own self-understanding, the
reality with which they have to do is more adequately explained on the
presupposition of God than without him. To use history again as an example,
Pannenberg cites several leading historians of the past and present to the effect
that concrete historical research of a limited historical period always presupposes
a wider context which ultimately presupposes some sort of universal-historical
conception. But, he argues, such a conception of the total course of events is
unavailable, as the historians too are vividly aware. Any universal-historical
scheme which denies the contingency of events and the openness of the future
contradicts our understanding of history. This was the fatal weakness of Hegel’s
scheme, and since Hegel historians have eschewed every all-encompassing
system. However, Pannnberg points out, the contemporary historian is in a
dilemma: on the basis of his understanding of his work, universal history must be
thought, but on the basis of his understanding of the nature of history such a
conception cannot be thought. In other words, by means of this immanent
critique of historical science Pannenberg points to an inner contradiction. Then,
taking a cue from Collingwood, he asks what are the prerequisites for a model of
history if its unity as well as its contingency must both find place? He concludes
that such a conception is possible only if we conceive of a ground of history which
is both the source of the contingency of its events as well the basis of its unity.
Can such a ground be found within history itself? Pannenberg attempts to
discover such, but concludes that there is no possible ground within history
which can meet the requirements of the model. Therefore, he concludes, on the
basis of the requirements of historical research and the nature of history, both as
understood by the historian, a transcendent ground which bears the whole of
reality as history must be presupposed.
But, the objection may be raised, did not Hegel presuppose just such a ground,
the Absolute, and did not his system fall in ruins before the recognition of the
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page14
openness of the future? Quite true, Pannenberg responds, and the objection to
Hegel was completely justified. However, in rejecting Hegel’s grounding of the
historical process on a transcendent Power, subsequent philosophy of history lost
the only possibility of establishing the unity of history required for historical
science. Hegel was not wrong in establishing history on a transcendent ground,
but only in his conception of that Absolute coming to self-realization in his own
philosophy. What is required is a transcendent ground, which not only
establishes the unity of history but also is its future, its End. But how can such a
Power be conceived, for the End has not yet arrived? We are back at the same
point apparently. Now, however, Pannenberg offers a model which meets the
requirements: the proleptic appearance of the End of history in the midst of
history. If the End has already appeared, albeit provisionally, then the whole of
history can be anticipated. Yet if the End has appeared proleptically, then
obviously the process of history is still under way and the future is still open.
Where did Pannenberg come up with such a model? Not out of the blue, of
course. It is a model suggested by the eschatological character of the Christ-event.
The model itself proves nothing. It can only be verified by determining if it
explains the facts and, indeed, it must be subjected to a double test: is it an
adequate explanation of the Christ-event and is it an adequate explanation of
reality as history. In the case of the first test we are in the area of biblical
theology; in the case of the second we are still dealing with history as the
historian understands it. We limit ourselves here only to the latter case. The
question is: does the model of history as process moving toward a still
outstanding End within which, however, the End has already provisionally
occurred meet the requirements of the historian’s conception both of his work
and his subject matter? It would seem to meet these requirements. The next step
would be to pursue concrete historical investigation in the framework of this
model. Only then can it be determined if the model is, in fact, a true conception of
reality as history. Here there are two criteria: positively, the model will be verified
if it is able to effect the most adequate explanation of the data encountered in
historical research; negatively, the model will be confirmed if known data
remains unexplainable without the model.
This verification process will be carried out by the historian using the best
scientific techniques at his disposal. The phenomena presented to him are not
perceived with any sort of “eye of faith,” nor must he operate with some sort of
supernatural conception of God. In short, no special pleading is involved in his
phenomenological research.
Is this model the only possible model? Not necessarily. At least that cannot be
presupposed. Anyone is free to propose a model as long as it fits the requirements
of historical science’s own self-understanding. Should such a “competitive” model
be presupposed, then it in turn must be judged on the basis of the criteria cited
above. The conception of models can be various but they must all be subjected to
the criterion of truth, that is, they must be tested as to their adequacy in
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page15
explaining available data and the impossibility of explaining data without them.
In such a process of testing the model which corresponds to reality as presently
comprehended will emerge. Only through such a procedure is it still possible to
speak of truth. Further, should the model constructed in the light of the eschatological understanding of the Christ-event prove true, it would, at the same time,
be a verification of the Christian conception of reality.
The point we must make here is that Pannenberg has proposed a theological
conception of reality not because, being a theologian, he automatically begins at
this point. Whether he does or not is not the point. We may even grant that the
model he constructs is suggested by his own orientation in the Christian
tradition. This still does not detract from the general validity of his procedure.
His theological perspective imposed on the historian neither his historiographical
principles nor his conception of the nature of history. He allowed the historian
himself to dictate the terms. Given those terms, he argued that those terms
require some such model as he proposed. Still he makes no extrinsic demand on
the historian. He simply asks him to test the model, working as a historian.
Whether this model meets the criteria of truth or not is not in any sense
dependent on a position of faith or theological position. The results are submitted
to the bar of generally valid canons of rationality.
But, someone objects, does this not subject the truth of the Christian faith to the
judgment of human rationality? The answer is yes. There can be no sidestepping
that test. There is no sheltered cove within which the Christian tradition can
practice its faith. Either it is true and commends itself as such to human
rationality or it must give up its claim to truth and be content to exercise itself as
a private affair. This is not to say that man comprehends the depths of the
mystery of the Deity or the secrets of the whole of reality. It does mean to affirm,
however, that if God has revealed himself to man in the midst of history, then
that revelation must be comprehensible to man. If God only makes himself
known “vertically from above,” by miracle, through some supernatural
illumination of the Holy Spirit, by means of some esoteric gnosis, why bother
about a revelation in history. If revelation is punctilear, why the horizontal line or
point on the plane of history? If revelation occurs only here and now, then why
does it need a “dass” in history? As an anchor to guard it from myth? But why not
myth? Because the Christian faith claims to be historical, not mythical? But why
be concerned about the Christian faith unless it is true? And if it is true then
revelation has occurred in history, so why all the strenuous efforts to deny that it
is “there?”
Bultmann admitted that he must come to terms with modern thought and so
when he operates with a conception of history as defined by the positivist and
then goes on to carve out a place for the Christian faith in the realm of existence
we must admit that he is at least consistent. But what shall we say of Barth? He
faults Bultmann for allowing modern thought to dominate. Barth rejects the idea.
But what has he done? The very same thing! Barth’s whole amazing theological
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page16
endeavor can well be understood as an affirmation of the truth of the Christian
faith in the face of positivistic thinking in which there was no room for it. But the
paradox of the matter is that the very Achilles’ heel of his whole position is his
contradictory statements about the historicity of revelation and the inaccessibility
of that revelation to historical-critical research. The charge of revelational
positivism is not unjustified. Is it not that he who denied the sovereignty of
modern thought constructed his own theology as if positivistic historiography
were indeed sovereign? Not exactly. Barth’s theology shatters all positivistic
historiography as far as the whole of reality is concerned. But he left it intact as
far as the historical process is concerned. He allowed Troeltsch the final word as
far as historical science was concerned, thus conceiving the historical process as a
self-contained entity set over against God. Historical science is competent to deal
with the one-dimensional reality of history but theology speaks of the One who
encounters the man who lives in that one-dimensional reality, and consequently
historical science is not competent to deal with the intercourse of man and God.
Pannenberg’s superiority must be recognized in two directions. Over against
Troeltsch he says that the historical-critical method, to be sure, has an
anthropocentric element inherent within it, but to that anthropocentric
methodological element you have wedded an anthropocentric worldview, which
not only is not intrinsic to the method but even hinders its effectiveness. Your
anthropocentric worldview precludes any consideration of a transcendent reality
and consequently contradicts the very requirements of historical research itself.
Furthermore your conception of the principle of analogy which is a valuable tool
for gaining knowledge is posited on the postulate of the universal similarity of all
historical phenomena, thus again denying the insight of history itself that events
are contingent and that history is the place of the arrival of the new, the unique,
the unforeseen. The principle of analogy is not wrong but the application is.
Rather than using it to determine the similarities of the respective phenomena,
use it to delineate their differences, their uniqueness.
Furthermore your principle of development denies the contingency of events and
the genuine openness of the future. Your model of history as a self-contained,
unfolding entity beyond which hovers the absolute, known only relatively within
the course of development is an inadequate model in the light of historical
science itself.
At this point Pannenberg addresses Barth and argues that it is not Barth’s
conception of history as encounter that is wrong but only his submission to
positivistic historiography as being the legitimate conception of historical science.
By his divorce of historical science from revelational history, Barth has
introduced an unendurable contradiction into his theological enterprise. Such a
contradiction has been responsible for the feeling as expressed by James Barr:
“Though I still feel that it is Barth’s God whom I seek to worship, the intellectual
framework of Barth’s theology has in my consciousness to a very great extent
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page17
collapsed in ruins.”10 Barth, Pannenberg would affirm, has begun to speak as a
Christian before he has justified his speaking as a theologian, in fact, without
recognizing the legitimacy of such a procedure, or even denying its possibility.
Barth, in one sense, can be recognized as nothing if not bold. It is a question
however if he was bold enough. In a world, a cultural situation, that is largely
determined in its intellectual milieu by atheistic thinking, can the theologian
speak seriously of God unless he has at least created the “room” for such talk by
an immanent critique of atheistic thought itself? If the existence of God cannot be
demonstrated, at least the acids of atheistic thought can be neutralized and a
theological conception of reality can be demonstrated to be rationally as
justifiable as an atheistic conception. Indeed, in Pannenberg’s thought we would
even claim that the theological conception is shown to be more rational. However
that may be, to think the matter through to its limits so that one is placed before
the alternatives is no little gain. Human rationality reaches its limits but that is
true not only for theological thought, but for atheistic as well. A rational choice is
not necessarily a choice in which every piece of data is explained, every mystery
disclosed. It is rather a choice in the face of all possible evidence. It is a choice
made in the light of the widest possible understanding of reality. In this respect it
can be maintained that the commitment of oneself to the God revealed in Jesus
Christ is grounded upon a rational decision—a decision made in the light of all
possible evidence.
In this way theology stands in the middle of the sciences seeking to unify all truth
through its relation to the God who is source, ground, and goal of truth. The
universal function of theology is once again asserted and the world of fragmentary experience, specialized knowledge unrelated to the whole of reality, is
brought into relation to him who is the Truth.
The theologian claims no quarter. He demands no “eye of faith,” no special
inspiration. He proposes his model, a model constructed out of the requirements
of the respective sciences themselves. He then submits his model to impartial
testing by the phenomena dealt with in the individual sciences. He brings the
results before the bar of rational judgment. Should a competing and
contradictory model prove more adequate, he has no recourse. But should his
model pass the test, then he has demonstrated that a theological conception of
reality is in fact rationally defensible. Is the risk too great? No, not if, when he
speaks of God, he is speaking of the Creator of the whole of reality who will bring
all things to consummation. Then the model will be verified. And if it is not? Then
he must cease to be a theologian, for then there will be no theology.
Is not the task too arduous? Certainly it is arduous, but have not the most
profound thought and the most profound thinkers arisen out of the Christian
tradition over the course of the centuries? The magnitude of the challenge is no
deterrent. Much rather, if in the modern period the church has alienated the best
minds, it is not because she demanded too much but too little. A call to serious
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page18
intellectual pursuit of truth will not offend but the lack of it certainly will— and
has.
Thesis II. Dogmatic theology must rethink the entire theological spectrum of
truth from the perspective of historical thinking.
Harnack’s criticism of the Hellenization of the gospel has a validity which can
hardly be denied. Rather than judging this “translation” negatively as he did, we
can understand today that the Greek metaphysical conceptuality was the most
effective means at hand for expressing the central truth of the Christ-event, “God
with us.” In the history of the transmission of traditions this was a necessary and
effective new stage. It entailed nonetheless grave difficulties because an event
actualized in a tradition that for centuries had been nurtured on the idea of the
dynamic relationship of God and man in the historical process which was moving
toward consummation had to be translated into meaningful terms for a culture
that had been fully indoctrinated with the metaphysical categories of Plato and
Aristotle and their successors. In such a setting, that which formed the
culminating point of God’s self-disclosure in Jesus—his resurrection from the
dead— there was formed an untranslatable conception which could only be
announced, proclaimed, but scarcely comprehended. In such an environment the
emphasis soon shifted to the coming of the Son of God, the idea of Incarnation.
Such a conception did allow the message of God’s presence with man in Jesus to
be expressed, but as the Christological controversy vividly demonstrates, it
brought in its wake insoluble problems which plague us to the present.11 The
church lived for centuries undisturbed by the irreconcilable contradictions of
Chalcedon because Christian theology has been conceptualized by means of
Greek metaphysical categories and thus the central idea of Incarnation
communicated the Christian message.
The crisis of theology today is not in the first instance a crisis of Christian belief
but a crisis of Christian theological formulation which could not help but collapse
when the Greek metaphysics in terms of which it was framed was undermined.
This occurred through the rise of modern thought becoming particularly
damaging to traditional theology through the rise of historical thinking which
undercut the unquestioned authority of Scripture. The reaction of Christian
theology to the crisis created by modern thought has often been defensive,
evidencing an underlying insecurity. At other times it has sought so desperately
to accommodate itself to modern thinking that it has given up its own central
affirmation of God’s presence in Jesus, thus robbing the world of its one source of
hope in the God of the future. These two extreme reactions can be found again
and again over the past two centuries. On the one hand there has been a jealous
guarding of traditional conceptuality: incarnation—true God—true man; three in
one—coequal and co-eternal; inspired, infallible Scripture, etc., under the
mistaken notion that God and his truth were cradled in the respective
stammering human attempts to express it. On the other hand, there was an
uncritical acceptance of modern thought, positivistically orientated, which from
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page19
the beginning practically shut out the possibility of a transcendent reality, let
alone a God present in the causal nexus that defined reality.
Where lies a solution? Is it not significant that western thinking, believing itself
now to be free from the archaic metaphysical bondage of theology, has discovered
reality as history? And furthermore it has been shown, for example, by Lowith
that the conception of reality as history moving toward an End “is rooted in the
Judaeo-Christian tradition. Is it not possible that we are in a position today to
rethink such basic conceptions as the Trinity, the natures of Christ, and the
Consummation and come to more fruitful results than has perhaps been the case
in the long tradition of Christian thinking ?
Thesis III. All Christological statements must be made from the perspective of
the resurrection.
Barth begins with the given of the Incarnation, Jesus, truly God and truly man.
The question, how do you know this?, is simply out of place. If we know it we
need not ask, and if we do not know it, it is futile to ask. The life of Jesus plays
itself out between the twin miracles of the Virgin Birth and the Resurrection, both
wholly the work of God, neither accessible to human judgment, examination or
confirmation. From this everything follows. Prior to this there can be no
discussion.
Bultmann starts with the kerygma. In response to the proclamation you either
say “yes” or “no” but you may not ask “Why should I?” or “Is it true?” Either
question is already proof that revelation has not occurred.
Even the Post-Bultmannians who feel uneasy with this approach are looking
everywhere for a basis for the kerygma except in the one place that Bultmann and
almost all New Testament scholars agree it is located, namely, in the resurrection
of Jesus Christ. Ebeling and Fuchs are retreading the paths of Herrmann,
Bornkamm speaks of Jesus’ authority, Kasemann of his message, but none of
them seriously considers the one place in which every kerygmatic utterance is
rooted.
It is here that Pannenberg makes a most significant contribution. He has dared to
assert once again that you cannot ground New Testament Christology anywhere
but where the New Testament itself grounds it. In so doing he has made progress
possible in several areas where thought had reached an impasse. Perhaps the
most crucial area is that of the natures of Christ. The long and bitter
Christological struggles need not be recounted here. It is sufficient to say that
Chalcedonian Christology is not a solution but represents an impasse, a
compromise between conceptions which are logically irreconciliable. We
understand the problem and we comprehend the intention, but what person
would ever suggest that Chalcedon represents an intelligible and satisfying
conclusion?
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page20
We would suggest that perhaps the problem lies in the inability of Greek
conceptuality to express a phenomenon which was essentially historical. In the
intellectual milieu of the Greek world the appearance of the Servant of God, the
Messiah, was proclaimed in conceptuality which culminated in incarnational
Christology and with incarnational Christology the whole problem of the divine
and human presented itself but with no possibility of solution.
We would ask, in terms of the Old Testament, in terms of the Messianic
expectation, why must Jesus be God? In fact, is the Messiah as God really true to
the Old Testament tradition? Chalcedonian Christology has such a long and
impressive tradition that we often never question what biblical imperative there
is for the divinity of the Messiah. The answer, of course, is not to reject
Chalcedon, as does Bultmann because he is so determined by positivistic thinking
that he cannot conceive of Jesus as anything more than a man, let alone his
resurrection. If we must choose between Barth or Bultmann, we must choose
Barth, for between the signs of the Virgin Birth and Resurrection God is present
in history, but Barth can assert this only as an assertion and is utterly unable to
say more about how we can understand incarnation.
It is the incarnation as a starting point that is wrong. To start there is to be cut off
immediately from all rational reflection. Revelational positivism is inevitable.
Incarnation is a valid idea if it is recognized to be a step in the interpretive
tradition leading from Jesus, an interpretation of an historical phenomenon that
occurred in a Jewish apocalyptic setting rooted in the Old Testament tradition.
Pannenberg has argued powerfully that Jesus must be understood in his own
context and that in that context the resurrection “spoke.” One of his great
contributions is his calling in question of the fact, meaning bifurcation. The fact
in its historical context bears its own meaning. In the tradition expecting the
final intervention of God at the End raising the dead, the resurrection of one
who had been dead and buried meant the End had arrived.
He has also quite rightly seen that resurrection did not carry that meaning in
another context. Consequently translation was necessary. This brings us to the
one point where we feel Pannenberg has not completely followed through on his
own insights. He has recognized that an End-expectation and coming judgment
are necessary presuppositions for a meaningful belief in resurrection and that
consequently Paul stressed these matters to the Gentiles. He has further
discussed how in our day resurrection can be meaningful as a more adequate
conception of the immortality of the soul. The one thing he has been unable to do
is to show how resurrection was translated meaningfully in the first century. The
fact is that it was not. Is not Paul’s Athenian experience evidence of an
indissolvable offense that adhered to the Christian message as heard by the
Greek? Resurrection was the key and resurrection was untranslatable into the
conceptuality of Greek metaphysics.
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page21
Is not this the reason that the focus shifted from resurrection to incarnation in
terms of which God’s intervention into human history was powerfully expressed?
God’s intervention, yes, but then the Messiah must have been God. Is not this
why Jesus must be God? Thinking which utilizes Greek metaphysical
conceptuality can only conceive of God’s presence in history in terms of
incarnation. However, such was not the case with Hebrew thought. God would
bring future deliverance through his Servant—David’s Son! God did not have to
“enter” history for the Israelites. History was his domain—no self-contained,
independent entity set over against him. In his holiness he ever dwelt in the
midst of his people.
Why the modern crisis of theology? Is it not rather the crisis of metaphysics? And
why the crisis of metaphysics? Is it not occasioned by the rise of historical
thinking? What is the answer then? It must be obvious. We ought to recognize
incarnational Christology as no longer a meaningful interpretation of the
historical self-disclosure of God in his servant Jesus, the Messiah. Paradoxically
Greek metaphysical thinking in terms of which the Christian tradition has
formulated its faith has fallen into disrepute making it possible once again to
understand Jesus and his resurrection historically, as was the case for Peter and
Paul.
But this raises another question regarding Pannenberg. He has thought through
the matter of natural law and has sought to show that the resurrection is not
really a “break” in nature. Here we are uneasy. That in its context it had meaning
we grant. But was it not also a “break” in historical continuity even for a Paul? To
be sure, all historical phenomena are unique and history is the place of the new, it
is irruptive. But still the resurrection cannot be leveled down to being an event
next to others. Now if, as the apocalyptic tradition expected, with the resurrection
of Jesus the End of history was in fact arrived at, then the historical process
would have unfolded with no “break” in its continuity. Or if, as Bultmann holds,
there was no resurrection, then the historical process still continues with no
“break.” But if it happened, as Pannenberg claims it happened—and we think he
is right—namely, that what Paul thought was the beginning of a fast-approaching
End, was really—as we know 2000 years later— an isolated, proleptic occurrence
of a still future End, then there has occurred in the midst of the historical
continuum a radical, indissolvable “break,” an act of God which is unique, in a
sense “more unique” than the uniqueness of historical phenomena in general.
Pannenberg has acknowledged the problem of identifying the resurrection of one
man with the expectation of the resurrection of all men. That is just the point.
The expectation of the resurrection of all men was indeed the presupposition for
finding meaning in Jesus’ resurrection. But, the resurrection of Jesus
nevertheless shattered apocalyptic preconceptions also. It was to Jew and Greek
alike an unforeseen, unforseeable self-disclosure of the God who remains free
and sovereign even in his historical self-revelation.
© Grand Valley State University
�Theological Conception of Reality as History
Richard A. Rhem
Page22
Why has Barth been able to speak so powerfully the truth of the Christian faith to
his generation? Because he said what the gospel wants to say: “God with us.” Why
does such a powerful witness engender such sharp reaction? Is it not because
while saying what the gospel wants to say, he has utilized a metaphysical
conceptuality which no longer commands respect?
We come back to our question why Jesus must be God. If God anointed his
Servant, the Messiah, to proclaim his Kingdom and announce the new age and
then raised him from the dead as a confirmation of that message and of his
Servant, what does it add to the matter if Jesus were divine? If Jesus were God
then resurrection is not quite so amazing. But if Jesus is my brother because a
man like me and if God raised him from the dead, then something truly amazing
has occurred. The New Age has dawned in the midst of the Old. Then while still
struggling in the old aeon, I have a real basis for Hope. Then I live in anticipation.
That is, I live by faith.
If this is the case then I can understand the Apostle who wrote: On the human
level he was born of David’s stock, but on the level of the Spirit—The Holy
Spirit—he was declared Son of God by a mighty act in that he rose from the dead.
. . Jesus Christ our Lord. (Rom. l: 3b-4, NEB).
1Karl
Barth, The Humanity of God, Richmond, 1960, p. 19.
2Ernst
Troeltsch, Die Bedeutung der Gescbichtlichkeit fesu fur dem Glauben,
Tubingen,1911, p. 11.
3Karl
Barth, Church Dogmatics, I.2 Edinburgh, 1960, p. 284.
4Rudolph
Bultmann, Kerygma and Myth, London, 1953, pp. 13ff.
5“Die
Krise des Schriftprinzips,” Grundfragen Systematischer Theologie,
Gottingen, 1967, p. 11.
6Ibid.
7“Die
Aufnahme des philosophisches Gottesbegriffs,” Grundfragen .... pp. 308f.
8Ibid.,
9”Die
p. 297.
Krise des Schriftprinzips,” Grundfragen …, p. 20.
10James
Baar, Old and New in Interpretation, SCM, 1966, p. 12.
11Cf.
H. Berkhof, The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit, Richmond, 1964, for his daring
challenge to traditional Trinitarian conceptuality.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19721001
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1972-10-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
A Theological Conception of Reality as History - Some Aspects of the Thinking of Wolfhart Pannenberg
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The Reformed Review; a journal of the seminaries of the Reformed Church in America
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on October 1, 1972 entitled "A Theological Conception of Reality as History - Some Aspects of the Thinking of Wolfhart Pannenberg", it appeared in Reformed Review, pp. 178-188. Tags: History of Theology, Historical Thinking, Truth, Eschatology, Revelation.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Eschatology
Historical Thinking
History of Theology
Revelation
Truth
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/3ae90fed5249abb54a3110b5a2363deb.pdf
a74dd012d836122d37b26e9514bd0e47
PDF Text
Text
The Cross in History and Human Experience
A Lenten Devotional Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
The Church Herald
The Magazine of the Reformed Church in America
April 20, 1973, pp. 10-11
History unfolds under the sign of the Cross; its shadow lies over all human
experience. That is a rather somber note, standing in stark contrast to the
triumphant sound of the Christian proclamation. Yet it is true, and unless we
reckon with that fact we will at some point in our lives encounter an experience
which cannot be understood in terms of our faith. History has its darker hues,
human experience its valleys of shadows, but a Christian stands undismayed
before them because he looks out at the world from a vantage point from beneath
the Cross.
The Cross is not God’s final act, and tragedy in human life is not the final word.
The brilliant revelation of triumph in Jesus’ resurrection reveals to us an ultimate
victory beyond the limits of history. The splendor of that victory shines brightly,
giving us courage and a solid base for hope; nevertheless, for us, that resurrection
preeminently is future. To be sure, we have been raised together with Christ to
newness of life, but we remain a part of the old order, and the sign over the old
order is the Cross. The suffering, tragedy and death of this present age touch all
of us at some point. None of us is immune to the misery that stalks the steps of
the children of men.
The Christian faith does not gloss over the reality of human experience. Jesus
Christ never covered up the difficult, the dark, the tragic. Prior to his death, he
prepared his disciples for the fact that they would very soon be severely tested.
He prepared them for the fact that their dreams were about to be shattered —
that their high hopes were about to be crushed — that their aspirations were to
evaporate into thin air. He prepared them for his crucifixion — a crucifixion so
excruciatingly painful to him that even he cried out in the midst of it, “My God,
my God, why hast Thou forsaken me?” He prepared them for the hard realities of
life. He said, “In the world you will have tribulation.” Anybody who comes into
the Christian faith or into the haven of the Christian Church thinking hereby to
avoid the harsh reality of human experience has not read the Gospel. In the
© Grand Valley State University
�The Cross in History & Human Experience
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
mystery of suffering, nothing makes the Christian unique except that he has the
resources to overcome it, and finally to prevail.
Look at the Cross. What does it really say? Look at the one who hangs there —
Jesus Christ —the only life that has ever really been played out in the course of
human history. Look at how he gave of himself, ministering constantly on behalf
of those in need. Listen to his words of wisdom and compassion. Note his healing
touch. Behold his self-forgetfulness. Watch him as he goes through the days of his
life in perfect obedience to the Father. Look at him as he lives that life of
righteousness, of service, of love, of obedience. And where did it end? On a cross!
Jesus Christ was too good for this world!
Much suffering and tragedy in the world comes through our own negligence,
foolishness or irresponsibility. But there is some suffering and some tragedy in
life that come precisely because a man is good. The righteous suffer. The only
man who fully incarnated the love of God in human flesh ended up on a cross.
That is the best commentary we have on human history and human life.
Righteousness crucified. Is it not significant that he was condemned by the
Roman government, by Pontius Pilate, the representative of the greatest legal
system the world has ever known? Even today when one thinks of Imperial
Rome, one thinks of the magnificent system of justice that it gave to the world. It
was man's highest achievement in jurisprudence that impaled Jesus on a cross.
But not only Rome. What about the Jewish leaders — the leaders of the one
religion that had an understanding of the true God and were prepared for God to
intervene in human history? It was those who stood in the line of Abraham and
David and Isaiah who cried out, “Crucify him! Let his blood be on us and on our
children!”
There you have it. Rome and Jerusalem, the highest achievements in human
justice and religion, barbarously murdering Jesus Christ on a cross. That’s what
life is all about. Righteousness crucified. Love condemned. Self-sacrifice hanging
on a tree. The only conclusion that one can come to is that human life is tragic —
that goodness suffers — that love is crucified — that righteousness is of no avail.
We may, at times, be tempted to cry out, “Why me?” But then we remember
Jesus. Why him? Why anyone? Because there is a tragic element in human
existence, a mystery of evil in the world that crucifies righteousness and justice
and love. Jesus was too good to be in this world, and if a person tries to live as
Jesus lived, he will find himself suffering as Jesus suffered. If he loves too much,
or cares too much, or gives too much of himself, he may end up broken and
crushed and disillusioned, looking in vain for a vindication of his human
experience.
Now, there is another side of the coin, of course. God can transform tragedy into
triumph. God can use the excruciatingly painful experiences of life as stepping
© Grand Valley State University
�The Cross in History & Human Experience
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
stones in building a beautiful life. And in the midst of human tragedy where there
is submission and trust in God there comes a strength and a grace that is poured
into life which makes of a person a most beautiful instrument in the hands of
God. Jesus found, even in his darkest hour, that victory was possible because he
was able to look at his spitting, jeering tormentors and say, “Father, forgive them
for they know not what they do.” He found out that the power of love can
overcome the worst of human tragedy. But it was only beyond Calvary that his
righteousness, his love, his obedience and his trust were vindicated.
This means we may suffer all our lives and die without having the sunlight break
upon our path. It means we may live in tragic circumstances all our days despite
obedience and submission. The Cross is the one symbol in all human history that
tells us that we cannot ask the question “Why?” Oh, we can ask it, but we cannot
answer it. There is no sure justice.
Tragedy is everywhere; evil rears its ugly head everywhere we turn, and the
righteous suffer. And those who love are crushed. What then? Is that the last
word? No, it's not. Because of Jesus, the final word is not crucifixion, but
resurrection. Not the blackness, the darkness of Calvary, but the brilliant light of
Easter morning. We live in hope because a life was lived that ended in tragedy,
but was vindicated by a mighty act of God. Jesus, who died in trust, was
vindicated by the Father in his resurrection.
We, however, are still under the shadow of the Cross, because our own
resurrection is in the future. Its light has already broken in on us in Jesus, the
first fruits of them that sleep. Its power is already ours because his Spirit lives
within us. We already have a foretaste of the victory and triumph to come.
Although we still look forward to our own resurrection, the new age has invaded
history in Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ assures us, in the face of inexplicable human tragedy, that we can
continue to trust him because beyond the limits of history is resurrection. Within
history — no answer. Beyond history —the risen Christ and victory.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19730420
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1973-04-20
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
The Cross in History and Human Experience
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The Church School Herald Journal
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on April 20, 1973 entitled "The Cross in History and Human Experience", it appeared in The Church Herald, pp. 10-11. Tags: Lent, Suffering, Crucifixion, Transforming Love, Resurrection
.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Crucifixion
Lent
Resurrection
Suffering
Transforming Love
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/bc864ccbef36ac2a85efc0d55d2f76bf.pdf
c63018e70d94a903da880350327a1d3f
PDF Text
Text
Let’s Close Half Our Churches
Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
The Church Herald
The Magazine of the Reformed Church in America
November 10, 1973, pp. 11-12
Sound Radical? Perhaps. But perhaps it's time for radical surgery on the church
in order to bring it to health and vitality, able effectively to carry out its mission
of reconciliation. We have too many congregations doing their own thing,
building their own buildings, paying their own overhead and offering their own
programs to the community in competition with too many other congregations
doing the same thing. If there was a day for church extension (and I'm sure there
was) now is the time for church deletion. We are not here to see how many new
Reformed congregations we can build. We are not here to preserve the identity of
congregations, even though they have outlived their mission. We are not being
called to maintain a church merely for the convenience of a few who refuse to
make an adjustment in the pattern of their church life.
These are hard words, but we need hard words. Too long we have argued against
change and new structures and modes of church life on the basis of sentiment,
nostalgia, or obstinacy, cloaking our real feelings with pious arguments which no
one dared to attack.
The day when we could afford that kind of luxury is past. We are not only failing
to dent contemporary secular culture, we are not even keeping up with the exploding world population. The challenge of the day calls for radical streamlining
of the Body of Christ. This will come to roost effectively by concentrating not on
the multiplication of congregations, but on the re-grouping of the people of God
into effective communities of worship, fellowship, and ministry.
What’s involved? The willingness to die in order to live - a sound gospel principal
(John 12:24-26). Jesus’ words are addressed to individuals, but they are not
without relevance to congregations as well. If it is really our primary aim to bring
Christ to the nation, then we must be willing to put all else on the line.
© Grand Valley State University
�Let’s Close Half Our Churches
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
The successful church will be the church that is a many-splendored thing – able
to approach our culture from various angles with a wide variety of opportunities
which will appeal to a wide spectrum of interests and needs. This can only be
accomplished by a team ministry that offers specialization in several spheres.
In most areas the traditional pattern of congregational life which remained
practically unchanged for over half a century is no longer effective in
accomplishing the mission of the church. We can no longer take for granted the
loyal, almost automatic response to the traditional church program. People will
not necessarily be there just because there is a meeting.
Nor ought we attempt to coerce people through guilt or fear. The old loyalty to
which once we could appeal and the family and community pressures which held
a congregation together, whether or not there was a creative ministry that was
meeting people at their point of need, can no longer be counted on and we ought
not to regret that loss. We are now in a position to allow the winds of the Spirit to
shape us into new forms of church life and ministry that will elicit the free
response of people who make up our largely secular culture.
But the task is demanding and will require the special gifts and specialized
training of the professional ministry, as well as the commitment of the total
Christian community.
I believe the key to building successful churches lies in the development of a team
ministry that can recruit, train, and motivate the Body of Christ to carry out its
ministry in the world. Paul conceived of the pastor as one who equipped God’s
people for doing the work of ministry. The congregation can no longer be
understood as the recipient of ministry carried out by a trained professional who
becomes their private chaplain, but rather must be viewed as the instrument of
ministry in the total cultural setting of which it is a part. This is not a new idea,
but what is being demonstrated in various places throughout the church today is
that effective recruitment and training issuing in effective ministry and church
growth can take place more readily where there is a team of professionals that
can utilize their specialized gifts for the building of the whole Body.
Team ministry offers several advantages over the single-pastor organization.
First, it allows for the most efficient and effective use of the professionally trained
ministry. Team ministry allows a person to exercise his best gifts in an area for
which he is especially fitted. Many men with fine gifts and dedication flounder
when they must carry the total program of a congregation’s life and witness.
When the leadership is frustrated, the whole program gets bogged down and
everything is done with mediocrity. We cannot allow the Lord’s work to be done
with mediocrity. Let the one gifted in administration, administer; the one gifted
in counseling, counsel; the one gifted in education, educate. Then each area of the
church’s life will receive the leadership of a specialist and the total program will
have upon it the mark of excellence.
© Grand Valley State University
�Let’s Close Half Our Churches
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
With a team ministry a wide spectrum of ministries can be inaugurated: small
groups, singles’ ministry, youth ministry, ministry to the aging, etc. There is a
vast reservoir of willing volunteer labor in the church but it must be tapped,
equipped and channeled into meaningful service. With a staff of trained
professionals to administer, lay-participation increases.
With a multiplication of ministry comes the increased usage of facilities. Church
buildings have traditionally been our poorest examples of Christian stewardship large sanctuaries and beautiful educational units used very few hours per week.
With a team ministry and a wide spectrum of ministries, the facilities will be in
use seven days a week.
When a congregation can offer a wide-ranging program appealing to a wide
spectrum of interests and meeting the needs of the whole person, it will grow,
and as it grows it will be able to support a growing mission to its community and
world.
Every congregation has a certain given overhead, but why should each little group
of one hundred or two hundred families duplicate each other in building
facilities, administrative costs and ministerial service? Why can we not fill the
sanctuary three times on Sunday morning as well as once? What difference does
it make if we develop two or three different congregations on the same locations?
Instead of three costly buildings, there will be one. Instead of three ministers
trying to do everything and succeeding with only some things, and doing nothing
with excellence, could not three men join together, each doing well for the
congregation what he is especially gifted to do.
And finally, the benefit of team ministry will be experienced in the mutual
support the team members are able to give to each other. When one is alone
trying to do too many things, succeeding in only some, and being frustrated in
others, the ministry can become a very depressing business. But when there is a
team working together, each one is released to exercise his best gifts, and finds in
his colleagues support and affirmation which enables him to function more
effectively and find fulfillment and satisfaction in his vocation.
Let us build the kingdom, not through the multiplication of congregations, but
through the building of multi-staff congregations, which can then become
effective communities of Christian worship and ministry.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19731110
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1973-11-10
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Let's Close Half Our Churches
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The Church School Herald Journal
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on November 10, 1973 entitled "Let's Close Half Our Churches", it appeared in The Church Herald, pp. 11-12. Tags: Church, Reformed, Community of Faith, Team Ministry.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Church
Community of Faith
Reformed
Team Ministry
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/c98ed1ba14d80c16501702112864e9b8.pdf
5e8f57b3387a0f033e828d5486f103ce
PDF Text
Text
All in the Family
Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
The Church Herald
The Magazine of the Reformed Church in America
October 17, 1975, pp. 14-15, 18
I remember how it used to be at Grandma's. The whole family was there—aunts,
uncles, cousins, in-laws. They were all there one time or another. Some of the
clan came after the morning service for coffee while the kids were in Sunday
school. Others made their weekly pilgrimage to the five-acre celery farm on
Sunday afternoon. A few stopped after the evening service. (It made me a little
jealous that some of my cousins got to stay with Grandma during that evening
service. She peeled apples and cut them up into quarters. Sometimes she could
peel a whole apple without lifting the knife or breaking the long ribbon of red
peeling.) Grandma was always at the center of things. Grandpa was off to the side
a bit in his favorite chair, pipe stand at hand and several cans of Prince Albert
nearby. The air was tinged with blue because he alternated between pipe and
cigar, and the cigar was finally deposited in the bowl of the pipe to draw out its
last glowing ashes. The atmosphere was always the same—warm, familiar,
comfortable. Grandma was there and so love and security were there. It was
family.
There was one source of tension, however. There was a mixed marriage to
contend with. One of my aunts had gone off and married a Christian Reformed
boy from a couple of farms up the road. She joined the Christian Reformed
Church but was never really converted. She grumbled about it a lot. And from
that union sprang several cousins. The Christian Reformed Church did a good job
on them. They never seemed to know there was anything else.
Well, we lived in reasonable peace over the years of my childhood. When
Grandpa or Grandma had birthdays we all got together, and that was something
else. Once in a while the peace was shattered — when, for example, we got talking
about the Christian school or the upcoming Hope-Calvin game. Then the
atmosphere was warm too; in fact, sometimes it even got hot.
© Grand Valley State University
�All in the Family
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
Those occasional sharp confrontations were gathered up into a larger bond that
had the toughness of love. I knew, without anyone ever telling me, that we were
really all one – one family. We could argue, raise our voices or grumble at each
other, but we belonged together; we belonged to each other.
Now many years later in the midst of my ministry I find myself on a “Joint
Christian Reformed-Reformed Church Committee for Study of a Theology of
Evangelism.” My experience on this committee has reminded me of my
experiences as a child in a family that had “mixed marriages.” There was always a
little rivalry, little points of tension, sometimes confrontation and sharply
differing perspectives. But, there was also always that sense of family. We belong
to each other and that which makes us one family is of far greater import than the
things that separate us.
There are many mysteries in life, but one of the greatest is how two churches with
the same national origins, the same polity, liturgical tradition and confessional
allegiance have been able to go their separate ways for over a century. Yet even
such a long period of separate existence has not been able to erase from our
corporate consciousness that we belong together, that we belong to each other.
Both denominations in their respective Synods of 1973 adopted
recommendations that a joint committee be formed. The committees of each
church responsible for Inter-Church relationships had been working together in
“concentrated dialogue” since 1969. This dialogue had issued in a formal meeting
of the two churches in the fall of 1972. The experience of that event was reflected
in a Conference Statement, which gave thanks to God “for the unity he gave us
during our deliberations.” The Conference heartily endorsed the following
recommendations and covenanted together to implement them.
1. That we recognize, reaffirm and publish the positions taken by our
respective Inter-Church Relations Committees in 1966 and 1987, the
substance of which is herewith submitted:
a. Joint work on liturgy to explore common concerns, suggest and
foster similar patterns of worship and liturgy in our two churches.
b. Joint planning be used in church extension to avoid overlapping
so that Kingdom resources and witness be used most effectively.
c. The encouragement of local exchanges between churches
including pulpit fellowship.
d. Overseas mission efforts done in a cooperative manner whenever
possible.
© Grand Valley State University
�All in the Family
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
There was much more to the Conference Statement dealing with cooperative
efforts on the denominational, classical and congregational levels and in the area
of publication. The statement ended with an eloquent call to action, pleading,
The mercies of God that what we have envisioned we, together with many
others, may now bring into being so that his name may be glorified, his
church may be made victorious and his people may rejoice in the blessings
that flow from the unity we seek.
Against this background the Joint Committee CRC/RCA for Study of Theology of
Evangelism was born. Five members from each church were appointed and the
first meeting was held in December of 1973.
Two churches in the Reformed tradition must necessarily discuss theology in any
coming together. Furthermore, there is wisdom in focusing on the imperative
that rests upon the whole church, the sharing of the Gospel with all men. Unity
arises not so much out of discussion of abstract principles as out of engagement
in the execution of the mission of Jesus Christ. Evangelism, telling good news in a
world of bad news, is a natural place to begin to search for our unity. Happily, we
on the joint committee can testify that we sensed a warm fellowship in our
common search for some word to speak together concerning the grace of God
which has appeared in Jesus Christ.
The issue of our committee's work thus far is a Manifesto On Evangelism. That
may seem to be a rather meager result. Yet, I think when the Manifesto is studied
it will prove itself a carefully formulated and profoundly significant statement. In
the preamble to the Manifesto, the committee acknowledged that it had narrowed
its task to sharp focus, hoping to make a distinct contribution to current
discussion from our Reformed perspective as well as lifting into prominence a
theme which is central to the biblical revelation and strangely absent from much
of the material on evangelism; that theme being the Kingdom of God.
We were aware of other discussions on the theme of evangelism. We sensed a real
struggle in the Christian community at two points:
First, how are word and deed related in Christian witness? Is social action, born
of Christian conviction, evangelism? Is evangelism oral testimony only, and are
deeds of demonstrated Christian concern in connection with that testimony
merely optional? But behind this tension lies a more fundamental concern. What
is the word, the message, in evangelism? What is the message which deeds are to
demonstrate? (Preamble to the Manifesto).
It was the Committee's judgment that the historic Reformed accent on the
Kingdom of God was a key to a meaningful solution to these questions. In various
study papers prepared by members of the group the Kingdom theme surfaced
again and again. Furthermore, we felt there was a lack of concern with the
Kingdom idea in much contemporary discussion, although it is certainly a central
© Grand Valley State University
�All in the Family
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
biblical motif. We opted to make a concise statement which expresses our unity
in the understanding of our evangelistic task as well as the central theme of our
proclamation in word and deed.
The Manifesto itself is divided into three sections: The proclamation of the
Kingdom, the signs of the Kingdom and the imperative of the Kingdom. The
opening paragraph evidences the inclusiveness of the Kingdom theme, which
allows it to overcome the false antithesis between word and deed which has so
long plagued the church.
We share the newly expressed concern of believers everywhere to understand the
nature of evangelism and its place in our total task. We deplore our own
tendencies in thought and action to separate Gospel proclamation from
compassionate ministry. We believe that both are rightly understood only in the
light of the Bible's pervasive theme—the Kingdom of God.
Strong proclamation of good news is immediately affirmed in the first section and
that section is concluded with the statement “that all ‘evangelizing’ in the New
Testament sense of the term includes the joyous proclamation of God's saving
rule, together with the call to repent and believe the Gospel.”
But the Manifesto continues in the second section, “the proclamation of God's
Kingdom rule brings with it the reality proclaimed,” and after a discussion of
what that entails specifically, we go on to affirm
that all evangelizing in the New Testament sense of the term is
accompanied by the signs of God’s Kingdom among his people and springs
from their active concern for the full deliverance and restoration of all to
whom the Gospel is addressed.
The final section of the Manifesto deals with the imperative placed upon us in
light of the Kingdom that has come in Jesus Christ for we testify to our conviction
that “the Gospel of the Kingdom brings the only hope for lost mankind.”
In our committee deliberations it was obvious that we were not all at the same
place. It was obvious, too, that both churches were at different points, spoke out
of differing contexts and had to speak to differing expectations and concerns. It
was most interesting to observe, however, that differences of opinion did not
always follow denominational lines. And perhaps the greatest realization to arise
out of our study and discussion together was the fundamental unity that is ours
both in our understanding of the Gospel and in the high sense of urgency in
making it known to all men.
The most significant feature of our joint committee is the fact that we are meeting
each other, studying and praying together, enjoying table fellowship together and
coming to appreciate each other. The results of such coming together have
already been significant in terms of personal relationships established and
© Grand Valley State University
�All in the Family
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
mutual respect and trust that have developed. This has led us to recognize each
other and the importance of working together in cooperative ventures, the
utilizing of the resources of our respective churches to the greatest possible
advantage and the seeking of a common purpose, the furtherance of God’s
Kingdom in the world. The removal of distrust, suspicion and a spirit of
competition inevitably results when we come together and place ourselves at the
disposal of the Lord of the Church for the execution of his mission.
We are not bothered by our separate denominational existences. Our energies
need not be swallowed up in trying to merge two denominational structures.
Rather we are open together to the Spirit’s leading, seeking ways in which we may
bear effective witness to the Christ who has made us together a part of his Body.
In the light of this challenging mission that unites us, we have a new recognition
of the fact that we belong together, we belong to each other, because together we
belong to him.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19751017
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1975-10-17
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
All in the Family
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The Church School Herald Journal
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on October 17, 1975 entitled "All in the Family", it appeared in The Church Herald, pp. 14-15, 18. Tags: Church, Reformed, Ecumenical, Team Ministry.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Church
Ecumenical
Reformed
Team Ministry
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/a25b4beabe4a88ee7abdaa83888a8030.pdf
621082e18e9ee27ce2c90176e9f901cb
PDF Text
Text
The Faith of the Church:
A Reformed Perspective on Its Historical Development,
By M. Eugene Osterhaven
(Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1982)
Book Review by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Publication of Review Unknown
With the publication of The Faith of the Church, Professor M. Eugene Osterhaven
has given the Church and a generation of his students to whom he dedicates the
work a lucid and concise manual of Christian theology in which he has immersed
himself and which he has taught in a long and fruitful teaching ministry. His
students will not fail to recognize their professor in the discussion of the Faith as
it is here presented in its historical development from a Reformed perspective.
Osterhaven defines theology as “the deliberate and careful consideration of the
Christian faith.” Convinced of the necessity of theological reflection on the Faith
of the Church, Osterhaven finds the norm of theology in the Scripture and its
method in listening to the record of God's self-disclosure found therein.
Systematizing is a necessary activity of the human mind which “seeks to relate
whatever material is given it into an intelligible pattern” (p. 6), but theological
reflection must not be understood as barren intellectualism, for the faith of the
Church “comes out of the experience of God's people struggling to hear his Word
in the context of life.” (p. 7)
Following a discussion of method and approach, Professor Osterhaven deals with
Christian doctrines in the order of their historical development beginning with
“the Faith of Israel.” He deals with the doctrines of God, Jesus Christ, Scripture,
Man, Sin and Grace, Hope and History, and Atonement.
Then, reflecting his method of treating doctrine in its historical development,
Osterhaven deals with the Reformation (“The Recovery of the Gospel”) and goes
on to treat Justification by Faith, the Church and the Sacraments, giving an
excellent treatment of the thinking of Luther and Calvin on these subjects.
Chapters 13, 14 and 15 constitute an interesting and helpful discussion, which is
not common to manuals of Christian doctrine. Osterhaven discusses Luther’s
conception of “The Freedom of a Christian;” what he maintains is the key to
Calvin's theology, “Order and the Holy Spirit;” and, “Experiential Christianity,” a
© Grand Valley State University
�Eugene Osterhaven, Faith of the Church, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
discussion of religious experience as it grew out of the Reformation and found
expression in both the mysticism and activism of Dutch Pietism and Puritanism.
Chapter 16 deals with “Eschatology: The Kingdom, The Spirit, and The End.”
Osterhaven touched Eschatology earlier (Chapter 7) when discussing the thought
of Augustine but he takes it up here again to acknowledge the theological
development of the twentieth century in the face of the crisis of meaning brought
on by the cataclysms of history which have been a part of our experience. Brief
reference is made to Barth, Cullmann, and a more extended discussion of
VanRuler and Pannenberg concerning the place of history in the design of God.
Professor Osterhaven concludes this study with a chapter on “The Relevance of
The Faith,” “to focus on the relevance in such a world of Christian theology and
the faith of the Church” (p. 213). The author’s personal conviction is clear.
There is only one remedy for this world’s ills: God himself in the person of
Christ, God-become-flesh, who has effected redemption and opened the
way to reconciliation and blessing. That faith, the message of salvation
proclaimed by the apostles, and the theology which studies and articulates
it are as relevant today as ever. (p. 213)
Stressing the need for Christian foundations and understanding well theology's
critical function – “...reflection on anything and everything from the point of view
of the biblical revelation” (p. 217) – as well as theology’s universal nature,
Professor Osterhaven calls the Church to its task so to articulate the Faith that it
will “make possible the development of a true humanism.” (221f) Citing Pascal,
Osterhaven closes with the strong conviction that the true humanism is “a view of
man which sees him, though full of contradictions, as a creature made by and
meant for God.” (p. 223)
In being guided through the historical developments of the Faith of the Church,
one is immediately impressed with the author's thorough knowledge and
understanding of the material presented. This is no superficial survey of
Christian doctrine, but rather a concise summary of the main lines of the faith
made possible only by a life-long acquaintance with the material as well as a
serious commitment to the truth of the Faith confirmed in deep Christian
experience.
The Christian Faith here portrayed is the classic Reformed understanding. If any
criticism is to be offered, it is not for what is presented but for what is not
acknowledged; there is little cognizance taken of the seriousness of the criticism
of the Faith from within the Church through the sifting of the foundations by the
critical biblical studies of the last two hundred years and from without the
Church through the development of Post-Enlightenment thought, both
philosophical and theological, and the growth of secularism.
© Grand Valley State University
�Eugene Osterhaven, Faith of the Church, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
The author calls us to the critique of modern culture and declares the relevance of
the Faith for our contemporary situation. The Faith here presented provides the
foundation for the task. One misses the wrenching that is involved in testing the
faith by the fires of modern criticism whose seriousness does not come to
expression. It remains for us to take the Christian foundations here so lucidly set
forth and translate them into the language of contemporary culture that the
ancient answers may continue to sound forth, demonstrating the relevance of
which the author has no doubt.
This is an excellent study which will be useful to the whole Church. It is a fitting
capstone to a long and effective teaching career and the strongest confirmation of
its truth is the life of the author, the life of a Christian man, deeply loved and
deeply respected by all who have had the privilege of sitting at his feet and being
shaped by his faith and life.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19820101
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1982-01-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
The Faith of the Church: A Reformed Perspective on Its Historical Development
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The Church School Herald Journal
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on January 1, 1982 entitled "The Faith of the Church: A Reformed Perspective on Its Historical Development", on the book The Faith of the Church: A Reformed Perspective on Its Historical Development, written by Eugene Osterhaven, it appeared in Church Herald. Tags: Faith, Church, Reformed, Theology.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Church
Faith
Reformed
Theology
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/61e6446eb2ee672041c2ab0a7bc95d50.pdf
c8d723ce34bba72496b21fc3723af4fc
PDF Text
Text
Preaching
by Fred B. Craddock
(Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1985)
Book Review by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Publication of Review Unknown
Reading this volume, one knows immediately that the writer is an
excellent communicator who has a thorough knowledge and expansive
experience of that about which he writes. Fred B. Craddock is Professor of
Preaching and New Testament at Emory University's Candler School of
Theology. This happy combination of expertise becomes evident as he
demonstrates a serious commitment to biblical preaching. The book is
highly readable, written in clear and vivid style, well organized and amply
illustrated with biblical examples of the points under discussion as well as
with life situations with which the preacher is familiar.
Craddock's purpose is to present a textbook in preaching. He aims this
work at both the seminary classroom where the craft of preaching is being
learned and at the practicing preacher who needs a refresher course as an
aid to reflect on the preaching task in which he/she is engaged. He
successfully hits both targets.
The book is divided into three parts: Preaching: I. An Overview, II. Having
Something to Say, and III. Shaping the Message Into a Sermon.
In the first part, Craddock states his assumptions, his understanding of the
task, his theology of preaching. One senses the seriousness with which he
conceives preaching in the Church. Although one finds awareness of the
traditional classification of sermons, Craddock takes a fresh and refreshing
approach.
The traditional categories of exegetical, textual, expository,
thematic and topical have had value in homiletical pedagogy, but in
these pages such tags will receive only minimal attention. However,
maximum attention will be devoted to the persistent and repeated
questions, Does the sermon say and do what the biblical text says
and does? (p. 28)
© Grand Valley State University
�Fred B. Craddock, Preaching, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
Part II, “Having Something to Say,” is the heart of the book with an
especially fine discussion of the hermeneutical process by which the gap
between the ancient text and the contemporary situation is bridged. The
author places great stress on the necessity of knowing both the listener
and the text because preaching is the interpretation of the biblical word to
persons in a concrete context. This is a strong section which every
practicing preacher ought to return to regularly as a check on
performance.
The third section deals with the shaping of the message, now that one has
discovered the message of the text. This is a practical guide, helpful in
determining how to put together and present the message won through
serious wrestling with the text. Craddock stresses the “orality” of the event
of preaching. He points out that
much of the educational process today is silent. From grade school
through college, students listen to instructors, read, write, take
notes, write term papers, sit for exams, and graduate. Many
students with excellent records enter seminary with sixteen years of
silent education, now preparing for a vocation that will demand oral
presentations every week for the remainder of their lives. (p. 21)
Craddock asserts that the goal is to preach,
and writing is a servant, nothing more, nothing less, of that goal.
(p. 190)
Again, he maintains,
In textuality there is more often an overload of information while
orality tends to adjust quantity to the brevity and fragility of the
communicative moment. (p. 190)
Craddock believes strongly in preaching as a God-ordained task but
reminds the preacher of its “provisional nature.”
The minister never says, “This is the way God will work through
preaching,” but rather he or she says, “This is the way I work
because of my understanding of the way God works.” (p. 65)
A final word from Craddock is worth the price of the book:
When preparing sermons, if preachers would write “So what?” at
the top of the page, many little promotional talks or clever word
games on “Salt Shakers and Light Bulbs” would quietly slip off the
desk and hide in the wastebasket. (p. 49)
© Grand Valley State University
�Fred B. Craddock, Preaching, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
This is an excellent work to be read, digested and returned to often by the
one whose task it is regularly to preach.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19850101
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1985-01-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Preaching
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on January 1, 1985 entitled "Preaching", on the book Preaching, written by Fred B. Craddock, it appeared in Perspectives, Dec. 1986, p. 15. Tags: Preaching, Scripture, Meaning.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Meaning
Preaching
Scripture
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/53000072d1a70f81f792fb2453c2a205.pdf
2e81236d2593aff2d86951c2fdd44882
PDF Text
Text
The Vision of Faith
Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
The Church Herald
The Magazine of the Reformed Church in America
December 6, 1985, pp. 6-7
The Advent season calls to our consciousness the end of history; to the realization
that history has an end; that our personal history as well as the history of the
world and humanity are moving toward a terminus, a final moment.
If we can resist the insistence of the commercial world that the Christmas season
begins before Thanksgiving and make space and time for the keeping of Advent,
we will find rich resources for reflection on the biblical themes of the end of
history. There is great curiosity about the “Last Things” and all too little calm and
reasoned discussion about these matters of faith. Advent, properly kept, provides
the opportunity to be reminded that the Christ who came is the Christ who is
coming and to treat those questions which continue to live in the human mind
and heart: What is the point of it all, this human drama? Where is it all going—
whither the whole? What happens at death? What about heaven and hell,
judgment and salvation? What do you mean by eternal life?
In the autumn of 1983 I was involved in a seminar at the University of Michigan
with Professor Hans Küng, who gave a series of lectures entitled “Eternal Life?”
Standing in the center of that great secular institution of learning where there is
but a token recognition of the whole sphere of religion, he spoke without apology
on the themes of death, life after death, hell, heaven, and the kingdom of God. It
was a fascinating experience to witness, not only because of the great depth of his
discussion, but because there in the sophistication of this great university there
were hundreds of bright young people eager to learn about life’s ultimate issue.
This is simple witness to the fact that we can never be content to be born, to live
out our days, and to die without asking why, whence, whither. God has put
eternity into our hearts. When life has been experienced with its full spectrum of
activities the question arises, “Is this all there is?” The biblical faith answers, “No,
there is much more.” Reflecting the biblical teaching, Küng concluded his lectures
© Grand Valley State University
�The Vision of Faith
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
after a careful and thorough examination of the questions from medical,
religious, and philosophical perspectives with this affirmation of faith:
To believe in an eternal life means—in reasonable trust, in enlightened
faith, in tried and tested hope—to rely on the fact that I shall one day be
fully understood, freed from guilt and definitively accepted and can be
myself without fear; that my impenetrable and ambivalent existence, like
the profoundly discordant history of humanity as a whole, will one day
become finally transparent and the question of the meaning of history one
day be finally answered.
That is a well-packed statement. It says in capsule form what Advent faith
teaches. Advent means “coming.” Advent means Jesus is coming; God's kingdom
is coming; consummation is coming.
Test Küng's statement by this most familiar word from St. Paul.
For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in
part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood.
So faith, hope, love abide... (1 Cor. 13:12-13).
These are familiar words coming at the end of Paul's “hymn of love.” We rarely
recognize the fascinating future reference of his declaration, but in this great
statement we find acknowledged both the puzzle that is our history and the vision
of our Christian faith. Let these words of the apostle provide our Advent
reflection as we realize anew that God calls us to live trusting that he will fulfill
his promises and bring his kingdom to its consummation.
We must acknowledge the ambiguity of our present state. Is it not our common
experience that a veil of mystery hangs over our lives and over history as a whole?
It is impossible from an observation of the course of history to find history's
meaning, to detect purpose, direction, and goal. We are caught up in the stream
of history itself; we swim in the stream. We have no privileged position above
history from which to survey it.
There are those who deny any detectable meaning. H. A. L. Fisher, in his History
of Europe, writes:
One intellectual excitement, however, has been denied to me. Men wiser
and more learned than I have discovered in history a plot, a rhythm, a
predetermined pattern. These harmonies are concealed from me. I can see
only one emergency following another, as wave follows upon wave, only
one great fact with respect to which, since it is unique, there can be no
generalizations, only one safe rule for the historian: that he should
recognize in the development of human destinies the play of the
contingent and the unforeseen.
© Grand Valley State University
�The Vision of Faith
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
That is an excellent statement of the case by an eminent historian. From the
study of history itself the conclusion is that it is “the development of the
contingent and the unforeseen.”
St. Paul admitted the same. If history itself be our focus or, more narrowly, the
data of our personal histories, then, “we see in a mirror dimly.” For Paul,
however, it is not only the data of history with which we have to do, but also the
revelation of God in the history of Israel and in Jesus. Thus we bring something
to history: the knowledge of the revelation of God. That revelation, which found
its supreme expression in Jesus, embraced by faith becomes the interpretative
principle by which we understand history.
There is more to come. Paul went on to write: “Then [we shall see] face to face.
Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been understood
fully.”
The meaning of history will be accessible to us only from history’s end. Paul
believed that just as there was a beginning, so there will be an end. He who spoke
and brought all things into being will speak yet again, and time will be no more.
As another Advent season comes around, we realize anew that we are faced with a
choice, a decision: Will we live by faith in God's promise or not?
To do so is a decision, not a conclusion at the end of rational argument. Trust is
necessary; not irrational trust but reasonable trust, trust as a decision of the
whole person.
Fundamental trust will live in the assurance of a gracious purpose threading its
way through the confusing patterns of history. Such trust is a gift. Its foundation
is laid in earliest infancy. We are from the beginning being pointed toward trust
or mistrust. As an adult it is only through a significant emotional experience that
one can move from mistrust to trust. An encounter with Jesus is the catalyst for a
life lived in trust. Such trust is confirmed in experience; yet it always remains
trust, an experience beyond verification in the scientific sense of verification.
Mistrust is an option. It is the consistent position of atheism. The Nobel Prizewinning biologist, Jacques Monod, an atheist, maintains:
If he accepts this (negative) message in its full significance, man must at
last wake out of his millenary dream and discover his total solitude, his
fundamental isolation. He must realize that, like a gypsy, he lives on the
boundary of an alien world; a world that is deaf to his music, and as
indifferent to his hopes as it is to his sufferings or his crimes (Chance and
Necessity, p. 160).
That is an excellent statement representing clear, concise thinking. As an atheist,
Monod is consistent. If there be no God, then there is no future resolution of
© Grand Valley State University
�The Vision of Faith
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
history's confusion, no future righting of wrong, no future realization of our
hopes, dreams, and longing.
If this be an impersonal universe with no heart, no mind at the center, no
purpose at the beginning, and no consummation at the end, then it is true the
universe is deaf to our music, indifferent to our hopes, our sufferings, our crimes.
If, on the other hand, we bring trust to history’s puzzling data, then we live in the
assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
Finally, we must choose. The vision of faith sees beyond history’s puzzle to the
promise of his coming, who came to a people who had for centuries cried, “How
long, O Lord, how long?” He has come. His promise is he will come again,
scattering the darkness, revealing the eternal purposes of God which now are
hidden from clear view.
To keep Advent is to keep faith in the promises of God.
The mystery will be removed and we will understand.
Faith will be vindicated as the king comes and the kingdom comes to
consummation.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19851206
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1985-12-06
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
The Vision of Faith
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The Church School Herald Journal
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on December 6, 1985 entitled "The Vision of Faith", it appeared in The Church Herald, Dec., 1985, pp. 6-7. Tags: Advent, Faith, Eschatology, Mystery, Love, Fundamental Trust.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Advent
Eschatology
Faith
Fundamental Trust
Love
Mystery
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/2cb8bee2634fdd0c2a082b9b8b13221d.pdf
6b3ea8330abee2529dccac62bfefefcd
PDF Text
Text
The Ground of Hope
Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
The Church Herald
The Magazine of the Reformed Church in America
December 20, 1985, pp. 6-7
Our hope for the future is grounded in what God has done in the past
We have kept Advent, the time of waiting, of expectation. We have rehearsed
faith's vision in the midst of the puzzle of history. In this time between the times
we live by the vision, trusting that the King will come and we will understand.
The King will surely come; that is faith's vision, a vision grounded in the fact that
the King has come. If Advent is the time of expectation, Christmas is the time of
fulfillment. Into the puzzle of our history a child was born, and in that fully
human existence a light penetrated our darkness, and the darkness has never
overcome it. Our hope for the future is grounded in what God has done in the
past.
To celebrate Christmas is to discover the ground of our hope as we grope through
the darkness which is the puzzle of history. The King who is coming is the King
who has come. We are a people of hope, a hope grounded in the past enabling us
already to appropriate the future that still lies before us, living in the assurance of
things hoped for.
Christian hope is hope in God. Stating what may seem obvious is an attempt to
distinguish the Christian hope from today's cheapened hope, a worldly term for
wishful thinking regarding a thousand matters from the ridiculous to the
sublime: Will you win the game? I hope so. Will you have more sales in 1986 than
in 1985? I hope so. Will your health improve? I hope so.
Hope has become a catch-all word for all sorts of situations and conditions that
we would like to see happen or become realized. Hope in this sense refers to an
uncertain outcome. We do not know; we cannot tell; we “hope so.” That is not
Christian hope. Christian hope is hope in God. It is certain.
© Grand Valley State University
�The Ground of Hope
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
There is another distinction. We use hope in its cheapened sense to express our
wish that something happens but about which we are uncertain. We also are then
using it to refer to a favorable outcome which lies within our capacity to bring
about: Will you win the game? I hope so—but the outcome is uncertain. Yet, I do
have it in my capacity to win the game if I play well, if I practice and am ready, if I
do not make the big mistake. Will you have more sales in 1986 than 1985? I hope
so—but I am not certain. Yet it is very possible, if I work hard; if I make sufficient
calls; if production is there. Will your health improve? I hope so—but I cannot be
sure. We enter a gray area because my health is not wholly within my power. Yet,
if I eat properly, get proper rest, exercise, and avoid stress, I can certainly
influence the outcome. Thus, in the cheapened sense of hope in contemporary
usage, hope refers to that which is uncertain, but is within my power to effect.
Biblical hope is something quite other. Biblical hope is in God; it is the present
certainty of what will be a future possession; it is certain of that which is
impossible in terms of human capacity.
As far as the quality of certainty is concerned, I simply refer you to the testimony
of Scripture. Biblical religion is a religion of certainty. I am not speaking now of
dogmatism. Surely there has been far too much dogmatism and far too many
dogmatic people in the history of the church. There is a lust for certainty in the
human heart and certainty about things that remain veiled in mystery. The Bible
is no answer book for all the questions of the less than serious curious ones. Too
many religious people “know” too much.
The Bible is, however, a book of certainty about the matters of ultimate concern:
That God is. That God is gracious. That God's kingdom will fully come. Biblical
religion in those ultimate matters is serious and certain. It is hope-full, not “hope
so.” It is the present certainty of what will be a future possession.
Further, it is certain of what is impossible in terms of human capacity. Let me
raise some questions to demonstrate that biblical hope is fastened on that which
lies beyond human capacity to effect.
Will there be a new creation as spoken of by Isaiah and in the Revelation to John?
Our Advent affirmation was yes. Will it come through human planning and
ingenuity? Will it come through human goodwill and harmony? Will some
president, king, or dictator arise who will effect it? Will it come through the
progressive education of the race, some evolutionary development?
Only the naive, the simple, the one ignorant of the human story could answer
affirmatively or even “I hope so.” Will there be life after life? The biblical faith
says yes. Will it come through medical research and the development of new
technology? Will death be defeated by future breakthroughs in science?
I need not go on. What all that conjured up is not only scarcely thinkable, it is not
desirable. It is apparent that biblical hope is certitude about a future reality which
© Grand Valley State University
�The Ground of Hope
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
lies beyond human capacity to achieve. Hope reaches beyond what is possible.
Hope claims a future that can come only as the result of an act of God.
Living in hope means living in the tension between now and then. There is a great
difference between present experience and the future for which we hope. This gap
between the vision and reality, between the ideal and the real, becomes
understandable in terms of the hope of which Scripture teaches. That hope is
grounded in the Christmas event.
Life is difficult. Human experience is thoroughly laced with suffering. Many have
had their faith in God shattered on the rocks of human suffering and evil in the
world. Such people have never been taught the true biblical faith because biblical
faith will not be eviscerated by suffering but is rather the means for
understanding precisely the hard reality of human experience. Our life is caught
in the tension. The darkness is not denied, but the darkness is not ultimate; the
Light has come and the light shines in our darkness. Therefore we endure; we live
in hope.
Hope is grounded in the faithfulness of God which came to expression at
Christmas. God has acted. Hope has been vindicated. God has visited his people;
the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.
We have seen the heart of God in the face of Jesus. Generations waited through
long centuries and then—Mary had a baby. Jesus was the fulfillment of God's
promise and in him redemption was accomplished—we have been saved. There is
a history to look back upon and a dramatic intervention in the life, death, and
resurrection of Jesus to remember and in which to trust. God did move in
faithfulness to his promises, and that move at history’s midpoint proved the
ground of a new promise, a new expectation, a new hope.
God's redemptive plan has touched down. He has connected with our history. He
has shown himself faithful in our past. Therefore our hope is grounded in history
and we have an anchor to which to hold as we wait in expectation. As we
celebrate another Christmas we acknowledge that we see only puzzling reflections
in a mirror, but our hope is renewed as we remember his coming and we wait in
hope for the day we will see him face to face.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19851220
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1985-12-20
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
The Ground of Hope
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The Church School Herald Journal
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on December 20, 1985 entitled "The Ground of Hope", it appeared in The Church Herald, pp. 6-7. Tags: Advent, Hope, God of Grace, Faithful.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Advent
Faithful
God of Grace
Hope
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/4fa6a435f09e1814c4fa10de5a650117.pdf
0ee6ec047ba31a3f574ca1b011efdd5f
PDF Text
Text
Theological Method:
The Search For a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
Reformed Review
A Theological Journal of Western Theological Seminary
101 East 13th Street, Holland, Michigan
Spring, 1986
Leafing through a manila folder labeled “Theological Methodology” was an
exercise in nostalgia. A few of us requested a reading course with Dr. Osterhaven
in which we would examine various models of theological method and write a
paper for presentation to the group. Perhaps it was there that my interest in
theological method was stimulated or, perhaps, the desire to study the subject
with Dr. Osterhaven arose from a distinction made by one of his esteemed
teachers, Dr. Albertus Pieters, whose Facts and Mysteries of the Christian Faith
fascinated me as a youth. Dr. Pieters distinguished systematic and biblical
theology and gave clear preference to the latter. It was a moment of awakening; I
was faced with the fact that the systematician's logical formulations might not
always faithfully reflect the biblical witness; indeed, at times they might actually
distort biblical truth.
No task places one in the tension between the richness and diversity of the
biblical witness and the systematization of the faith more than the task of
preaching each Lord's Day. Thus I have continued to be challenged with the need
to do theology in such a way that what comes to expression in the sermon is a
faithful witness to biblical faith evidencing sensitivity to the contemporary
situation. The sermon is the end product of the significant encounter of the Word
and the world in the mind and heart of the preacher, and the theological task
must be pursued to that end that the truth may find expression within the present
horizon. It will be my purpose here to reflect on the substratum on which the
sermon rests in the conviction that preaching with integrity demands not only
theological understanding, but also self-consciousness of one's theological
method.
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
It is a great privilege to offer the following discussion of theological method in
honor of a highly esteemed teacher in whose person the authenticity and integrity
of the Christian thinker is modeled out.
A NEW BASIC MODEL OF THEOLOGY?
In May of 1983, seventy professors of theology from around the world gathered at
the University of Tubingen in Germany. The international ecumenical
symposium was organized by the Institute for the Advanced Study of Religion at
the University of Chicago, the International Magazine for Theology, Concilium,
and the Institute for Ecumenical Research in Tubingen. The leading spirit in
organizing the event was Professor Dr. Hans Küng, head of the Tubingen
Institute. The key question was, “Is a base consensus in Christian theology
possible today despite all differences?” In his introductory remarks, Hans Küng
set the stage for the discussion. He said,
The natural sciences, humanities, democratic plural societies and freedom
movements of all kinds all have radical consequences, specifically also for
theology, whose outgrowths have not yet even been conceptualized, much
less dealt with. But is theology dependent on such multifaceted tensions,
such divergent systems, or even fads? Or is a new, changed basic model of
theology recognizable? Is there, then, a new “paradigm of theology,” which
might adequately react to the present changed experience? Are there
universal constants despite all the differing theories, methods, and
structures in such a “new paradigm” which every Christian theology must
advance because, scientifically, they are held accountable by the Christian
faith?
The key word in understanding the task of this symposium is “paradigm” which
was introduced into this theological discussion from a discussion in the natural
sciences by Thomas Kuhn whose book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,
became the catalyst for reflection on the history of theological development.
Kuhn defined paradigm as,
an entire constellation of beliefs, values, technics, and so on shared by the
members of a given community.1
On the basis of that understanding of paradigm, Hans Küng charted the history
of theology, attempting to locate those points of significant ferment in the Church
which led to the evolving of a new model or paradigm. He set forth a tentative
periodization beginning with the primitive Christian theology that was shaped by
apocalypticism followed by the Greek and Latin Fathers of the Patristic period,
the East-West schism of the Eleventh Century, the Reformation of the Sixteenth
Century, including the Counter-Reformation of the Roman Church, the
development of modern philosophy and the natural sciences of the Seventeenth
and Eighteenth Centuries, including the Enlightenment, the French and
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
American Revolutions and the Twentieth Century theological movements
beginning with Barth's Dialectical Theology and including Existentialist,
Hermeneutical and the various Liberation Theologies of the present.
From these major shifts in the history of the Church and in theological posture,
Küng finds five models or paradigms operational in the present whose roots lie in
the major shifts of the past. Stemming from the Ancient Church is the model of
Eastern Orthodoxy; from the Medieval period there remains a Roman Catholic
traditionalism; from the Reformation era there developed a Protestant orthodoxy
which is still embraced; from the Enlightenment classical Liberalism developed
and in strong reaction to that Nineteenth Century Liberalism, the revolution
whose catalyst was Karl Barth in the early decades of this Century, Dialectical
Theology with several variants in the present.
His schematization gives credence to the contention that eruptive events in
Church and society often result in new insights, new angles of vision which are
the catalyst for the conception of a new paradigm, a new model of theology. The
Symposium held at Tübingen in 1983 had as its purpose the endeavor to find a
new paradigm that could gather the best insights of the biblical studies of the
modern period along with the understanding of the world, history and human
existence available to us through all of the academic disciplines. Such a paradigm,
Kiting contends, must be truthful, not conformist or opportunist; free, not
authoritarian; critical, not fundamentalist or traditionalist; ecumenical, not
denominationalist or confessionalist. A theology in the horizon of the present
world of experience and critically rooted in the biblical tradition would be a
theology at the same time both Catholic and evangelical, both traditional and
contemporary, both Christocentric and universalist, both theoretical-scholarly
and practical-pastoral.
In sum: the quest is for a critical, ecumenical theology.
In a paper read to the Symposium, Küng discussed the process by which these
major shifts took place in the history of the Christian tradition. As indicated
above, the study by the historian of science, Thomas Kuhn, was the catalyst for
surveying shifts in theological understanding. Kuhn's book was a major challenge
to the traditional self-understanding of natural science. According to Kuhn,
progress in the natural sciences has not come through an orderly acquisition of
knowledge which has cumulatively issued in our present body of scientific data.
Much rather, progress has come in spurts, through major breakthroughs in
understanding which have forced the replacement of a former model of
understanding with a new model or paradigm. Küng writes,
Kuhn's heretical main thesis is that radically new theories arise neither by
verification nor by falsification but by the replacement - in individual
cases, highly complex and protracted - of a hitherto accepted explanatory
model (paradigm) by a new one. 2
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
As an example of this process, Küng cites the shift from a Ptolemaic astronomy to
the Copernican view.
... The more the movements of the stars were studied and corrected in the
light of the Ptolemaic system, the more material was produced to refute
that system. And the same thing happened not only with the Copernican
revolution but also with the Newtonian, the chemical and the Einsteinian
revolutions.
... The process may be tedious, protracted and complex. And these are
transitional periods in which at first only the stereotypes of the old model
begin to break up. But the critical state of the traditional theory
increasingly comes to light. A period of pronounced insecurity generally
precedes the emergence of new theories, which in the end leads to the
destruction of the paradigm. In a word, crisis is the usual condition for the
rejection of a hitherto accepted paradigm. 3
Scientific progress according to Kuhn comes not through an evolutionary,
cumulative process, but through scientific revolution.
Confirming and developing the thesis of Thomas Kuhn in regard to
systemological analysis is Stephen Toulmin, who in the preface to his basic work
entitled, Human Understanding, states his central thesis as follows:
... in science and philosophy alike, an exclusive preoccupation with logical
systematicity has been destructive of both historical understanding and
rational criticism. Men demonstrate their rationality, not by ordering their
concepts and beliefs in tidy formal structures, but by their preparedness to
respond to novel situations with open minds - acknowledging the
shortcomings of their formal procedures and moving beyond them.4
From Kuhn’s work in the history of science and Toulmin's study of human
understanding we come to the surprising recognition that the respective scientific
disciplines and philosophical movements do their model building and
systematization in the wake of new insight - some breakthrough in understanding
or some intuitive grasp of truth which shatters the prevailing model or paradigm,
forcing upon the community (academic or social or ecclesiastical) a new way of
looking at Reality.
This development has been especially fruitful in the theological discussions being
carried on by the Universities of Tubingen and Chicago, highlighted at the
Symposium to which I referred above. Hans Küng's attempt at a periodization of
theological development is an attempt to demonstrate that there are fascinating
parallels between that development and development in the natural sciences. He
lists five parallels:
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
A.
As in natural sciences, so also in the theological community, there is
a “normal science” with its classical authors, textbooks and teachers,
which is characterized by a cumulative growth of knowledge, by a solution
of remaining problems (“puzzles”) and by resistance to everything that
might result in a changing as replacement of the established paradigm.
B.
As in natural science, so also in the theological community,
awareness of a growing crisis is the starting position for the advent of a
drastic change in certain hitherto prevailing basic assumptions and
eventually causes the breakthrough of a new paradigm or model of
understanding. When the available rules and methods break down, they
lead to a search for new ones.
C.
As in natural science, so also in the theological community, an older
paradigm or model of understanding is replaced when a new one is
available,
D.
As in natural science, so too in the theological community, in the
acceptance or rejection of a new paradigm, not only scientific, but also
extra-scientific factors are involved, so that the transition to a new model
cannot be purely rationally extorted, but may be described as a conversion.
E.
In the theological community as in natural science, it can be
predicted only with difficulty, in the midst of great controversies, whether
a new paradigm is absorbed into the old, replaces the old or is shelved for
a long period. But if it is accepted, innovation is consolidated as tradition.
5
Küng adds a word from Albert Einstein at this point, who said on one occasion,
“Smashing prejudices is more difficult than smashing atoms.” But Küng adds,
“Once they are smashed, they release forces that can perhaps move mountains.”
These theses set forth by Küng he calls only provisional. They are offered for
discussion and he is well aware where the critical question arises. After stating
these parallels, he continues,
And yet the question is thrust upon us: Does not theology, even Christian
truth itself, faced by nothing but paradigm changes and new conceptions,
become a victim of historical relativism which makes it impossible any
longer to perceive the Christian reality and makes every paradigm equally
true, equally valid? Perhaps the natural scientist is not very much
concerned with this problem, but it is of the greatest consequence for the
Christian theologian ... Let us therefore pose the question: Does a
paradigm change involve a total break? 6
Küng's conviction is that in both science and theology there is preserved a
continuity when there is a shift in paradigm. In theology he insists,
We have to avoid the choice not only between an absolutist and a relativist
view, but also between a radical continuity and a radical discontinuity.
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
Every paradigm change shows at the same time continuity and
discontinuity, rationality and irrationality, conceptual stability and
conceptual change, evolutionary and revolutionary elements. 7
Further, in theology and the historical sciences much more than in the basically
un-historical natural sciences, “ ... it is therefore not a question of a new
invention of a tradition. It is a question of a new formulation of tradition,
admittedly in the light of a new paradigm.” The problem of continuity is a more
serious problem for theology because theology deals with “truth.” Kuhn as a
scientist must leave alone the ultimate questions of the “whence” and the
“whither” of the world process and the human drama. Theology addresses those
very ultimate questions. Thus there are not only parallels between the
development of natural science and theology but there are also some significant
differences.
Christian theology lives out of the primordial event which is its source, its norm
and to which it must continually return - the event of Israel and of Jesus Christ as
set forth in the Scriptures.
This primordial event which has found its preeminent expression in Jesus and is
attested to in Scripture is not simply a past datum to be analyzed and interpreted
but is a dynamic living force which time and again breaks out - for example, in
the personal crisis of a Martin Luther. As Küng expresses it,
The gospel itself then - obviously always in connection with a particular
development in contemporary world history - appears here as a direct
cause of the theological crisis, as ground of discontinuity in theology, as
impetus to the new paradigm. 8
Further, because theology is anchored to a past historical event, a new paradigm
may emerge and theological upheaval may occur, but there can never be the total
replacement or total suppression of the old paradigm. Thus Küng declares a
revolution in Christian theology
can never take place except on the basis of and ultimately because of the
gospel, and never against the gospel. 9
Another difference from a paradigm shift in the natural sciences is that in
theology, because of the existential nature of the “decision of faith,” the academic
decision for one paradigm or another is not always distinguished from the
“decision of faith;” the person for whom the Christian reality comes to clear
expression in a new paradigm causing him to abandon the old paradigm may be
seen as choosing against the gospel itself of which the paradigms are but
structures for understanding.
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
Finally, and closely connected to the foregoing observation, is the fact that when
the Church and theological community reject a paradigm,
... rejection easily leads to condemnation, discussion to excommunication;
gospel and theology, content of faith and outward form of faith, are
identified.10
Because this is such a powerful tendency in the Christian community, when a
new model of understanding is accepted, it is soon turned into tradition and
tradition in turn becomes a new traditionalism.
With the discussion of how knowledge has advanced in the history of science as
the catalyst, Küng has thus surveyed the development of theological
understanding to the present, observing both parallels and differences between
the history of science and the history of theology. But his purpose is not simply
information but, rather, the study is being engaged in in order to determine if
there is a base consensus in Christian theology today. Are all the elements of
ferment at work today in the Church pointing to a new paradigm in theology and,
if so, what would such a paradigm look like? We have noted some of the essential
characteristics that must be reflected in a new basic model for theology in our
day. Beyond the characteristics listed, the parameters of any new paradigm must
be set by two constants which provide the two poles in reference to which the
Christian message must come to expression:
The first constant: The present world as horizon.
The second constant: The Christian message as standard.
The “horizon” within which theological reflection must happen and theological
formulation must occur is “our own present world of human experience.” Küng
asserts:
One thing should now be clear: that the reality of world, humanity, myself,
is revealed in depth in its obvious ambivalence, its radical contingency
and its continual change: an ongoing history of success and suffering,
justice and injustice, happiness and unhappiness, salvation and disaster,
sense and nonsense. Nor does this mean making the world evil, so that
theologians can more easily get their God involved; it means taking stock
without prejudice of what is. Theology does not create any reality, but
interprets it. 11
The second constant has already been noted in our discussion of the differences
between theology and the natural sciences. Küng describes it this way:
If ecumenical theology wants to be Christian theology, its other pole must
be the Judeo-Christian tradition and its primary norm cannot be anything
except the Christian message on which this tradition is constructed as on
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
its ultimate ground. That is to say, the Christian primordial and basic
testimony, the gospel itself in the sense of the good news in its entirety, as
recorded in the Old and New Testament Scriptures, is the basic norm of
ecumenical theology. 12
These two poles or constants then form the context within which theological
formulation must come to expression. If we observe the history of theology after
the great awakening of the Sixteenth Century, we see how in both the Catholic
and Protestant traditions there was a hardening of theological positions. The
Seventeenth Century saw the development of an orthodoxy shaped by
Rationalism, which froze the new insights of the Reformers into carefully defined
doctrinal positions with little regard for the present horizon. In the wake of the
Enlightenment of the Eighteenth Century there was an attempt to come to terms
with the new understanding of both human reality and the natural world. The
classic Liberalism of the Nineteenth Century was an effort to proclaim the gospel
within the confines of a weltanschaung - that had no room for transcendent
Reality; the gospel, the second constant, was dissolved into the first, into the
horizon of this world.
In sharp reaction, Karl Barth reversed the whole tide of Nineteenth Century
Liberalism, loudly proclaiming a theology of the Word, pointing to the God Who
is the “Wholly Other.” Because he was in a posture of such sharp reaction, the
early Barth nearly obliterated the present horizon, the first constant, although he
was too deeply imbued with the culture of his day wholly to lose sight of it.
The present discussion comes at a time when we are able with historical distance
to gain some objectivity as we face the task before us. The theology of the future
must never again lose sight of either constant. Our task is to find an expression of
the Gospel which is faithful to the Word and honest with the world. If such an
understanding of theology's task meets with anything like a consensus, then we
may be poised for a fruitful period of theological activity.
SPEAKING THE TRUTH IN A PLURALISTIC AGE
Under the auspices of the Program for Studies in Religion at the University of
Michigan, Hans Küng led a seminar during the Fall Term of 1983 on the subject
of “Paradigm Change in Theology.” It was a cross-discipline seminar including
students and professors from the schools of the arts and literature, law, and
medicine. One of the papers studied was written by Professor David Tracy of the
university of Chicago Divinity School, a Catholic scholar who has been a major
participant in the discussion of paradigm shift in the symposium discussed
above.
Tracy has grappled with the matter of theological methodology. In his first book
Blessed Rage for Order, published in 1979, he identified five theological models:
Orthodox, Liberal, Neo-Orthodox, Radical, and a Revisionist model. These five
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 9
models are the result of a different schematization than that followed by Küng,
cited above, but there is great similarity of view as to the models operative in the
present period. Tracy's Revisionist model, which he will endeavor to build, is his
attempt at finding a new paradigm. It is his contention that a Revisionist model
must be constructed which will enable the ecumenical Church to proclaim a
message that will make the claim of truth recognizable in a pluralistic age. The
Revisionist model is a critical correlation of the two principle sources for
theology, the two constants mentioned above, cited by Küng: Christian texts and
common human experience and language. Tracy sets forth the following theses:
The Principle Method of Investigation of the Source, “Common Human
Experience and Language,” Can Be Described as a Phenomenology of the
“Religious Dimension” Present in Everyday and Scientific Experience and
Language.” 13
The Principle Method of Investigation of the Source “The Christian
Tradition” Can Be Described as a Historical and Hermeneutical
Investigation of Classical Christian Texts. 14
Having set the agenda for his endeavor, Tracy moved on in his next work, The
Analogical Imagination, to set forth the method and execute it in terms of his
own commitment to the Catholic Christian Tradition. The Preface announces, “In
a culture of pluralism must each religious tradition finally either dissolve into
some lowest common denominator or accept a marginal existence as one
interesting but purely private option?” Tracy is not willing to accept either option.
A theological strategy must be found that can articulate the genuine claims of
religion to truth. This is the task he sets for himself: a responsible affirmation of
pluralism through the discovery of public criteria by which truth can be affirmed.
Theology must develop public criteria of truth and discourse because it deals with
the fundamental questions of existence and because it speaks of God.
Recognizing that the theologian addresses three arenas, Society, Academy and
Church, Tracy insists that the criteria of publicness applies in all three areas.
Theology is the generic name for three disciplines: fundamental, systematic and
practical theologies. Publicness is demanded of each. The primary focus of
fundamental theology is the Academy, of systematic theology, the Church and of
practical theology, Society. They differ not only in their primary reference group,
but also in terms of their modes of argument, ethical stance, religious stance and
in terms of expressing claims to meaning and truth.
On the way to a responsible pluralism all conversation partners must agree to
certain basic rules for the discussion. Two constants are present: the
interpretation of a religious tradition and the interpretation of the religious
dimension of the contemporary situation from which and to which the theologian
speaks. In regard to the first, it is incumbent upon the theologian to make explicit
her/his general method of interpretation, to develop “criteria of appropriateness”
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page10
whereby specific interpretations of the tradition may be judged by the wider
theological community. In regard to the interpretation of the contemporary
situation there must be an analysis of the “religious” questions, the question of
the meaning of human existence in the present situation.
There are major differences as well. Tracy addresses the question as to what
constitutes a public claim to truth in the three sub-disciplines of theology.
Fundamental theology's defining characteristic is
... a reasoned insistence on employing the approach and methods of some
established academic discipline to explicate and adjudicate the truth
claims of the interpreted religious tradition and the truth claims of the
contemporary situation. 15
Various models are available, but whichever model is chosen fundamental
questions and answers are articulated in such a way that any attentive,
intelligent, reasonable and responsible person can understand and judge them in
keeping with fully public criteria for argument. Personal faith may not enter the
argument for the truth claims in fundamental theology.
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY AS A HERMENEUTICAL TASK
The systematic theologian's major task is the reinterpretation of the tradition for
the present situation.
Where the fundamental theologian will relate the reality of God to our
fundamental trust in existence (our common faith), the confessional
systematic theologian will relate that reality to their arguments for a
distinctively Christian understanding of faith.
Christian theology ... consists in explicating in public terms and in
accordance with the demands of its own primary confessions, the full
meaning and truth of the original “illuminating event” ... which occasioned
and continues to inform its understanding of all reality. 16
Thus the task of the systematic theologian is a hermeneutical task. The
“illuminating event” Tracy calls a religious classic. As in a classic work of art, the
religious classic contains the possibility of ever-new “disclosures.” Classics Tracy
defines as texts, events, images, persons, rituals and symbols that are assumed to
disclose permanent possibilities of meaning and truth. The hermeneutical
theologian seeks to articulate the truth-disclosure of the reality of God embedded
in the tradition for the contemporary situation.
If the systematic theologian speaks out of a particular tradition, is systematic
theology public discourse? Can the claim of Truth be made for theological
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page11
statements arising out of a particular tradition? Tracy believes it can if systematic
theology is understood as a hermeneutical task.
It is Tracy's contention that systematic theology is hermeneutical. This means
that systematic theology's task is to interpret, mediate and translate the meaning
and truth of the tradition. Where this is not the case, where the notion of
authority shifts from a truth disclosed to mind and heart to an external norm for
the obedient will, theologians can no longer interpret and translate the tradition
but “only repeat the shop-worn conclusions of the tradition.”
Eventually, the central, classical symbols and doctrines of the tradition
become mere “fundamentals” to be externally accepted and endlessly
repeated.17
Tracy points to the contrast of a hermeneutical theology:
The heart of any hermeneutical position is the recognition that all
interpretation is a mediation of past and present, a translation carried on
within the effective history of a tradition to retrieve its sometimes strange,
sometimes familiar meanings. 18
How is this done? Recognizing that one begins within a tradition which has
shaped one, that one is socialized, acculturated and thus without the possibility of
finding some position “above” one's own historicity,
... the route to liberation from the negative realities of a tradition is not to
declare the existence of an autonomy that is literally unreal but to enter
into a disciplined and responsive conversation with the subject matter the responses and, above all, the fundamental questions, of the
traditions.19
Tracy refers to Hans-Georg Gadamer's model of conversation as a model for
understanding the dialogue with the tradition.
Real conversation occurs only when the participants allow the question,
the subject matter, to assume primacy. It occurs only when our usual fears
about our own self-image die. ... That fear (dies only because we are
carried along, and sometimes away, by the subject matter itself into the
rare event or happening named “thinking” and “understanding.” For
understanding happens; it occurs not as the pure result of personal
achievement but in the back-and-forth movement of the conversation
itself.
The word “hermeneutical” best describes this realized experience of
understanding in conversation. For every event of understanding, in order
to produce a new interpretation, mediates between our past experience
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page12
and the understanding embodied in our linguistic tradition and the
present event of understanding occasioned by a fidelity to the logic of the
question in the back-and-forth movement of the conversation.20
Using the model of conversation Tracy shows how one enters into the history of
the illuminating event. When interpreting a classic one recognizes its “excess of
meaning” demands constant interpretation and is at the same time timeless –
... a certain kind of timelessness - namely the timeliness of a classic
expression radically rooted in its own historical time and calling to my
own historicity. That is, the classical text is not in some timeless moment
which needs mere repetition. Rather its kind of timelessness as permanent
timeliness is the only one proper to any expression of the finite, temporal,
historical beings we are. ... The classic text's fate is that only its constant
reinterpretation by later finite, historical, temporal beings who will risk
asking its questions and listening, critically and tactfully, to its responses
can actualize the event of understanding beyond its present fixation in a
text.21
To be understood, a classic cannot be repeated; it must be interpreted. Thus
Tracy claims,
All contemporary systematic theology can be understood as fundamentally
hermeneutical. This position implies that systematic theologians, by
definition, will understand themselves as radically finite and historical
thinkers who have risked a trust in a particular religious tradition. They
seek, therefore, to retrieve, interpret, translate, mediate the resources ... of
the classic events of understanding of those fundamental religious
questions embedded in the classic events, images, persons, rituals, texts
and symbols of a tradition.22
At the heart of Tracy's argument is the conviction that “classics exist;” they exist
in all domains of human endeavor. He does not merely assert that they exist but
builds a carefully argued case for their existence and specifically for the existence
of the religious classic. The task of the systematic theologian is to interpret
religious classics.
Systematic theology intends to provide an interpretation, a retrieval
(including a retrieval through critique and suspicion) and always,
therefore, a new application of a particular religious tradition's selfunderstanding for the current horizon of the community. 23
Applying this understanding of systematic theology's task to the specific task of
the Christian thinker, Tracy declares,
In Christian systematics, that self-understanding is itself further
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page13
grounded in the particular events and persons of Jewish and Christian
history: decisively grounded, for the Christian, in God's own
self-manifestation as my God in this classic event and person, Jesus
Christ. 24
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY AS PUBLIC DISCOURSE
But now the crux of the matter is reached: how does the systematic theologian
address the wider public with discussion characterized by “publicness” thus
stopping the retreat of Christian faith into the sphere of privateness and yet
remain faithful to
... the radical particularity of the relationship of that gift's disclosure to the
particular events of God's action in ancient Israel, in Jesus of Nazareth, in
the history of the Christian Church? 25
Acknowledging the dilemma, Tracy believes it can be overcome. The means of
overcoming the dilemma is the recognition of the public nature of the classic:
... grounded in some realized experience of a claim to attention, unfolding
as cognitively disclosive of both meaning and truth and ethically
transformative of personal, social and historical life. 26
Tracy therefore contends,
Whenever any systematic theologian produces a classic interpretation of a
particular classic religious tradition (as both Barth and Rahner have,) then
that new expression should be accorded a public status in the culture.
Every classic ... is a text, event, image, person or symbol which unites
particularity of origin and expression with a disclosure of meaning and
truth available, in principle, to all human beings. 27
And again,
Any person's intensification of particularity via a struggle with the
fundamental questions of existence in a particular tradition, if that
struggle is somehow united to the logos of appropriate expression, will
yield a form of authentically sharable public discourse. 28
Thus Tracy argues, classics exist, religious classics exist, and classic status in any
field including the religious accords a text, work of art, symbol or other form of
expression public status. Religious classics are
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page14
... expressions from a particular tradition that have found the right mode
of expression to become public for all intelligent, reasonable and
responsible persons. 29
At the heart of the Christian tradition the classic expression is found in the event
of God's self-disclosure in Jesus Christ. Tracy claims,
One need not be a believer in Christianity to accord it (and thereby its
central, paradigmatic, classic event) authentically religious status: a
manifestation from the whole by the power of the whole. 30
Christology is the attempt to respond through some interpretation to the event of
Jesus Christ in one's own situation.
... The Christian interpreter of this classic event recognizes in some
present experience of the event - more precisely, in the claim disclosed in
that event (paradigmatically in experiencing that event in manifestation
and proclamation) as an event from God and by God's power. To speak
religiously and theologically of the Christ event is ultimately to speak of an
event from God. 31
The Jesus remembered by the tradition is experienced in the present mediated
through the word of proclamation and sacramental action. Jesus remembered as
the Christ is the experience of the presence of God's own self.
The second part of Tracy's work entails the actual execution of the method here
described. His is the attempt of a systematic theologian engaging in the
hermeneutical task of mediating past and present so that the event of Jesus
Christ remembered in the tradition comes to expression again in the present in a
manner that affords the possibility of public discussion with all persons of good
will who will engage in reasonable conversation.
In Tracy's Revisionist model we find the essential characteristics set forth by
Küng for a new paradigm in theology determined by a critical correlation of the
present horizon and the biblical texts.
Herein lies the present challenge to Reformed theology. Through the impact of
biblical studies and the explosion of knowledge across the whole spectrum of
human inquiry we have been alerted to the danger of confessionalism and the
imperative to take seriously the horizon of contemporary experience. The
opportunity is ours to realize the ideal of the Reformation. The Church of the
Sixteenth Century was re-formed according to the Word of God and at its best it
recognized that it must always be being re-formed. The Reformed branch of the
Protestant Reformation expressed itself in many Confessional statements and
refused to reduce them all to one credal formulation. The Lutheran branch
sought to bring the various strands of its confessional position into a unifying
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page15
statement with the Formula of Concord which then served as the norm of right
doctrine. The Reformed churches feared that such a statement of unity might
impede the continuing efforts to confess the faith in each new historical situation
and thus determined to continue to confess its faith in ever-new credal
formulations as the times demanded.
It goes without saying that the ideal was soon abandoned. The high Calvinism of
the Seventeenth Century with its rationalism and careful scholastic definitions
was a complete break with the best insights of the early Reformers. Not only in
the Reformed tradition but Protestantism generally has been plagued with the
fossilizing of doctrinal formulation, the absolutizing of historically conditioned
creeds and a defensive posture which has ill prepared it to meet the explosion of
knowledge in the sciences, natural and social. Failing to act on its own best
insight that the Church needs constant reformation of its understanding of the
Faith, Reformed Orthodoxy has been severely threatened by the rise of historical
thinking which is so characteristic of the modern period.
Of course, the Church can continue to close its mind to the knowledge and insight
that streams forth in a mighty torrent as we continue to unlock the secrets of the
cosmos and, with a mindset of an earlier Century and a defensive posture, it can
ward off the demands for reformation. In so doing it will lock the faithful into a
system of ideas and structure of belief that become increasingly out of touch with
their experience of the world, and it will continue to offend its brightest and most
sensitive spirits who will finally be forced out when they can no longer deny the
compelling truth that calls for a new understanding of the Faith.
This is not a new problem for the Church. It is new only in the rapidity of
breakthroughs on all frontiers of knowledge and in the rapid spread of that
knowledge that is now possible in the Electronic Age which is creating the
“Information Society.” But a Church confident of the Truth as it has come to
expression in Jesus Christ will find the present day an exciting day in which to
identify the questions and find the appropriate mode in which to witness to the
self-disclosure of the God in the face of Jesus Christ.
ENDNOTES
1 Thomas
Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (Chicago, Illinois:
University of Chicago Press, 1962), p. 175.
2 Hans Küng, Does God Exist? (New York: Doubleday and Company, 1980), p.
107.
3 Ibid., p. 108.
4 Stephen Toulmin, Human Understanding. (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton
University Press, 1972), p. vii.
5 Hans Küng, “Paradigm Change in Theology,” unpublished paper read at the
Symposium.
6 Ibid., p. 17.
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page16
7 Ibid.,
p. 17.
p. 20.
9 Ibid., p. 21.
10Ibid., p. 21.
11 Ibid., p. 25.
12 Ibid., p. 26.
13 David Tracy, Blessed Rage For Order. (New York: Seabury Press, 1979),p. 47.
14 Ibid., p. 49.
15 David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination. (New York, New York: Crossroad,
1981), p. 62.
16Ibid., p. 65, 66.
17Ibid., p. 99.
18Ibid.
19 Ibid., p. 100.
20Ibid., p. 101.
21Ibid., p. 102.
22Ibid., p. 104.
23 Ibid., p. 131.
24 Ibid.
25 Ibid., p. 132.
26 Ibid.
27Ibid., p. 132F, 133.
28Ibid.,p. 134.
29Ibid.,p. 233.
30Ibid.,p. 234.
31Ibid.
8Ibid.,
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Kuhn, Thomas, The Structure of Scientific Revolution. Chicago, Illinois:
University of Chicago Press, 1962.
Küng, Hans, Does God Exist?. New York: Doubleday and Company, 1980.
Küng, Hans, “Paradigm Change in Theology,” unpublished paper at Symposium,
University of Michigan, 1983.
Toulmin, Stephen, Human Understanding. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton
University Press, 1972.
Tracy, David, Blessed Rage For Order. New York: Seabury Press, 1979,
Tracy, David, The Analogical Imagination. New York, New York: Crossroad,
1981.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
References
Hans Küng. Does God Exist?, 1980, "Paradigm Change in Theology,", 1983, David Tracy. Blessed Rage for Order, 1979, The Analogical Imagination, 1981.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19860301
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1986-03-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Theological Method: The Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The The Reformed Review
a journal of the seminaries of the Reformed Church in America
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on March 1, 1986 entitled "Theological Method: The Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age", it appeared in The Reformed Review, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 242-254. Tags: Preaching, Theology, History of Christian Tradition, Pluralism, Ecumenical, Historical Thinking. Scripture references: Hans Küng. Does God Exist?, 1980, "Paradigm Change in Theology,", 1983, David Tracy. Blessed Rage for Order, 1979, The Analogical Imagination, 1981.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Ecumenical
Historical Thinking
History of Christian Tradition
Pluralism
Preaching
Theology
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/40dadfb171bd4075b2533a4b00a5f8c4.pdf
f74cf4b03a952e00e205e19b06941d2d
PDF Text
Text
The Cross and the Theology of Self-Esteem
Book Review
Self-Esteem: The New Reformation
By Robert H. Schuller,
(Word Books, 1983)
Reviewed by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
Perspectives
A Journal of Reformed Thought
March 1986, pp. 10-13
The way of Jesus in this world led to crucifixion. God raised him up. Thus we
have a gospel to proclaim, but only Jesus stands beyond the cross; our history is
lived out under the shadow of the cross; those who follow Jesus are called to
costly discipleship. An authentic biblical theology must embrace the cross and
bring to expression the dying to self and denial of self, symbolized in the cross of
Jesus and the cross Jesus calls us to bear.
Does the theology of self-esteem outlined by Robert H. Schuller in his book, SelfEsteem: The New Reformation, meet the above criterion? Is there place for the
cross in a theology of Self-Esteem?
Schuller sketched the appearance of Christian theology, viewed from the
perspective of self-esteem, which he contends is the deepest need of the human
person. The whole spectrum of biblical truth is seen in light of this need. The
traditional content of Reformed theology, which is Schuller’s heritage, is not
changed, but the perspective of fundamental human need as a starting point does
put that traditional content in a new light. That new light changes dramatically
the appropriate approach to people. This is not surprising since this is theological
understanding which arises from the pulpit, from the heart of an evangelist, and
the passion of an apologist for the faith.
Schuller’s conviction that the deepest need of the human person is the need for
self-esteem or a sense of self-worth is coupled with an equally critical conviction
— the dignity of the human person. The content of the gospel addresses the
© Grand Valley State University
�Schuller, The Cross & the Theology of Self-Esteem, review by Richard A. Rhem Page 2
person’s deepest need; the approach to the person is determined by the infinite
value of the human person created in the image of God.
Robert Schuller has called for a daring and creative rethinking of biblical faith;
indeed, for a new reformation. He has written a call to action, drawing a first,
tentative outline of what a theology of self-esteem would look like. He invites the
church to think with him and to go beyond him. He is convinced that it is possible
to move beyond our Reformation theology, characterized by reaction, into a new
age characterized by expanded mission.
His own ministry of over thirty years has gained him a worldwide hearing. His
credentials are established. Now he has moved beyond concrete demonstration
into the area of theological reflection. He invites us to join him on the journey. To
do so we must be certain that the gospel of Jesus Christ centered in the
crucifixion and resurrection comes to full expression. Let us seek to discover from
his own writing whether this is the case.
The Human Person
Central to Schuller’s understanding of both the content and approach of the
gospel is the dignity of the human person. He claims:
Historically, the Church does not have a commendable success record in
its effort to purge sinful pride out of Christ’s followers without insulting,
demeaning, and bringing dishonor to God’s beautiful children.
The theological task to which Schuller calls the church is to discover
a full-orbed theological system beginning with and based on a solid central
core of religious truth—the dignity of man. And let us start with a theology
of salvation that addresses itself at the outset to man’s deepest need, the
“will to self worth.”
He is insistent at this point:
No theology of salvation, no theology of the Church, no theology of Christ,
no theology of sin and repentance and regeneration and sanctification and
discipleship, can be regarded as authentically Christian if it does not
begin with and continue to keep its focus on the right of every person to be
treated with honor, dignity, and respect. At the same time, any creed, any
biblical interpretation, and any systematic theology that assaults and
offends the self-esteem of persons is heretically failing to be truly
Christian....
Such forceful affirmations raise questions about Schuller’s view of human nature
and the human condition. Is he naive about the demonic potential of the human
© Grand Valley State University
�Schuller, The Cross & the Theology of Self-Esteem, review by Richard A. Rhem Page 3
person? Is he not aware of the record of human history written in blood, laced
with violence? Is his a Pollyanna view of the human situation, a refusal to see the
darkness? That is scarcely the case; he does, however, make a critical distinction
between the nature of the human person and the actual human condition.
Human nature is marked by wonder and dignity, a reflection of the image of God
in which the person was created. The human condition is marked by a reactive
behavior which is not reflective of human nature but by a denial of that nature.
The rebellious actions of a person are reactions, not the expression of a person’s
true nature:
By nature we are fearful, not bad. Original sin is not a mean streak; it is a
non-trusting inclination. Label it a “negative self-image,” but do not say
that the central core of the human soul is wickedness. If this were so, then
truly, the human being is totally depraved. But positive Christianity does
not hold to human depravity, but to human inability. I am humanly unable
to correct my negative self-image until I encounter a life-changing
experience with nonjudgmental love bestowed upon me by a Person whom
I admire so much that to be unconditionally accepted by him is to be born
again.
Schuller uses the illustration of the golf ball. The outside dimpled surface gives
little hint of what is really inside. Rebellion is our surface appearance. Why the
rebellion? At the center of the golf ball is a hard rubber core. Around that core is a
maze of stretched rubber wrappings. The core represents a negative self-image or
an intrinsic lack of trust or simply fear. The stretched rubber wrappings are the
reactions of that fear-filled core—all the anxieties and fearful reactions of
negative emotions which surface as the rebellious exterior—angry, mean, violent.
To use Schuller’s analogy, emanating from the core of the person constituted of
fear, feelings of inferiority, and doubt are all forms of demonic behavior—enough
to create hell on earth, presenting to the world an angry face. What is wrong with
humankind is the ego run amuck, an ego threatened, insecure, desperately trying
to establish itself, prove itself, justify itself, make something of itself. The
consequence is sin and misery. One can hardly accuse Schuller of naiveté in
regard to the darkness of the human situation.
He is not content, however, simply to explain it in terms of wicked human nature.
He asks why the human person reacts as he does. He finds the biblical picture of
human sinfulness corroborated and explained by insights from the behavioral
sciences. He sees the ego with its destructive potential reacting negatively
because instead of trust which liberates for love, there is at the core a lack of trust
which issues in fear, love’s opposite.
What is needful? To be born again—changed from a negative to a positive selfimage through an experience of grace in an encounter with Jesus Christ.
© Grand Valley State University
�Schuller, The Cross & the Theology of Self-Esteem, review by Richard A. Rhem Page 4
Beginning with a strong conviction that every person must be treated with
respect and accorded the dignity that is his because he is created in the image of
God, Schuller has probed beneath the surface of human sin and rebellion to
understand that one acts, not according to his nature, but reacts out of an
intrinsic fear and lack of trust. That being the case, the approach to people is all
important, and it is here that he is critical of the traditional approach of much of
the church.
One reason many Christians have behaved so badly in the past two
thousand years is because we have been taught from infancy to adulthood
“how sinful” and “how worthless” we are. The self-image will always
incarnate itself in action. A negative diagnosis will become a self-fulfilling
prophecy. The most difficult task for the Church to learn is how to deal
honestly with the subject of “negativity,” “sin,” and “evil” without doing
the cause of redemption more harm than good.
The Place of the Cross
The cross of Jesus Christ plays a central role in the theology of self-esteem, and
self-esteem is the perspective from which the cross is discussed. Therefore it may
appear that Schuller reinterprets the meaning of the atonement, but that simply
is not the case.
He claims, “The Cross is the central force in the kingdom of God.” He discusses
this claim under the double aspect of the cross of Christ and the cross of the
Christian.
Christ’s death for us witnesses to the infinite value we have in God’s sight.
Such a realization changes one inside. The core of fear and lack of trust,
which is the generating center of all negativity and rebellion, is
transformed into trust and security—a positive sense of worth, liberating
one in turn to extend love and forgiveness to others.
Were this all Schuller had to say about the cross, his critics would be right in
seeing in this interpretation the effect of the cross as “moral influence,” Jesus’
sacrifice inspiring us to emulate his example of self-giving love. To claim this as
the heart of Schuller’s understanding of the atonement, however, is simply
without warrant if we listen to his own statement. References to the atonement
are to be found throughout the text and it is always the substitutionary
atonement that comes to expression. For example:
It is not until we meet Jesus Christ, who is perfect and he offers to share
his robe of righteousness with us and his garment of grace is draped across
our shoulders that we can then walk with him into the presence of God.
He specifically discusses the crucifixion in another context. There he lists three
ways in which we can say we are saved “by the blood of Christ.”
© Grand Valley State University
�Schuller, The Cross & the Theology of Self-Esteem, review by Richard A. Rhem Page 5
1. The Cross of Christ brings vitality to my dignity...I know the value of my
life when I see the price God paid on the Cross to save my soul....
2. The Cross of Christ makes atonement from guilt possible because it
adds integrity to the positive Gospel...In the Cross of Christ we see the
harsh reality of “negativity,” “demonic human behavior,” “collectivized
social evil in institutions....”
3. The Cross of Christ adds morality to divine forgiveness. ...Negativity
must pay its dues. Evil must be punished. So Christ has taken the rap “for
our irresponsible negative behavior.” He experienced hell—on the
cross...His suffering is credited to my personal account....So God is morally
able and obligated to offer forgiveness to any person who claims the credit
card of Calvary’s Cross to cover the guilt of his sinful behavior.
As stated above, Schuller will always speak of the cross, and any other doctrinal
truth for that matter, from the perspective of his central motif, self-esteem,
because he is convinced that self-esteem affords an effective key for interpreting
the gospel for our day. To say, however, that the atoning death of Jesus Christ for
the sin of the world is not at the heart of that gospel in his understanding is
simply not true.
The second aspect in which the cross is “the central force in the Kingdom of God”
he discusses as “the cross of the Christian.” This is the cross the person graced by
God through Jesus Christ voluntarily assumes as his response to that grace. What
does it mean to bear one’s cross? It means to respond positively to the dream God
puts in the heart of the redeemed.
Faithful to his Reformed heritage, Schuller is careful to stress that he is now
speaking of the response of a grateful heart for a salvation freely given, a
salvation fully accomplished and graciously applied. To experience grace is to
respond out of gratitude, and that response involves commitment. Its price is
self-denial—”The voluntary vicarious assumption of the Cross.”
When God’s dream is accepted, we must be prepared to pay a high price.
The dream that comes from God calls us to fulfill his will by taking an
active part in his kingdom. The price? A cross. The reward? A feeling of
having done something beautiful for God.
It is the cross we voluntarily accept and willingly bear that distinguishes a
dangerous egotism from healthy self-esteem. To pursue the dream and thereby to
commit oneself to the fulfilling of God’s will as God reveals it to one is to bear the
cross. There can be no success without a cross, but even here success must not be
understood as “always winning and never losing.”
Rather, success is to be defined as the gift of self- esteem that God gives us
as a reward for our sacrificial service in building self-esteem in others. Win
© Grand Valley State University
�Schuller, The Cross & the Theology of Self-Esteem, review by Richard A. Rhem Page 6
or lose: If we follow God’s plan as faithfully as we can, we will feel good
about ourselves. That is success! We will then be able to live with ourselves
with dignity when we know deep down in our hearts that we did what God
wanted us to do.
Cross bearing is no minor theme for Schuller. Self- esteem restored in a person
through the encounter with Jesus Christ and the experience of God’s grace
becomes the dynamic of a fruitful life lived to the glory of God. If one has truly
been overwhelmed by grace, redeemed by Jesus Christ, then one knows with Paul
that he can do all things through Christ who strengthens him. For Schuller this is
what it means to be a possibility thinker.
To be saved is to know that Christ forgives me and I now dare to believe
that I am somebody and I can do something for Cod and for my fellow
human beings.
Schuller contends that forgiveness is not simply the negation of our guilt but “a
positive injection of saving and soaring faith!” Repentance follows the experience
of grace. Our thinking is turned around; a whole new world presents itself and we
are called to “caring, risky trust which promises the hope of glory...through noble,
human need-filling achievements.”
Cross bearing is costly. In many and various ways this fact comes to expression:
There is no crown without a cross. There is no success without sacrifice.
There is no resurrection without death...no accomplishment without
commitment, and no commitment without conflict. For there is no
commitment without involvement; there is no involvement without selfdenial; and there is no self-denial without personal sacrifice.
So what is the real Christ-call to self-denial? It is a willingness to be
involved in the spiritual and social solutions in society.
Self-denial is the daring commitment of your name, your reputation, your
integrity, your ego on the altar of God’s call to service. Mark this; it is
important: The greatest Cross any person can carry is to risk sacrificing his
or her ego by risking the embarrassment of a public failure in the pursuit
of some noble, honorable, God-inspired dream. That is positive self-denial.
It is denying your ego the selfish protection from a possible humiliating
failure that might occur if you tried to carryout the divine idea.
No one familiar with the ministry of Robert Schuller can doubt that he speaks
here out of his own experience. Jesus followed a dream to do the Father’s will and
he was crucified. Martin Luther King Jr. had a dream and he was assassinated.
Robert Schuller has followed a dream, and only the naive would judge the
personal cost in terms of the grandeur of the Crystal Cathedral.
© Grand Valley State University
�Schuller, The Cross & the Theology of Self-Esteem, review by Richard A. Rhem Page 7
Cross-bearing in Schuller’s understanding is a call “to do something creative and
constructive.” He rejects the “crusader complex.” While recognizing that
sometimes a situation calls for frontal attack, confrontation, he is also aware that
such an approach is a dangerous style and should be the exception, not the rule,
because violence breeds violence. The difference between a positive, constructive
approach to society’s problems and the confrontational approach is the difference
between generating a social climate of polarization versus creating a
community where creative and mutually respectful dialogue can happen.
Finally, cross-bearing will move the Christian person into the whole spectrum of
human society and its concerns. Schuller will not choose between a gospel of
personal salvation or a social gospel. He proclaims a whole gospel that brings
personal salvation to individuals and addresses the larger societal issues as well.
It is Schuller’s conviction that the idea of self-esteem provides an integrating
factor which can show how the personal and social dimensions of theology can be
interconnected. Schuller thus sees the applicability of the gospel to the full
spectrum of human existence, personal and social. He sees the theology of the
Reformation as reactionary and the sixteenth to the twentieth centuries as the
“reactionary age.” With the conviction regarding the dignity of the human person
and the realization that the deepest human need and longing is for self-esteem,
he is convinced a Christian theology will be able to address the whole person and
the whole of society with its healing gospel ushering in a new age, the age of
mission.
As we reflect on our walk with Jesus Christ through another Lenten pilgrimage
we raise the question of the human condition and what address this time of selfdenial makes to it. In a critique of the idea that low self-esteem is at the heart of
the human dilemma, David G. Myers cites recent data from psychological
research which seems to indicate that there is rather a “self-serving bias” that
characterizes the human person. Myers contends,
It seems true that the most common error in people’s self-images is not
unrealistically low self-esteem, but rather a self-serving bias; not an
inferiority complex, but a superiority complex. In any satisfactory theory
or theology of self-esteem, these two truths must somehow coexist [The
Christian Century, December 1, 1982, pp. 1226-1230).
If Myers is correct, it would not be the first time that truth proved dialectical. We
ought not immediately be forced to choose between Schuller and Myers. Rather,
it would seem that each has hold of an important and critical insight. In all of the
recent research data referred to by Myers we are dealing with the human person
in action—acting man or woman in concrete, existential situations. In our
analysis of Schuller’s position on the human person we saw that there is no dark
shadow, no demonic dimension of human behavior that he denies. His
© Grand Valley State University
�Schuller, The Cross & the Theology of Self-Esteem, review by Richard A. Rhem Page 8
contention regarding the fundamental need of every person for self-esteem says
nothing about concrete human behavior. What he does insist is that that behavior
is a manifestation, not of human nature as human nature, but rather of human
nature as distorted, wrenched loose from its native soil of resting in God. Once
that separation of the person from God occurs, all hell breaks loose, literally, but
it is reaction, not simple action as a reflection of nature.
Thus the recent research data only confirms what we in the church have always
known from Scripture about ourselves: our lives are marked by rebellion, pride,
and self-love in the sense of selfishness.
It is precisely here that Schuller—the pastor and communicator of the gospel —
has so much to teach us. The diagnosis of the situation is dismal; will we be
content simply to declare that dark truth? Can we be content to reinforce what
our hearers already really know but which, if thrown in their faces, will only
reinforce them in their already entrenched rebellion by which they are trying to
deny the truth?
Schuller points us to an alternative which is both theologically and
psychologically sound. There is no need to recite the darkness of the person’s
reactive behavior of which he or she is quite aware; what is needful is to show
that through the creative action and intention of God, he or she is something
quite other than the behavior would seem to indicate. Through an appeal to what
he is, not what he does, one may just succeed in breaking through to the person
because the approach will have been motivated by love, executed with grace, and
grounded in truth. Defenses tumble; the cornered is known, feels no need to rush
to justify himself, senses acceptance, and learns of the reality of forgiveness. Then
it is that deep repentance occurs. It is not a prelude to salvation but a fruit of the
experience of grace. It is in the presence of Jesus Christ in whose face is seen the
good and gracious God that one knows unconditional love and acceptance;
therefore it is in that presence that one dares see oneself deeply and that one
“dies” to those old patterns of reactive behavior that bound him in chains of
selfish existence and created havoc in his human relationships and, most
seriously, alienated him from God.
If the church would really hear Robert Schuller, there would be renewal and
revitalization of major proportions. One of my most respected teachers, Professor
D. Ivan Dykstra, wrote in personal correspondence about Schuller’s basic premise
regarding the dignity of the human person and the basic need for self-worth.
Commenting on Schuller’s book, Self-Esteem:... he judges
it was Bob Schuller in search of a theology, or, better, in search of a Bible.
And this is exactly the right order and the only proper order, despite our
wish and our pretense that we find our Bibles first and then go on from
there. All reformations, vitalizations of the faith, happen by our first
responding to an instinct of authenticity and then going on to re-read our
© Grand Valley State University
�Schuller, The Cross & the Theology of Self-Esteem, review by Richard A. Rhem Page 9
Bibles accordingly or creating our theologies....The great prophets did it
that way, Jesus did, Luther, and so on down the line.
Dykstra then goes on to reflect on his own philosophical work which led him to
an examination of Christian beliefs through use of linguistic analysis. He raises
the question, are our Christian beliefs Christian? His conclusion is
That religious terms, including Christian ones, begin always in the form of
some great, situationally defined, instinctive authenticities. After the first
flush of excitement...there is a time of intellectual and institutional
structuring of the belief. There is a virtually complete discontinuity of
meaning between the universe of discourse of the original intuition and
the institutionalized universe of discourse into which we move the original
terms. In the process the whole original meaning is simply buried. In
Christian contexts, the over-all name for that structuring is
“ecclesiasticizing.” And everything, every dominating concept in the
ecclesiastico-theological structure, loses the authentic Biblical meaning:
faith, sin, Jesus, inspiration, scripture, resurrection have no longer any
discernible connection with the initial biblical intent. Until some
courageous soul, (like Luther, as one example) has, and has the courage to
act on, a new authentic instinct. To attack the ecclesiastical
inauthenticities one does not need to attack the Bible on which they base
themselves; one needs only to “out-Bible” the bibliolaters. To read the
Bible via the instincts is not to invent a new Bible; it is to recover it.
Dykstra suggests that Schuller’s authentic instinctual grasp of a deep biblical
truth has ramifications for the whole theological system; that perhaps Schuller’s
unquestioned Reformed orthodoxy is itself too confined a vehicle to contain the
ferment of his own insight. Such is certainly the case, but Schuller did not write
this slender volume as the complete and final word. He writes a first word
pleading with others to join the question for a more adequate way to bring to
expression his own authentic insight confirmed by the worldwide hearing he has
gained.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
References
Robert H. Schuller. Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, 1983.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19860302
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1986-03-02
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
The Cross and the Theology of Self-Esteem a review of
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on March 2, 1986 entitled "The Cross and the Theology of Self-Esteem a review of", on the book Self-Esteem, written by Robert H. Schuller, it appeared in Perspectives, March, 1986, pp. 10-13. Tags: Way of Jesus, Theology, Unconditional Love, Human Nature, Christian, Self-Esteem, Forgiveness. Scripture references: Robert H. Schuller. Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, 1983. .
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Christian
Forgiveness
Human Nature
Self-Esteem
Theology
Unconditional Love
Way of Jesus
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/c1f6246e5641efc935677d34dc98c262.pdf
b36fcca1b2b21c674c86307eb53569c9
PDF Text
Text
Karl Barth: Preaching and Theological Renewal
Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
Perspectives
A Journal of Reformed Thought
May 1986, pp. 9-11
Karl Barth is the Twentieth Century's towering theological figure. His name calls
to mind the massive Church Dogmatics, theological movements from the early
dialectical theology to the later theology of the Word. We think of the great
European universities, Gottingen, Bonn and Basle, where he taught. Yet, Karl
Barth was at heart a preacher of the Word and the great theological renewal of
which he was the primary catalyst and which reversed the tide of Nineteenth
Century Liberalism had its roots in the local parish, in the pulpit, in the
demanding task of preaching. Not while he was a Professor of Theology but while
he was a village pastor in Safenwil in his native Switzerland did he ignite the fire
that would sweep the continent and dominate the theological discussion of the
West for decades to come. Indeed, when he had become a professor and
published his first volume of dogmatics under the title Christian Dogmatics, he
changed the title and began anew under the title Church Dogmatics, a significant
sign of his recognition that theological reflection arises out of the Church and
must be in the service of the proclamation of the Church.
An early collection of addresses, The Word of God and the Word of Man, gives
eloquent testimony to the fact that it was the setting of worship of the local
congregation and the desperate need of the preacher for a word to speak that sent
Karl Barth to Paul's letter to the Romans to wrestle anew with the Christian
message.
In 1922 Barth was invited to address a ministers’ meeting to give an introduction
into an understanding of his theology. He was embarrassed to hear of his
theology being spoken of so seriously. He said,
... I must frankly confess to you that what I might conceivably call "my
theology" becomes, when I look at it closely, a single point, and that not, as
one might demand, as the least qualification of a true theology, a
© Grand Valley State University
�Karl Barth: Preaching and Theological Renewal
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
standpoint, but rather a mathematical point upon which one cannot stand
- a viewpoint merely.”1
Barth claimed to have not yet even gotten to theology proper even though his
commentary on Romans had sent shock waves through the theological world. He
denied that he or his friends had any desire or intention of starting a new school
of theology. Yet if a new movement was in formation, Barth insisted,
... that it did not come into being as a result of any desire of ours to form a
school or to devise a system; it arose simply out of what we felt to be the
"need and promises of Christian Preaching... " 2
Then Barth shared his own spiritual pilgrimage as a pastor. He had received the
finest of European University training in theology. Yet he writes,
... Once in the ministry, I found myself growing away from these
theological habits of thought and being forced back at every point more
and more upon the specific minister's problem, the sermon. I sought to
find my way between the problem of human life, on the one hand, and the
content of the Bible on the other. As a minister I wanted to speak to the
people in the infinite contradiction of their life, but to speak the no less
infinite message of the Bible, which was as much of a riddle as life.
Continuing in this autobiographical vein, Barth said,
... But it simply came about that the familiar situation of the minister on
Saturday at his desk and on Sunday in his pulpit crystallized in my case
into a marginal note to all theology, which finally assumed the voluminous
form of a complete commentary upon the Epistle to the Romans. 4
The reception of that volume amazed him. As an obscure village pastor it was
difficult to get the work published at all. A small firm in Bern risked the venture,
publishing 1,000 copies of Der Romerbrief in 1919. So, contrary to the current
climate of opinion, it was received with dismay in his own country, but the
shattering experience of the World War in Germany caused its strange message
to find resonance. In retrospect, Barth wrote of the stir he caused,
As I look back upon my course, I seem to myself as one who, ascending the
dark staircase of a church tower and trying to steady himself, reached for
the bannister, but got hold of the bell rope instead. To his horror, he had
then to listen to what the great bell had sounded over him and not over
him alone. 5
But that was looking back. As he spoke to the pastor's conference in 1922, he was
still in the early phase of his theological development in which ten years of
pastoral ministry had engaged him. Barth declared that the critical situation
created by the necessity of having to preach became to him an explanation of the
character of all theology. He raises the question as to whether it would not be for
© Grand Valley State University
�Karl Barth: Preaching and Theological Renewal
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
theology's good if it attempted to be nothing more than this knowledge of the
quest and questioning of the Christian preacher, full of need and full of promise.
... Must not everything else result from this knowledge? 6
Stating simply where he was coming from, Barth said,
... I do not really come to you armed with a new and astonishing theology,
but I want to make my place among you with a theology ... which consists
simply in an understanding of and sympathy for the situation which every
minister faces. ... If then I have not only a viewpoint, but something also of
a standpoint, it is simply the familiar standpoint of the man in the pulpit.
Before him lies the Bible, full of mystery; and before him are seated his
more or less numerous hearers, also full of mystery....What now? asks the
minister. If I could succeed in bringing acutely to your minds the whole
content of that, "What now?," I should have won you not only to my
standpoint, which indeed you occupy already, but also to my viewpoint,
no matter what you might think of my theology. 7
The whole gigantic enterprise of Barth's long and fruitful career was the
outworking of the standpoint of the pulpit. It is in the act of preaching that the
Word of God encounters people where they live, where the Word engages the
world. If the engagement is to prove fruitful, then the preacher must know both
the Word and the world. In Barth's colorful expression, the preacher must preach
with the Bible in one hand and the newspaper in the other. Only then will the
sermon "speak." Only then will the deeper longing of the people be met and the
unspoken question of their lives be addressed.
THE PRESENT HORIZON TO WHICH THE WORD IS SPOKEN
It is in the congregation that the two constants of theological formulation come
together: the message and the present horizon which is represented in the lives of
the people. That present horizon must be understood by the preacher. It provides
the approach, the access to the questions of the people. Barth speaks of the
strange situation of Sunday morning. The strange building with its strange
appointments, its ancient traditions, singing, praying to God! And then - "here is
daring" he says, the preaching. Pervading the whole strange Sunday morning
episode is a sense of expectancy because everything seems to point to the
conviction that God is present. Yet the people come with expectancy not only, but
also with the haunting question, "Is it true?"
... And so they reach, not knowing what they do, toward the unprecedented
possibility of praying, of reading the Bible, of speaking, hearing, and
singing of God. So they come to us, entering into the whole grotesque
situation of Sunday morning which is only the expression of this
possibility raised to a high power. 8
"Is it true?" That is the question beneath the surface that animates the people as
they come to church. They may or may not be consciously cognizant of their
© Grand Valley State University
�Karl Barth: Preaching and Theological Renewal
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
question and certainly they will not let on the seriousness of their quest even if
they recognize it.
People naturally do not shout it out, and least of all into the ears of us
ministers. But let us not be deceived by their silence. Blood and tears,
deepest despairs and highest hope, a passionate longing to lay hold of that
which, or rather of him who overcomes the world because he is its Creator
and Redeemer, its beginning and ending and Lord, a passionate longing to
have the word spoken, the word which promises grace in judgment, life in
death, and the beyond in the here and now, God's word... They expect us
to understand them better than they understand themselves, and to take
them more seriously than they take themselves. 9
It is with that profound sense of the longing of the people, of the deep question of
their life that the preacher must approach the pulpit.
The serious meaning of the situation in our churches is that the people
want to hear the word, that is, the answer to the question by which,
whether they know it or not, they are actually animated, Is it true? The
situation on Sunday morning is related in the most literal sense to the end
of history; it is eschatological, even from the viewpoint of the people, quite
apart from the Bible. That is to say, when this situation arises, history,
further history, is done with, and the ultimate desire of man, the desire for
an ultimate event, now becomes authoritative. 10
Then Barth continues with words that must burn in the consciousness of every
person on whom the call to preach is laid:
... If we do not understand this ultimate desire, if we do not take the people
seriously (I repeat it, more seriously than they take themselves!) at the
point of their life perplexity, we need not wonder if a majority of them,
without becoming enemies of the Church, gradually learn to leave the
Church to itself and us to the kind-hearted and timid. 11
Thus Karl Barth well understood that sensitivity to people, to their concrete
existence lived out in the real world provides the present horizon which must be
addressed - addressed not with a word of speculative philosophy or human
cleverness of whatever sort but addressed by the Word of God.
THE WORD
Before the preacher on Sunday morning is the open Bible, the second pole, the
other side of the equation. If it is imperative that the preacher have a great
sensitivity to his people, it is equally necessary to grasp the message of the Word
of God in order that that message may be translated into the idiom of the
contemporary world. The Word of God must sound forth again. The preacher's
task is to communicate the Everlasting Gospel so that the message comes
through. That message is in the Bible but the message will be released only when
that which occurred in concrete history and thus received a concrete shape and
© Grand Valley State University
�Karl Barth: Preaching and Theological Renewal
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
sound is translated into the shape and sound that will "say" the same thing in a
new historical situation.
Barth had a profound confidence in the Word of God. The movement that he
effected has been labeled the theology of the Word. With the open Bible before
him, the preacher becomes the servant of the Word. We can never abandon the
Bible
... because it has a somewhat uncanny way of bringing into the church
situation its own new and tense and mighty (mightier!) expectancy. If the
congregation brings to the Church the great question of human life and
seeks an answer for it, the Bible contrariwise brings an answer, and seeks
the question corresponding to this answer: it seeks questioning people
who are eager to find and able to understand that its seeking of them is the
very answer to their question. The thoughts of the Bible touch just those
points where the negative factors in life preponderate, casting doubt over
life's possibilities - the very points, that is, where on the human side we
have the question arising, Is it true? ... where that last perplexed craving
has seized him and leads him, let us say, to church. 12
And what happens when the perplexed person full of longing makes his way to
church and is encountered by the Word? Barth answers:
The Bible responds without ado to the man who has awakened to a
consciousness of his condition and to whom certainty has everywhere
begun to waver; and its way of answering him is to ask with him, in its own
way - think of the forty-second Psalm, think of Job - Is it true? Is it true
that there is in all things a meaning, a goal, and a God?13
The Bible takes the question of our life which drives us to church and gives it
depth; shows us that the question beneath all the questions of our life is a
question about God. And further Barth declares,
... as the Bible takes these questions, translating them into the inescapable
question about God, one simply cannot ask or hear the "question" without
hearing the answer. The person who says that the Bible leads us to where
finally we hear only a great NO or see a great void, proves only that he has
not yet been led thither. This NO is really YES. This judgment is grace.
This condemnation is forgiveness. This death is life. This hell is heaven.
This fearful God is a loving Father Who takes the prodigal in his arms. The
crucified is the one risen from the dead. And the explanation of the cross
as such is eternal life ... The question is the answer.14
When the question of our life is understood to be the question of God, then the
question has become the answer; then the reality of a great grace fills the
yearning void and stills the restless fear.
But we are not yet finished. Every Christian sermon finds rootage in the Bible, the
Bible that has the uncanny power, as Barth says, to bring the answer to the
question which animates the human quest. But something critical must happen
© Grand Valley State University
�Karl Barth: Preaching and Theological Renewal
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
in the process by which the words of the text become the Word which is heard in
the words of proclamation.
THE WORD PROCLAIMED IN THE SERMON
The Word of God - what is it? Essentially it is the message of His redemptive
grace through which He effects His purposes of salvation.
Where do we find it? We find it in the Bible. The Bible is not God's Word in some
static sense whereby we can say between these leather covers we have God’s
Word. God's Word is always active, living, dynamic because it is God speaking.
But the Bible is God's Word in the sense that for us, God speaks through and by
means of this word written.
The written words of the Bible are the reverberations of the Word of God which is
the message of God's redemptive grace; or could I use the word "residue?" - the
written words of Scripture are the residue of the "happening Word," and the
connection between the Word and the words is the Spirit of God. It is the Spirit of
God that illumined the Prophet's mind and heart. The Truth exploded in the
person of the Prophet - who spoke the Truth to God's people and wrote the
message so that the message could be communicated further. That Word, which
"happened" to the Prophet and was then put into words, now becomes the
occasion for the Word to happen again.
Every message from a Christian pulpit is tied to a written word. Every message is
an attempt to set free the Word that is in the words. At times we read the Bible
and, closing it, realize that we know nothing of what we have read. But at other
times we read a verse or chapter and feel its truth penetrate to our soul. What is
the difference? Same book. Perhaps the same words. But when the Word
happens, the words become the vehicle of the Spirit Who looses its meaning on
us; the Word happens again.
Sermons are that way. In fact, Karl Barth distinguished the Word written and
the Word proclaimed as two forms of the Word. Again, sometimes the message
strikes no fire, sets no cord of the heart vibrating. Sometimes in a message the
Word happens.
Having distinguished two forms of the Word, Barth added a third - the Word
made flesh - Jesus, the Word incarnate. We read in the opening verses of Isaiah
61 how the prophet connects the agency of the Spirit with "the word of
proclamation.
The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me because the Lord has anointed me;
he has sent me to bring good news to the humble, to bind up the
brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and release to those in
prison; ...
The passage goes on; it is a message of grace and redemption - a beautiful,
hopeful message; it is God's Word proclaimed in words by the prophet anointed
by the Spirit - that is, authorized and authenticated by the Spirit - by God.
© Grand Valley State University
�Karl Barth: Preaching and Theological Renewal
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
The words are familiar because they are the words Jesus selected to use as his
text when he returned to his home synagogue in Nazareth. (See Luke 4:18-19).
That was a tremendous claim that Jesus made and the hometown folks did not
receive it kindly. They drove him out of town. Jesus was claiming the Spirit of
God as His authentication and authorization and he was saying - in me today in
your presence the salvation of God is present. Jesus used the words of the Bible
to point to himself as the incarnation of the Word of God - the one Truth, the
message of redemption and freedom.
The Word of God is the message of a redeeming grace and a saving purpose. It
finds expression through the power of the Spirit of God:
–when the Spirit created Jesus ("conceived by the Holy Spirit");
–when the Spirit enlivens the written words of the Bible so that the Word
happens;
–when the words of Scripture find expression in the proclaimed word of
the sermon and the Spirit drives home the Word behind the sermon and
the written word from which it arises. Such is the Word of God.
Behind the word preached, behind the word written, behind the word made flesh,
is God, the God of grace and salvation.
That powerful conception of the Living Word of God we owe to Barth and that
dynamic and promising view of preaching we owe to him, as well.
It was the task of preaching that drove Karl Barth to the Bible and it was out of
that encounter that the theological renewal of our century arose. It was in the
service of the Church that proclaims Jesus Christ that Karl Barth labored
fruitfully throughout his life. His great legacy to the Church is the recognition
that all theological reflection must arise from and be directed to need and
promise of preaching.
To the end of his life he preached. He was a regular preacher at the Basle jail.
Asked why he went there when he could command the great pulpits of the world,
he replied that if he preached in a cathedral people would come to hear Karl
Barth; at the Basle jail they came to hear the gospel of Jesus Christ. On New
Year's Eve, 1962, he preached at the jail on the text, "My grace is enough." In
beautiful simplicity he declared:
My grace - that is myself: I for you, I as your Saviour in your place - I who
set you free from sin, guilt, misery and death, all of which I have taken on
myself and so away from you - I who show you the father and open up the
path to him - I who let you hear the great Yes which he has spoken to you
too, to you personally, from all eternity ...
That is my grace. And this grace of mine is enough. It is what you really
and truly need, and what you, moreover, may and must have. You can hold
on to it, you can live by it. You can also die with it. It is enough for you just
now, it will also be enough for you to all eternity.
© Grand Valley State University
�Karl Barth: Preaching and Theological Renewal
Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
... But say it to him! He hears it and is glad to hear it from you. He expects
nothing more from you and from me than that we should say it to him as
"the echo of what he says to us: "Yes, your grace is enough." Amen.15
ENDNOTES
1 Karl
Barth, The Word of God and the Word of Man. (New York: Harper and
Row, Harper Torchbook Edition, 1957), p. 97F.
2 Ibid.,
p. 100.
3 Ibid.
4 Ibid.,
p. 101
5 Karl
Barth, Forward to Die Lehre vom Worte Gottes: Prolegomena zur
Christlicken Dogmatik. (Munohen, Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1927). p. IX.
6 Karl
Barth, The Word of God and the Word of Man., p. 102.
7 Ibid.,
p. 103F.
8 Ibid.,
p. 108.
9 Ibid.,
p. 108F.
10 Ibid.,
p. 110.
11 Ibid.,
p. 110F.
12 Ibid.,
p. 116.
13 Ibid.,
p. 117.
14 Ibid.,
p. 120.
15 Karl
Barth, Call For God. "New York: Harper and Row, 1967), p. 83F.
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Barth, Karl, The Word of God and the Word of Man. New York: Harper and Row,
1957.
Barth, Karl, Forward to Die Lejhr vom Worte Gottes: Prolegomena zur
Christlicken Dogmatik. Mundien, Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1927.
Barth, Karl, Call For God. New York: Harper and Row, 1967.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
References
Karl Barth. The Word of God and the Word of Man, 1957, Call For God, 1967, Forward to Die Lehr vom Worte Gottes: Prolegomena zur Christlicken Dogmatik, 1927.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19860501
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1986-05-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Preaching and Theological Renewal
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on May 1, 1986 entitled "Preaching and Theological Renewal", on the book Preaching and Theological Renewal, written by Karl Barth, it appeared in Perspectives, May, 1986, pp. 9-11. Tags: Preaching, Word of God, Theology, Meaning, Church, Grace. Scripture references: Karl Barth. The Word of God and the Word of Man, 1957, Call For God, 1967, Forward to Die Lehr vom Worte Gottes: Prolegomena zur Christlicken Dogmatik, 1927..
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Church
Grace
Meaning
Preaching
Theology
Word of God
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b56bb743eeb61d9017935a4878af8e18.pdf
f2bfaaa9858c2328042028b9e4c47f25
PDF Text
Text
Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Study of the Faith
By Hendrikus Berkhof
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., revised edition, 1987)
1987 Book Review by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Publication of Review Unknown
With the appearance of this revised edition of Hendrikus Berkhof’s Christian
Faith, we are given not only a serious and thorough articulation of the faith from
a Reformed perspective in light of the contemporary world, but we also have a
model of how the systematic theologian must continue to be in dialogue with the
ongoing developments in the historical arena so that new questions that are
raised may elicit new understanding of the faith and the faith may bring new
understanding to the present horizon. First published in Dutch in 1973, the work
has proved highly popular, with a fifth Dutch edition published in 1985. At that
time a significant revision was made. The original English translation based on
the fourth Dutch edition appeared in 1979 and is now replaced by the revised
edition based on the fifth Dutch edition.
In a “Preface to the Revised Edition,” Berkhof tells us how he came to write a
systematic theology in the first place. In May of 1969, amid the student
revolutions that were common throughout the Western world, Berkhof - always a
sensitive listener -heard the cry for greater freedom, equality and brotherhood in
society. His response - intuitive at the time - was to determine to write a
systematic theology. In retrospect he realizes that his response arose out of his
deeply held conviction that what was being demanded in the student revolts
could be gained only by going back “to what is firm and unchangeable, to God
who makes history with his covenant and wants to involve our history in his
covenant.” Thus he wrote this introduction to the study of the faith “against the
backdrop of secularization and polarization.”
Berkhof’s treatment of the faith lives and breathes because it arises out of a
masterly grasp of the biblical material, the history of the interpretation of the
faith, and a passionate engagement with life. An encyclopedic knowledge of the
subject matter is obvious; one is confident the most difficult questions have been
engaged, questions raised by the explosion of knowledge in the modern world;
various options are sympathetically offered demonstrating the genuine openness
of the author to a variety of voices and then, simply and straightforwardly, the
author’s own position is stated.
© Grand Valley State University
�Hendrikus Berkhof, Christian Faith, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
This is theology written for the serious inquirer. Aimed in the large print sections
at a broad audience willing to think seriously about the faith, Berkhof adds small
print sections for more detailed and technical treatment of the subjects under
discussion with bibliographical references for further study.
This is theology written for the person who would both understand the faith from
a Reformed perspective but within a larger ecumenical context in light of modern
knowledge and be able to interpret the faith in the contemporary situation.
Berkhof digs deeply into the biblical tradition in order to transmit that tradition
in new translation. He summarizes his motives in writing,
... as concern for a world which is losing its cohesive power, which is
pluralistically and permissively falling apart, and which is losing its sense
of meaning, purpose and direction.
That is a serious diagnosis. Yet, Berkhof maintains, and those who know him well
confirm, that he is no “prophet of doom.”
If it is true that God watches over his world, the counterforces are also
bound to be there. We see these forces in a widespread quest for the
meaning of life. Precisely in our culture this is a question which
consciously or unconsciously occupies the minds of many.
This is hopeful theology; the author is unequivocally committed to the biblical
faith, sensitively aware of his own context and the broader world scene and
confident in the redemptive purposes of the God of the covenant.
Sensitivity to contextuality marks this revision. Berkhof notes that, about the
time the first Dutch edition appeared in 1973, “contextuality” came into vogue.
Berkhof recognizes the importance of being aware of one’s own context, but
insists each context has its own questions and every context is a proper place to
do theology - not only, for example, a context characterized by poverty or
oppression. He calls for “a mutual awareness of the limiting significance of our
stances” and the necessity of going “beyond the boundaries this imposes upon us
... striving for greater universality and catholicity.”
Berkhof welcomed the opportunity for major revision because “dogmatics does
not stand still.” But, he maintains,
That is not the same as “making progress.” But it does mean that new
angles regularly present themselves beside the earlier ones, or even
dislodge them.
In his preface to the new edition, Berkhof indicates the areas of major revision
which is very helpful in tracing his own ongoing understanding and
interpretation of the faith and the moving context of our times.
© Grand Valley State University
�Hendrikus Berkhof, Christian Faith, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
One new paragraph is added: “Revelation and Experience,” paragraph 10. Here
he deals with the concern with the experience which precedes the revelational
encounter and leads up to it. The last two decades have seen a return to concern
with such experience after the sharp reaction against any such consideration in
the wake of Karl Barth. In typically balanced fashion, Berkhof presents the
subject under three perspectives:
a. Revelation is directed to people in the world of their concrete
experiences.
b. This approach always both determines and delimits at the same time.
c. Experience itself can never bridge the gap between the person and
revelation.
The contemporary Christological discussion is given lucid and concise treatment
in the small print section on pages 291-297. Within the compass of these pages
one is brought up to date on where the discussion has come with pages 294-297
rewritten for the revision.
Berkhof suggests that the new nuances of the revision will further be sensed by
reference to the subject index, to such subjects as Auschwitz, liberation theology,
experience, feminist theology and Pneuma-Christology.
For all the value of the work of revision, the great contribution of Christian Faith
remains its contemporary statement of the meaning of the faith. For readers not
yet familiar with Berkhof’s work, we must point to the remarkable discussion of
the attributes of God under the headings “Holy Love,” “The Defenseless Superior
Power,” and “The Changeable Faithfulness.” The headings themselves should be
enough to demand examination and the examination will not disappoint.
Another great strength of this work is its focus on the history of the covenant. The
history of Israel is taken seriously and the Old Testament is allowed to speak for
itself before it is understood from the perspective of Jesus Christ.
In contrast to the all too typical dogmatic treatment where, as in the Apostles’
Creed, the exposition jumps from the Creator to Christ with a treatment of the
fact of sin interspersed, giving the impression that Jesus drops out of heaven,
Berkhof follows the redemptive drama historically.
There are ... not only vertical incursions from eternity, but there is also a
horizontal course of God with us through time. Therefore following his treatment
of “Revelation” and “God,” Berkhof discussed “Creation,” “Israel,” “Jesus the
Son,” and “The New Community.”
The latter discussion of the Church is creative and innovative, challenging the
static descriptions of the older dogmatics. In the paragraph on “The Church as
Institute,” for example, Berkhof departs from the usual institutionalized means of
© Grand Valley State University
�Hendrikus Berkhof, Christian Faith, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
transmitting the grace of God - the marks of the Church. He suggests rather nine
elements: instruction, baptism, sermon, discussion, Lord’s Supper, diaconate,
worship service, office and church order. His final paragraph on the Church
moves the focus outward, the orientation to the world, as he discusses “The
People of God as the Firstfruits.”
The final three sections treat “The Renewal of Man,” “The Renewal of the World,”
and “All Things New,” handling aspects of the faith that especially address the
question of meaning which Berkhof senses as at the heart of the Western context.
Christian Faith is theology at its best: biblically rooted, aware of the transmission
of the tradition, written in dialogue with the ultimate concern of the present
context. It is up to date but not trendy; it is sensitive to the spirit of the age, but
transcending that spirit. It is written out of faith for faith. It is the best available
textbook for students of theology. Preachers will find it “preaches” well and
congregations who receive it via the sermon will be stimulated, challenged and
inspired.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
References
Hendrikus Berkhof, Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Study of the Faith, 1987
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19870101
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1987-01-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Study of the Faith
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on January 1, 1987 entitled "Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Study of the Faith", on the book Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Study of the Faith, written by Hendrikus Berkhof, it appeared in Pespectives, January, 1988, pp. 14-15. Tags: Meaning, Scriptures, Faith, Theology. Scripture references: Hendrikus Berkhof, Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Study of the Faith, 1987.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Faith
Meaning
Scriptures
Theology
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b8a909cba54403e49ab4d428189c33ea.pdf
cd619248d14037223dca58b02bbc86d4
PDF Text
Text
Praying To An Absent God
Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
The Church Herald
The Magazine of the Reformed Church in America
January 1987, pp. 9-11
It is painful to pray to an absent God; most of us have felt that pain at some time
in our lives. One feels alone, cut off; no answer comes and no light penetrates the
thick darkness; it is the winter of the soul and one fears the killing snows will
never pass.
The Psalms are replete with expressions of lament and plea, of complaint and
pathetic cry. They are expressions of deep human feeling and experience, the
anguish of the soul and longing of the heart. Jesus found articulation of the
desolation and horror, of the aloneness, the forsakenness that he experienced in
crucifixion by reciting a Psalm. His piercing cry of excruciating pain, “My God,
my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” comes from Psalm 22. It has been
understood as the expression of ultimate aloneness and dereliction, and it is that.
Yet, those chilling words are not the whole Psalm. To be sure, there are few more
poignant expressions of pain anywhere than Psalm 22. However, some biblical
expositors suggest that what has come to us as a word from the cross was part of
a recitation of the Psalm by Jesus. In the depths of anguish, he reached for the
Psalmist’s expression by which to give utterance to what he was experiencing, but
he most likely recited the Psalm to its end and it ends in an expression of trust.
Light has broken through, the darkness is scattered, praise returns to the
Psalmist’s heart. Thus, the recitation was perhaps the consummate act of trust by
Jesus.
That is the way it is in the rich and varied outpouring of spiritual life that we find
in the Psalms. Lament, plea, complaint, even angry challenge to God are
common, but before the Psalm is concluded, some resolution has been
experienced, a sense of being heard and helped is declared and praise ensues.
That is the way it is in all cases save one; Psalm 88 is a cry in the darkness and
the Psalm ends with thick darkness still enveloping the Psalmist’s soul. There is
no lightening of the burden, no assuaging of the pain, no sense of being heard, no
© Grand Valley State University
�Praying To An Absent God
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
promise of healing. Psalm 88 is a bitter cry to an absent God and the soul finds
no relief.
O Lord, my God, by day I call for help,
by night I cry aloud in Thy presence.
But no help is found;
I ... have become like a man beyond help,
like a man who lies dead...
Still the Psalmist persists;
I have called upon thee, 0 Lord, every day and spread out my hands
in prayer to thee.
…
But, Lord, I cry to thee,
my prayer comes before thee in the morning.
Why hast thou cast me off, 0 Lord,
why dost thou hide thy face from me?
The Psalm ends with these pathetic words;
Thou hast taken lover and friend far from me,
and parted me from my companions.
The mystery of suffering prevails; no shaft of light breaks the grip of darkness.
Thunderous silence is heaven’s mute reply; prayer is raised to no avail, for God is
absent. Leaf through the Psalter; see if Psalm 88 is not unique in that no final
resolution is found, no word of hope offered, no sense of grace expressed.
It stands alone; still it has found a place in Israel’s hymnbook. It is not familiar; it
would not be on anyone’s “best-loved” list. Yet, within the rich variety of spiritual
expression in the Psalms, its voice is heard. Then perhaps we should “hear” it.
There is a temptation to limit our devotional reading to a few selected favorites.
And there are so many inspiring, uplifting passages of Scripture, why pause to
consider this painful cry? One would seldom find this text listed for Sunday
morning’s message; its positive possibilities are severely limited. Who wants to
come to church to hear of the agony of praying to an absent God? Perhaps we
should simply cut this Psalm out of the collection; in fact, by our selective usage,
that is precisely what we have done. Why stop to consider Psalm 88, then?
Because life is like that even though it is threatening to our traditional piety to
admit it, even though the fact is rarely mentioned in church.
But life for many is like that; for some all the time, and for all, some of the time.
The experience of praying to an absent God is a not uncommon experience even
though we do not speak much of it. Honesty demands that we acknowledge that
© Grand Valley State University
�Praying To An Absent God
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
even for the child of God there are periods of pain that know no relief, times of
deep darkness when no ray of light brings comfort.
In The Message of the Psalms, Walter Brueggemann speaks of Psalm 88 as
leaving us “lingering in the unresolve, dangling in the depth of the pit without any
explicit sign of rescue.” He goes on to assert,
That is an important statement to have in the repertoire, precisely because
life is like that. Faith does not always resolve life. There is not for every
personal crisis of disorientation a way out, if only we can press the right
button. Too much pastoral action is inclined and tempted to resolve
things, no matter how the situation really is. Faith is treated like the great
answer book. (p. 78)
Sometimes when the way is hard and bitter and God seems deaf to our urgent
appeal, we are made to feel that the problem must be with us - our sin and guilt,
our feeble faith or faint devotion. It must be me; no aspersion must be cast on
God.
Clichés trip lightly over the tongues of the untroubled, assured in their safe
tranquility that if there is a communication blackout, the problem lies not on the
side of deity. Thereby we often add to the sufferer’s burden of alienation a load of
guilt, undercutting perhaps the last vestige of self-confidence and self-worth.
Not so Psalm 88 and that is why it is so important that it has found place in the
Psalter. Brueggemann writes,
Psalm 88 is adamant in its insistence, and it is harsh on Yahweh’s
unresponsiveness. The truth of this Psalm is that Israel lives in a world
where there is no answer. We are not offered any speculative answer... The
Psalm is not interested in any theological reason Yahweh may have. The
Psalm is from Israel’s side. It engages in no speculation. It asks no
theological question. It simply reports on how it is to be a partner of
Yahweh in Yahweh’s inexplicable absence. (p. 78F)
We have not done well with inexplicable absence, with unanswered questions,
with a silent God. To that extent we have not always been honest with human
experience or honest with God and we have not joined in solidarity with the pain
of the wounded ones.
We are nervous before the mystery of suffering. We want to be in control, to
manage the situation, to bring a cure; but sometimes we can only be present to
the pain and wait in silence.
In his meditation, Out of Solitude, Henri Nouwen writes of the ministry of Jesus.
He points out,
© Grand Valley State University
�Praying To An Absent God
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
What we see, and like to see, is cure and change. But what we do not see
and do not want to see is care, the participation in the pain, the solidarity
in suffering, the sharing in the experience of brokenness. And still, cure
without care is as dehumanizing as a gift given with a cold heart. (p. 31F)
The persons who mean the most to us, Nouwen contends, are the ones who can
be silent with us in moments of despair, who will stay with us in an hour of grief,
who can tolerate not-knowing, not-curing, not-healing and face with us the
reality of our powerlessness. (p. 34)
That, insists Nouwen, is the person who cares. But our tendency is to run from
painful realities, to try to change them. We are more comfortable as rulers,
controllers, manipulators, but sometimes the human circumstance will not yield
to the “quick fix.” Such “cure” without care is violent and insensitive; it leaves the
suffering one even more alone in her pain.
Nouwen condemns the preachers who reduce mysteries to problems and offer
Band-Aid-type solutions. It is only out of compassionate solidarity with the one
suffering that healing comes forth.
Those who do not run away from our pains but touch them with
compassion bring healing and new strength. The paradox indeed is that
the beginning of healing is in the solidarity with the pain. (Reaching Out,
p. 43)
When there are no answers, when pain will not be alleviated, it just may be that
the only comfort would be the comfort of such a word as Psalm 88 that
acknowledges the pain that knows no healing. According to Brueggemann,
... The speaker is shunned and in darkness. The last word in the Psalm is
darkness. The last word is darkness. The last theological word is darkness.
Nothing works. Nothing is changed. Nothing is resolved. All things deny
life. And worst of all is the “shunning.” (p. 80)
Brueggemann raises the obvious question, “So, what is one to do about it?” The
answer he gives is, “Wait.” That, he says, is what Israel has been doing for a long
time. Wait or speak it again; keep on crying out.
One has two options: either to wait in silence, or to speak it again. What
one may not do is to rush to an easier Psalm, or to give up on Yahweh. (p.
80)
Why does this Psalm appear in the Bible? As stated above, life is like that and the
Bible addresses life - all of life, not just the pleasant parts. But beyond that, this is
not a psalm of mute depression. It is still speech, speech addressed to God.
© Grand Valley State University
�Praying To An Absent God
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
In the bottom of the Pit, Israel still knows it has to do with Yahweh. (p. 80)
Sometimes God’s presence is most poignant precisely in the absence. Jesus cried,
“My God, my God, why are you absent?” and paradoxically, that is the time and
place of God’s nearness, of the ultimate expression of his love.
When there is no answer, when one wearies of speech, then it is that one can only
wait; but that word found frequently in the Psalms is not simply passive
resignation, but rather “hoping intensely.” Sometimes one can only hope
intensely in the darkness, conscious of a presence in the absence.
Psalm 88 is not scripture’s only word, nor is it the last word. But in some
situations of human suffering it may be the only word that can evoke any
resonance in the anguished soul. We must have enough trust in the good and
gracious God to let that word come to expression, to stay with it and let it be the
present word of the God who is currently known only as absence. To wait in such
a time of not-knowing and non-healing is the most helpful support that the
sufferer can receive and the most caring ministry another can offer.
Within history there is not always resolution;
beyond history there is resurrection.
Thanks be to God!
References:
Walter Brueggemann. The Message of the Psalms. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984.
Henri Nouwen. Out of Solitude. Notre Dame: Ave Maria Press, 1974.
Henri Nouwen. Reaching Out. Garden City: Doubleday and Co., Inc., 1975.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
References
Walter Brueggemann, The Message of the Psalms, 1984, Henri Nouwen, Out of Solitude, 1974, Reaching Out, 1975
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19870116
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1987-01-16
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Praying to an Absent God
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The Church School Herald Journal
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on January 16, 1987 entitled "Praying to an Absent God", it appeared in The Church Herald, pp. 9-11. Tags: Suffering, Prayer, Trust. Scripture references: Walter Brueggemann, The Message of the Psalms, 1984, Henri Nouwen, Out of Solitude, 1974, Reaching Out, 1975.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Prayer
Suffering
Trust
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/9b2ceae1278f1251b86aea98cafa86b8.pdf
d8ca92c9fc2a81a6f8c39414ac14413d
PDF Text
Text
An Accident of the Incarnation
Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
Perspectives
A Journal of Reformed Thought
February 1987, pp. 4-6
The maleness of the human person in whom God was incarnate was an
accident of the incarnation. That is the thesis of this essay, which contends
that in another epoch of human history, in another cultural context, the
incarnation of the Word might have found expression in feminine form.
Accident is used here in its technical meaning in philosophical discourse,
in logic, as “something contingent, not necessary, non-essential, or that
might not have been,” not in its more popular meaning of “anything that
happens, an event, especially an unforeseen contingency, a disaster something to do with chance or fortune. Accident as used here means
specifically “a non-essential accompaniment.”
Thus the contention is not that the maleness of the incarnation of the
Word in its concrete historical manifestation in Jesus of Nazareth was a
matter contingent, a chance occurrence apart from the predetermined will
of God; on the contrary, given the time in which God took time for us,
maleness was the historical garb chosen to accomplish the purpose of
revelation. However, the gender of the incarnation was determined by the
historical context of its manifestation; it was not determined by its
purpose, namely, the revelation of God in human form.
The same contention can be made from the opposite side using another
technical philosophical term: the essence of the incarnation was the
revelation of God in human form. The essential matter which came to
expression was the humanity of the Word. To accomplish the essence of
God’s purpose, to be revealed in human form, it was necessary to select a
gender, male or female. But the selection of gender was determined by the
time of the incarnation, not the essential purpose of the incarnation.
The essence of the incarnation was God in human form;
the accident of the incarnation was God in a human form of male
gender.
© Grand Valley State University
�An Accident of the Incarnation
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
Given the patriarchial society of the world into which Jesus came, the
purpose of the incarnation was best accomplished by the utilization of a
human person of male gender. But the essential element of Jesus in whose
face we have been shown “the light of revelation - the revelation of the
glory of God ...” was his humanity, not his male gender.
In The Preparation of the World for Christ, a history of the world into
which Jesus was born, David R. Breed describes the historical
circumstances which prevailed at the time of Jesus’ birth and points to the
providential preparation of the large tapestry of history which made the
time of incarnation “the fullness of time” - a time in which the revelation of
God in human form took root and flourished and gained the ascendency
over the great power of imperial Rome. It was one world united under the
pax Romana, pervaded by Hellenistic culture, drawn together by the
Greek language; a world empty of soul, hungering for a true word. Breed
makes an interesting case for the preparation of the moment chosen for
the supreme revelation of God in our time and space. It was indeed a
Kairos time, a most opportune moment for God manifest in the flesh.
However, recognizing a providential purpose operative in the course of
human history preparing the world for the incarnation of the Word must
not be extended to include the patriarchial character of Jewish society at
that moment as essential to God’s purpose to reveal himself in human
form. If that were the case, then the argument being made here would fall;
then, indeed, not simply revelation in our humanity, but revelation in
humanity of male gender would be essential and the superiority of male
gender as reflective of God would be established. It is that that I am
denying by asserting that the maleness of the incarnation of the Word was
an accident, not an essential mark of the incarnation. Otherwise, we would
be saying something about God which would distort the biblical image.
Were male gender the essence of the incarnation, maleness would
necessarily be ascribed to God. But such ascription would run contrary to
the biblical understanding of God in spite of the fact that God is referred to
as Father. Such reference is found in the Old Testament as well as in Jesus’
usage. It is also found in other religions of the ancient world. But the use of
Father in reference of God is not a statement about gender.
In the later of the two Creation accounts (Genesis 1:1-2:4), we read,
So God created man in his own image;
in the image of God he created him;
male, and female, he created them. (11:27)
Without getting into the complexities of the biblical idea of the image of
God, it is obvious that in whatever that image consists, it embraces both
maleness and femaleness. Maleness and femaleness reflect something of
© Grand Valley State University
�An Accident of the Incarnation
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
God who must incorporate both within the Divine Being. Thus, God
transcends our human sexual differentiation.
It is interesting to note that even our human sexual differentiation is not
an absolute differentiation; maleness and femaleness are the opposite
poles of the human sexual spectrum. The individual finds a place not at
one pole or the other, but somewhere on the continuum that connects the
poles. In this, the human person would appear to be a reflection of the
image of God who incorporates both male and female qualities and
transcends sexual differentiation.
Why, then, is God called Father in the Bible? As indicated above, the
concreteness of the incarnation demanded a particular time, place, people,
gender and person; the “scandal of particularity” comes to expression in
our claim that the infinite and eternal God is revealed in the face of Jesus
of Nazareth, born in Bethlehem during the reign of Caesar Augustus. An
aspect of that concreteness was the patriarchal society and thus the use of
Father. The “Father” image is so deeply ingrained that one wonders if it
could ever be replaced by another image. It has been called in question,
however.
Hans Küng has raised the question about the appropriateness of the name
Father. He asserts that such usage is problematic in the age of women’s
emancipation. He asks,
Should we without more ado apply to God a name implying sexual
differentiation? Is God a man, masculine, virile? Are we not making
God in the image of man, to be more exact of a male human being?
(On Being a Christian, p. 310)
He points out that the designation of God as Father is not determined
solely by Yahweh’s uniqueness, but
appears to be also sociologically conditioned, bearing the imprint of
the male-oriented society. (Ibid.)
But in the Old Testament, God is not “forthrightly male,” but has also
feminine, maternal features. Today, however, we must be clear about this.
He contends,
The designation “Father” will be misunderstood unless it is
regarded, not in contrast to “Mother,” but symbolically
(analogously): “Father” as patriarchal symbol - also with
matriarchal features - of a transhuman, transsexual ultimate reality.
Today less than ever may the one God be seen merely within a
masculine-paternal framework, as an all-too-masculine theology
used to present him. The feminine-maternal element in him must
© Grand Valley State University
�An Accident of the Incarnation
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
also be recognized. To address God as Father can then no longer be
used as the religious justification of a social paternalism at the
expense of woman or in particular for the permanent suppression
of the feminine element in the Church (or ministry). (Ibid.)
The God revealed in the human form of Jesus is a God of redeeming love,
not a God who is in fact
the projection of instilled fears, of human domination, lust for
power, arrogance and vindictiveness. This Father-God is not a
theocratic God who might serve as an excuse - if only indirectly - for
the representatives of totalitarian systems, whether piousecclesiastical, or impious-atheistic, who attempt to take his place
and exercise his sovereign rights. These men become holy or unholy
gods of orthodox teaching and absolute discipline, of law and order,
of dictatorship and planning, regardless of the claims of other
human beings. (p. 312)
Is there an image for God that might better reflect the divine-human
relationship, avoiding the possible misunderstanding and exploitation of
the father image? Alternating the pronouns referring to God, she and he, is
being done by some; also the use of “father-mother” finds occasional
expression. Our biblical understanding of God certainly justifies such
usage even though it may not find easy acceptance. “Parent” is a
possibility, although not carrying the emotional weight of father or
mother.
Anne E. Carr of the Divinity School in Chicago suggests that some would
move away from the parental images
... which can inculcate a relation of childish rather than adult
religious dependence. That is to say, while parental images express
compassion, acceptance, guidance, and discipline, they do not
express the mutuality, maturity, cooperation, responsibility, and
reciprocity demanded by personal and political experience today.
Carr refers to Sallie McFague who shows how the father image
has expanded into patriarchalism as a “metaphysical worldview,” a
“mindset” that becomes a “whole way of ordering reality.”
McFague argues that this dominant father image must be countered with
many images; no one image will suffice. She points out that we image God
according to that which is most important to us humanly and suggests
“friend” as perhaps the most appropriate image. Carr affirms this image,
claiming that
© Grand Valley State University
�An Accident of the Incarnation
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
The metaphor of God as friend corresponds to the feminist ideal of
“communal personhood,” a relationship among persons, groups,
and lifestyles that is non-competitive, mutually enhancing, and
desperately needed in our world.
Jurgen Moltmann supports the appropriateness of the friend image. He
writes,
The friend of God does not live any longer “under God” but with
and in God.
One finds this demonstrated in the life and death of Jesus who reveals a
God who suffers for us and invites us into a fellowship of suffering for
others.
I have argued that the maleness of the Word of God was the accident of the
incarnation, its essence being the revelation of God in human form. This is
confirmed by Karl Barth who prefaces paragraph 15 of Church Dogmatics
I, 2, “The Mystery of Revelation” this way:
The mystery of the revelation of God in Jesus Christ consists in the
fact that the eternal Word of God chose, sanctified and assumed
human nature and existence into oneness with Himself ... (p. 122)
In section 3, the splendid discussion of the virgin birth entitled “The
Miracle of Christmas,” Barth speaks of the human involvement in the birth
of the Word being
... only in the form of non-willing, non-achieving, non-creative,
non-sovereign man, only in the form of man who can merely
receive, merely be ready, merely let something be done to and with
himself. (p. 191)
He is in no way denying that the woman has her share in the
determination of man.
Only a foolish ideology of manhood or an equally foolish ideology of
womanhood can deny her her share in this determination of man.
(p. 193)
But Barth argues there can be no talk of an equality of the two sexes in this
respect.
God alone knows whether the history of humanity, nations and
states, art, science, economics, has in fact been and is so
predominantly the history of males, the story of all the deeds and
works of males, as it appears to be, or whether, for all that, the
© Grand Valley State University
�An Accident of the Incarnation
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
hidden factor of female co-operation and participation has not, in
fact, always turned the scale in a way of which chronicles, acts and
monuments give us no information, because it involves an element
which is deeply concealed both psychologically and sociologically,
although it was not and did not need to be less potent for that
reason. Be that as it may, if there had been a matriarchate instead
of a patriarchate ... nevertheless it is - well, “significant,” that the
historical consciousness of all nations, states and civilizations
begins with the patriarchate. Male action is significant for the world
history and characteristic of the world history with which we are
acquainted, as it has been and actually is for us, even if it is not so in
itself. (p. 193)
Therefore, Barth contends it is precisely the male participation that had to
be set aside. What takes place in the mystery of Christmas is not world
history and it is not the work of human genius.
His eternal generation of this eternal Son excludes a human
generation, because a human father and human generation, the
whole action of man the male, can have no meaning here. Therefore
it is the very absence of masculine action that is significant here. (p.
194)
Of interest in this discussion is not Barth’s argument for the virgin birth as
a sign of the one who was fully in our history but did not arise from our
history; rather, it is his contention that the virgin birth signified the setting
aside of precisely the male domination of which history is full. The sign is a
judgment on the willing, achieving, creative, sovereign action of the male.
If one grants Barth’s contention that the sign of the virgin is a judgment on
male domination, then it would confirm the argument pursued above that
maleness was not essential to but accidental to the incarnation of the
Word. To read back into the God of revelation sexual differentiation,
specifically maleness, is to distort the revelation of God in Jesus Christ.
And on the basis of such a distortion, to justify male domination of the
Church and its ministry is totally without warrant.
Carr cites the ethicist Daniel Maguire, who argues,
Sexism is the elementary human sin. If the essential human
molecule is dyadic, male/female, the perversion of one part of the
dyad perverts the other. And, to distort femininity and masculinity,
the constitutive ingredients of humanity, is to distort humanity
itself.
Maguire welcomes feminine participation in theological discussion which
will bring a new wholeness to the public conversation in the Church. The
© Grand Valley State University
�An Accident of the Incarnation
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
incorporation of affect, mysticism and concrete experience into theological
and ethical discussion and the denial of the almighty, macho-masculine
God whose exclusionary symbolism is utterly arbitrary will move us
toward wholeness without distortion.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19870202
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1987-02-02
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
An Accident of the Incarnation
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on February 2, 1987 entitled "An Accident of the Incarnation", it appeared in Perspectives, February 1987, pp. 4-6. Tags: Incarnation, Creation.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Creation
Incarnation
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/126ba9825c60dbc7351e7d14ab62377b.pdf
fb19e087d6d022f041936c8bd7663b6c
PDF Text
Text
Diversity in Faith – Unity in Christ
By Shirley C. Guthrie, Jr.
(Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1986)
Book Review by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Publication of Review Unknown
This is a book addressed to the Church, to the Christian community. It is not an
apologetic to instruct the inquirer in the content of Christian faith; rather, it is an
explanation of the respective postures, attitudes and nuances of orthodoxy,
liberalism and pietism. Guthrie's purpose is to enable self-understanding within
each of these camps and thereby to create the possibility of understanding across
the spectrum of the Church.
Although a broad spectrum of the Christian community might agree on a basic
definition of what it is to be a Christian, as soon as the discussion gets to specific
theological, ethical and practical implications of Christian faith, division will be
immediate - “Churches choose up sides, get red in the face, and either yell at each
other or refuse to talk together at all.” To address the all too often rancorous
divisions within the Christian community, indeed, within the same confessional
family, denomination and local congregation, Guthrie suggests as a starting point
the question: “Why is it that people who read the same Bible and talk about the
same Christ, even when they belong to the same church, have so much trouble
getting along with each other and committing themselves to a common Christian
witness in the world?” His answer is that, before conversation begins, we all bring
certain “conscious or unconscious presuppositions about the meaning of
Christian faith and life that determine what we are able and willing - and unable
and unwilling - to hear from scripture, from fellow Christians, or even from God!”
Thus Guthrie sets for himself the task of identifying and clarifying the
presuppositions operative and determinative of the respective postures of
Orthodoxy, Liberalism and Pietism. Part I is divided into four sections
(Liberalism being treated in two sections, Moralism and Social Activism). Each
section is divided into a “In defense of ...” and “Criticism of ...” This first part is
largely descriptive with Guthrie giving a fair and balanced analysis of the
strengths and weaknesses of each position.
Part II is Guthrie's positive contribution toward transcending the division “Beyond Orthodoxy, Liberalism, and Pietism.” He suggests as a key to getting
© Grand Valley State University
�Guthrie, Diversity in Faith-Unity in Christ, Reviewed by Richard A. Rhem
Page
2
beyond the three conflicting positions, the concept of “witness.” A Christian, he
contends, is first and last simply a witness to Jesus Christ and to begin there, he
claims, will enable one to avoid the weaknesses and combine the strengths of the
three positions described in the first part of the book. The last three chapters
discuss what it means to witness to Jesus Christ, to the suffering love of God, and
to the liberating power of God. Guthrie's discussion is helpful and convincing.
This book would make a fine text for an adult education class in which there was
a serious purpose to deepen one’s own understanding of the faith and
commitment to Christian service, while broadening one’s perspective on the
essential unity of the faith that comes to expression with varying accents and
nuances. A more gracious spirit within the Church and a more effective witness
without would result from a study of this text.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19870401
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1987-04-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Diversity in Faith - Unity in Christ
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on April 1, 1987 entitled "Diversity in Faith - Unity in Christ", on the book Diversity in Faith - Unity in Christ, written by Shirley C. Guthrie, it appeared in Perspectives, November 1987, p. 15. Tags: Diversity, Community of Faith.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Community of Faith
Diversity
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/a43c31c5c10a81787a95d4bdb209c65c.pdf
829061ce4613b83c2d29a96e9e07b1c8
PDF Text
Text
Plurality and Ambiguity: Hermeneutics, Religion, Hope
By David Tracy
(San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987)
Book Review by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Publication of Review Unknown
“At times, interpretations matter. On the whole, such times are times of
cultural crisis. The old ways of understanding and practice, even
experience itself, no longer seem to work.” (p. 7)
We live in such a time, according to David Tracy, a crisis of tradition, culture, and
language so that we can no longer simply move forward by means of the usual
ways of experiencing, understanding, acting or interpreting. Tracy names our
time “post-modern” - a vague and ambiguous expression he admits; yet “there we
are,” he avers.
This being Tracy’s conviction, he continues to pour his energy into the
interpretation of interpretation theory.
“A crisis of interpretation within any tradition eventually becomes a
demand to interpret this very process of interpretation.”
Tracy stands within the crisis of Western culture.
“... shaped by the seventeenth-century scientific revolution, the
eighteenth-century Enlightenment, and the nineteenth-century industrial
revolution and explosion of historical consciousness. We late twentiethcentury Westerners find ourselves in a century where human-made mass
death has been practiced, where yet another technological revolution is
occurring, where global catastrophe or even extinction could occur. We
find ourselves unable to proceed as if all that had not happened, is not
happening, or could not happen.” (p. 8)
In such a time, the question of interpretation itself becomes central. Although the
discussion of interpretation theory becomes extremely technical and one runs
into the technical jargon in Tracy causing the uninitiated to despair; nevertheless
the technical discussion is not simply an academic game without practical
relevance or application, for, Tracy contends,
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, Plurality and Ambiguity, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
“Every time we act, deliberate, judge, understand, or even experience, we
are interpreting. To understand at all is to interpret. To act well is to
interpret a situation demanding some action and to interpret a correct
strategy for that action ... To be human is to act reflectively, to decide
deliberately, to understand intelligently, to experience fully. Whether we
know it or not, to be human is to be a skilled interpreter.” (p. 9)
The theme of the present work is conversation. Tracy offers conversation as a
model for all interpretation. He calls it a “game.”
The movement in conversation is questioning itself. Neither my present
opinions on the question nor the texts’ original response to the question,
but the question itself, must control every conversation. A conversation ...
is not a confrontation. It is not a debate. It is not an exam. It is questioning
itself. It is a willingness to follow the question wherever it may go. It is dialogue. (p. 18)
Understanding will move forward only where conversation exists; where one says
what one means as accurately as possible; where one listens to and respects what
the other (person, text, or event) says however different or other; where one is
willing to correct or defend one’s opinion if challenged by a conversation partner,
willing to argue if necessary, to confront if necessary, and to change one’s mind if
evidence suggests it.
Any act of interpretation involves at least three realities: a phenomenon to be
interpreted, someone interpreting the phenomenon, and the interaction between
the first two realities. Understanding these three realities is the problem of
interpretation. Tracy suggests it is best to begin with the phenomenon to be
interpreted (a law, an action, a ritual, a symbol, a text, a person, an event). For
purposes of his discussion, Tracy suggests the classic texts, “Those texts that bear
an excess and permanence of meaning, yet always resist definitive
interpretation.” Tracy contends,
The classic is important hermeneutically because it represents the best
examples of what we seek: an example of both radical stability become
permanence and radical instability become excess of meaning through
ever-changing receptions. (p. 14)
To understand is to interpret and conversation with a classic text is to find
oneself caught up in the questions and answers worthy of a free mind.
Conversation is thus an exploration of possibilities in the search for truth. One
who enters upon such a conversation does so with the understanding that what is
other from one’s pre-understanding may be possible. A good interpreter
possesses an “analogical imagination” (a concept developed by Tracy in his book
by that title) by which the interpreter is able to move from otherness, to
possibility, to similarity-in-difference. Persons willing to risk conversation in
interpretation are at a disadvantage from those who will not take the risk because
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, Plurality and Ambiguity, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
such a person begins with the possibility they may be wrong. But only such
openness can advance understanding in the cultural crisis in which we find
ourselves, a crisis which has revealed the poverty of both the Enlightenment and
the Romantic Movement which was its reaction. As the Enlightenment unfolded,
having freed us from the weight of certain oppressive traditions allowing us to
dare to think for ourselves, it became trapped in ever-narrower models of what
could count as truth until it retreated into a formal and technical rationality.
But we cannot follow the reaction of romanticism thus becoming the latest
expressions of the “unhappy consciousness” of the romantic. The
“remystification of all reality” is not an option.
It cannot be a pretense that the imagined joys of first naiveté can be ours.
It cannot be the disparagement of science and the retreat into privacy. (p.
31)
How do we move forward? Tracy suggests that two contemporary methods offer
hope: historical critical methods and literary critical methods. Both affirm the
necessity of method and the necessity of rejecting methologism. Tracy discusses
the effects of historical critical and literary critical methods on our understanding
of the classics of Western culture so that there is no longer such a thing as an
unambiguous tradition - no innocent readings of the classics. And where does
that leave us? Tracy contends,
The historicity of every text, interpreter, and conversation has been
clarified by historical consciousness. Certainty is no more. But relative
adequacy for all interpretations remains an ideal worth striving for. (p. 39)
Tracy grounds this contention in the third chapter: “Radical Plurality: The
Question of Language,” a discussion of the relationships among language,
knowledge and reality and an assertion of the results of critical methods – the
radical plurality in language, knowledge and reality alike.
“‘Reality’ is the one word that should always appear within quotation
marks.”
That claim of Nabokov, says Tracy, best expresses one major strand of postmodern reflection on language. Both positivism and romanticism held language
to be secondary, derivative, coming after the fact of discovery and cognition,
peripheral to the real thing. But language analysis has demonstrated its social
and historical character. Our understanding comes through particular and public
languages and language “shapes” reality - even constitutes reality. The result of
this insight has been the dethroning of the autonomous ego from its false
pretensions to mastery and certainty. We are inevitably shaped by the history we
are born into. We are left with plurality and ambiguity.
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, Plurality and Ambiguity, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
Plurality seems an adequate word to suggest the extraordinary variety that
any study of language shows, and any study of the variety of receptions of
any classic documents. Ambiguity may be too mild a word to describe the
strange mixture of great good and frightening evil that our history reveals.
Historical ambiguity means a once seemingly clear historical narrative or
progressive Western enlightenment and emancipation has now become a
montage of classics and new-speak, of startling beauty and revolting
cruelty, of partial emancipation and ever-subtler forms of entrapment. (p.
69F)
Neither optimism nor pessimism will prove fruitful in understanding the
plurality and ambiguity of our history. Rather resistance, attention and hope
must be exercised. Without resignation or cynicism, Tracy advocates
conversation as limited, fragile and necessary exercises in reaching relatively
adequate knowledge of language and history.
In the final chapter, “Resistance and Hope: The Question of Religion,” Tracy
declares that the purely autonomous ego has been mortally wounded, yet not
erased; rather there appears a more fragile self - open to epiphanies.
Postmodern coherence, at best, will be a rough coherence: interrupted,
obscure, often confused, self-conscious of its own language use and, above
all, aware of the ambiguities of all histories and traditions. (p. 83)
Theological interpretation is one way to allow genuine conversation with the
religious classics (for example, the Scriptures). A highly tentative, relative
adequacy is all that can be hoped for as the same plurality and ambiguity that
affects all discourse affects theology. Religions are even more intensely pluralistic
and ambiguous than art, morality, philosophy and politics because religions do
claim
that Ultimate Reality has revealed itself and that there is a way of
liberation for any human being. (p. 86)
Pluralism is the attitude Tracy fundamentally trusts, but such an affirmation is
the beginning, not the end for the interpreter of religion.
The great pluralists of religion are those who so affirm plurality that they
fundamentally trust it, yet do not shirk their responsibility to develop
criteria of assessment for each judgment of relative adequacy. (p. 91)
Reductionism is a real temptation in the interpretation of religion. The problem
is one of totalization: only this method or this hermeneutic or this critique can
interpret what religion really is.
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, Plurality and Ambiguity, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
All methods of reductionism, whether by believers or nonbelievers, are
grounded in an unacknowledged confession of their own: the belief that so
secure is their present knowledge of truth and possibility that the religious
classics can at best be peculiar expressions of more of the same. Anything
different, other, alien must clearly be untrue and impossible - that ‘goes
without saying.’(p. 100)
Thus, declares Tracy, the difference between fundamentalist and secular readings
only appear startling; the differences are on the surface, not in fundamental
hermeneutical approaches. They are reverse sides of the same coin of certainty,
mastery and control. But, writes Tracy,
When it is believable, religious faith manifests a sense of the radical
mystery of all reality: the mystery we are to ourselves; the mystery of
history, nature, and the cosmos; the mystery, above all, of Ultimate
Reality. ... When it is active, religious love frees us from the illusion that to
be a human being means to become an ego attempting mastery and
control of all others. (p. 107)
Tracy witnesses to his personal belief in belief.
I believe that faith in Ultimate Reality can make all the difference for a life
of resistance, hope, and action. I believe in God. It is, I confess, that belief
which gives me hope. (p. 110)
In a profile of David Tracy in The New York Times Magazine (11-9-86), Tracy is
quoted as saying,
The religious event described in the First Letter of John asks the question:
What is the nature of the ultimate reality? And the answer is: God. And
more explicitly, God is love. That is an extraordinary thought, that
ultimate reality is love.
All of his strenuous attention to interpretation theory is in the service of bringing
that truth to expression, not just in the Church, but in the public arena. To follow
his argument is not easy; it is rewarding. Tracy is a pioneer venturing into the
new situation arising out of the cultural crisis of the present in order that the
truth claim of God as it comes to manifestation might be understood and acted
upon.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
References
David Tracy, Plurality and Ambiguity, 1987
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19870901
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1987-09-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Plurality and Ambiguity: Hermeneutics, Religion, Hope
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on September 1, 1987 entitled "Plurality and Ambiguity: Hermeneutics, Religion, Hope", on the book Plurality and Ambiguity: Hermeneutics, Religion, Hope, written by David Tracy. Tags: Postmodern, Pluralism, Religion, Mystery, Love at Core of Reality. Scripture references: David Tracy, Plurality and Ambiguity, 1987.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Love at Core of Reality
Mystery
Pluralism
PostModern
Religion
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/38ad85e9decd838b26f99ef8cbc6d3a1.pdf
f3307799ff6cfc9318a5d3006730c8e8
PDF Text
Text
Purgatory Revisited
Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
Perspectives
A Journal of Reformed Thought
January 1988, pp. 4-7
In the fall term of 1983, Hans Küng, the noted Roman Catholic theologian gave a
series of lectures at the University of Michigan entitled Eternal Life? It was an
investigation of life after death as a medical, philosophical, and theological
problem. He faced squarely and straightforwardly all the difficult questions
surrounding the subject, dealing with ancient and contemporary issues, the
question in the history of religions, the modern denial of anything beyond death,
and the near-death experiences recorded in recent years. He dealt with biblical
material, the question of resurrection, the resurrection of Jesus, and the church’s
teaching on judgment, heaven, and hell. The lectures were subsequently
published under the title Eternal Life? By virtue of a sabbatical granted me by the
Christ Community congregation, I was able to hear the lectures and to participate
with Küng in a seminar.
I came away with two striking realizations: first, that there was intense interest in
these questions of death and dying, of life after death, of heaven and hell on the
campus of a large secular university. The lectures had to be moved from the
largest lecture hall available to the Rackham Auditorium. Secondly, I realized
how little these vital questions were probed in the church, how little reflection I
had personally given to them in my ministry, and how comfortably and
uncritically we in the church have accepted traditional answers.
Once awakened to the questions that are not nearly so simply answered as once I
had thought, and also to the deeply existential interest of today’s people, both
secular and religious, I began to open again questions on which I had come to
premature closure. For me, the greatest surprise came in a new appreciation for
the teaching of purgatory, which was resolutely rejected at the time of the
Reformation and which has received little serious reflection in the Protestant
tradition.
This is quite understandable since the sharp reaction of the Reformers was
precipitated by the Roman teaching and practice in regard to indulgences,
© Grand Valley State University
�Purgatory Revisited
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
intercessory prayers, and masses for the dead. The abuses at this point are well
documented; Luther’s protest was justified, as Küng would testify. Calvin railed
against the teaching of purgatory as “a deadly fiction of Satan, which nullifies the
cross of Christ, inflicts unbearable contempt upon God’s mercy, and overturns
and destroys our faith.” (Institutes, 3.5.6) Certainly there was enough abusive
practice to make such strong reaction necessary. When the abuses have been
exposed and the questionable teaching surrounding the state of the dead rejected,
however, have we finished with the subject?
The Roman Catholic church traditionally taught that people who died at peace
with the church but who were not perfect (which included just about everybody)
had to undergo a penal and purifying suffering before they could be translated to
heaven. Purgatory was an intermediate realm and the purgation process was mild
or severe and of short or long duration, depending on the moral condition of each
individual.
Traditionally, evangelicals have taught that those who in life embrace Jesus
Christ by faith are saved by the grace of God and those who reject Christ are
condemned eternally. One’s historical existence is the time in which a decision
regarding Jesus Christ must be made and with the drawing of the last breath the
issue is determined irreversibly and eternally.
A little sober reflection shows us that the matter is not quite that simple. Even if
those who are exposed to the gospel are judged on their acceptance or rejection of
Christ, what about those who never heard? What about those who die in infancy?
What about the mentally impaired? More questions arise: What about those who
have been terribly wounded by the church? What about those who have been
abused as children and are never able to trust? What about those whose only
exposure to the gospel has been of a garbled and distorted nature? It would seem
that we must begin to make some exceptions; some qualifications are necessary.
Reflecting on the traditional teaching of evangelical faith, a further question
arises: Do we imagine that the transformation necessary to complete in us the
work of grace will happen in an instant at the moment of death? In his discussion
of the resurrection at Christ’s coming, Paul does speak of those remaining alive as
being changed “in a flash,” and in the First Letter of John we read that we shall be
like him because we shall see him as he is. But are we to understand
instantaneous perfection by these statements, something totally foreign to the
process of sanctification, which is our experience on this side of death?
Obviously, the first thing we must admit is that we are dealing with a subject
beyond our knowledge. And throughout this discussion we must be aware, as
well, that we can speak only in temporal categories and think only of a succession
of moments, while we recognize death as the break between time and eternity.
Into the philosophical discussion of the relation between the two we cannot enter
but the distinction must not be lost.
© Grand Valley State University
�Purgatory Revisited
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
We must admit, too, as is recognized by both Protestant and Roman Catholic
biblical theologians today that there is a paucity of biblical material to which to
refer. The thrust of Scripture is the imperative to repent and believe, and the
stress is on the urgency of decision. Yet there are indications that there is something more.
For example, Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 3 of the necessity of care in building the
superstructure of the church which is founded on Jesus Christ. He points to two
kinds of builders: one builds with wood, hay, and stubble; the other builds with
precious stones, gold, and silver. The work of the first is consumed by the testing
fire; the work of the second stands the test. He then wrote:
If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will
receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss,
though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire. (Cor. 3:14-15)
The latter person will enter the life beyond, having lost everything. He will be
secure in God’s eternal presence, yet with nothing to show for his earthly life.
Paul seems to indicate that there is, beyond death or through death, an encounter
with God in which one’s life is tested. The issue is not salvation or condemnation;
the issue is whether we bring into God’s presence something or nothing. Does not
this passage indicate that Paul thought in terms of encounter with God and
perhaps a continuing process beyond death? If it is a matter simply of being
saved or lost as we enter the moment of death, that is, entering a status of
salvation or condemnation, and that is all there is, then why be concerned about
what one brings to death’s moment—a fruitful life or a barren life?
The apostle seems to suggest that at death there is not only break and
discontinuity between our time and God’s eternity, but also continuity between
this life and the life beyond death. We bring something (or nothing) with us, and
whatever lies beyond is influenced and determined by what we bring (or fail to
bring).
In Luke’s gospel, Jesus calls us to be watchful and ready for the end. He is
encouraging loyal, faithful stewardship of life (Luke 12:35ff). He then speaks of
two servants, one who knew the master’s wishes, but failed to fulfill them, and the
other who also did not comply with those wishes, but did not know them. The
first was flogged severely, the second less severely. We must not attempt to push
this vivid language of Jesus too far. Yet it seems that Jesus was saying that the
judgment will vary in light of individual circumstances—a gradation of judgment
on the basis of the individual life being examined.
If at the moment of death the encounter with God will be very personal,
individual, and discriminating, and if the sentences will vary, does this point to a
process beyond death’s moment?
© Grand Valley State University
�Purgatory Revisited
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
The traditional understanding of these texts is that, in the case of the Lucan
passage, there is gradation of punishment—yet to be lost, eternally condemned, is
to remain in a state spoken of as hell—separation from God. In the case of the
passage from Paul, the understanding has been that the “saved” enter into
heaven, or union with God, but some with greater, and others with lesser capacity
to experience the joy of salvation.
Let us push those conventional interpretations. I entitled this essay “Purgatory
Revisited” not simply to get attention. Surely in a day when Roman Catholic
theology itself is very self-critical and is engaged in a serious encounter with
Scripture, I am not about to suggest we reinstate a teaching that has been
thoroughly sifted and carefully redefined in contemporary Roman Catholic
thought. Yet, I am suggesting that behind the teaching of purgatory there was a
significant insight, even if the practical application of that insight led to
disastrous results. That insight is simply that God is not through with us at our
death. I am raising for reflection this question: “Is the issue of our lives
irreversibly settled at the moment of our last breath?”
This question is meant in no way to detract from the strong call to decision, the
seriousness of choices in this life, or the urgency of the gospel call. However, is it
not possible that in the experience of death itself, understood as an encounter
with God, there is the possibility of something of eternal significance occurring?
In Christian Faith, Hendrikus Berkhof, discussing the idea of the judgment of
works done by believers in their earthly lives, writes:
In Protestant theology, this viewpoint is almost completely pushed aside
by the accent on grace. In Roman Catholic piety it is (or used to be) very
prominent in connection with the veneration of saints and purgatory. The
Roman Catholic Church assumes correctly that believers differ greatly in
regard to their progress and fruitfulness....
So the idea of a judgment according to one’s deeds leads of itself to the
consideration of a process of purification, called purgatory in the Roman
Catholic tradition....The Reformation broke with that doctrine because of
its moralistic conception of salvation and its detrimental effect on the
practice of piety (indulgences, intercessory prayers and masses for the
dead). It imagined a sudden, radical transformation after the judgment,
usually without giving it further theological reflection and without
connecting it with the struggle for sanctification on earth. Meanwhile
Roman Catholic thinking, too, has become much more reserved. Typical of
the modern Roman Catholic conceptions is the idea of “ripening”...which
K. Rahner develops in “The Life of the Dead”(Christian Faith, Revised, p.
493).
Referring to the text discussed above, 1 Corinthians 3:15, Berkhof asserts that
© Grand Valley State University
�Purgatory Revisited
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
that statement does suggest that Paul thought of more than an abrupt recreation of man; salvation is accompanied by a painful becoming aware of
one’s own failures on earth. The difficulties here are more an open
question for theological reflection than a subject for back and forth
theological denouncement. The matter of making inferences from faith
about what lies beyond death is fraught with far too many difficulties. One
can state with Bavinck: “After death there is no more sanctification, one
enters upon a state of complete sanctity...for death is the greatest leap
someone can make, a sudden transposition of the believer into Christ’s
presence, and thereby a complete destruction of the outward man and a
complete renewal of the inner man” (CD IV, no. 650, under 4). But one can
also ask with G. J. Heering: “Does this change instantaneously, when God
shows mercy to the repentant soul and takes it to himself?...Life is called a
training school, but perhaps there is a higher training school above” (De
menselijke ziel, 1955, pp. 190,192). (p. 494).
In another context Berkhof writes:
God is serious about the responsibility of our decision, but he is even more
serious about the responsibility of his love. The darkness of rejection and
God-forsakenness cannot and may not be argued away, but no more can
and may it be eternalized. For God’s sake we hope that hell will be a form
of purification (p. 536, Christian Faith, Revised).
That word “purification” is one used by Küng. In the published lectures, Eternal
Life?, Küng treats the idea of purgatory in his discussion of the question whether
hell is eternal.
Some theologians, however, argue that it is not God who damns man by a
verdict imposed from outside. They are human beings themselves, by sins
committed with inward freedom, who damn themselves. The
responsibility lies not with God but with man. And by death this selfdamnation and distance from God (not a place, but a human condition)
becomes definitive. Definitive? Do not the psalms say that God rules over
the realm of the dead? What is supposed to become definitive here,
contrary to the will of an all-merciful and almighty God? Why should God,
who is infinitely good, want to perpetuate enmity instead of removing it
and in practice to share his rule forever with some kind of anti-God? Why
should he have nothing more to say at this point and consequently render
forever impossible a purification, cleansing, liberation, enlightenment, of
guilt-laden man? (Eternal Life?, p. 137)
Then he refers specifically to purgatory.
Purification, cleansing, liberation, enlightenment Here perhaps may lie—I
want merely to prompt a few reflections—the particle of truth, the real
core, of the problematic idea of purgatory, which has been translated in
© Grand Valley State University
�Purgatory Revisited
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
German from the Middle Ages onward with the unfortunate designation of
Fegefeuer (“winnowing fire”). This may be the true core, but it remains
true only if the idea is not reified.
[A]s no human being is entirely bad, neither is anyone entirely good. Any
human being, even the best, falls short of what he might be, fails to meet
his own demands and norms and thus never wholly realizes himself. For if
he is to be fully himself, even the “saint” needs completion, not after death,
but in death itself. And, in view of so much unpunished guilt in the world,
a number of people wonder—not entirely wrongly—if dying unto God, the
absolutely final reality, can be one and the same for all: the same for
criminals and their victims, for mass murderers and the mass of the
murdered; for those who have struggled a whole life long to fulfill God’s
will, true helpers of their fellow human beings, and for those who for a
whole life long have only carried out their own will and at the same time
shut out others?...[H]ow this...purification, cleansing, follows is not left to
the speculation or calculation of human curiosity, but remains a matter for
God as merciful judge, is God’s all-embracing final act of grace. (pp. 137)
The key idea Küng stresses is the shattering effect of the encounter with God. We
die not into nothingness; we die unto God. Küng cites Karl Barth:
Man as such, therefore, has no beyond. Nor does he need one, for God is
his beyond. Man’s beyond is that God as his Creator, Covenant-partner,
Judge and Saviour, was and is and will be his true Counterpart in life, and
finally and exclusive (sic) and totally in death (Church Dogmatics Vol. Ill,
2, pp. 632-33).
Küng also cites a Roman Catholic theologian, Greshake:
From this standpoint we can understand what was pointed out earlier, that
God himself, the encounter with him, is purgatory. But this means that we
need not fall back on a special place or still less on a special time or special
event to grasp the meaning of purgatory. Still less do we need to work out
crude ideas about the “poor” souls. Instead we can understand what the
Church teaches and has taught from the earliest times as an element in the
encounter with God in death....[W]e should avoid any talk of fire and
speak instead of purifying and cleansing as an element of the encounter
with God. At the same time what should be particularly clear is that
purgatory is not—as it often seems to be in popular piety—a “demihell”
which God has erected in order to punish the person who is not entirely
bad, but also not entirely good. Purgatory is not a demihell but an element
of the encounter with God: that is, the encounter of the unfinished person,
still immature in his love, with the holy, infinite, loving God; an encounter
which is profoundly humiliating; painful and therefore purifying (cited,
Eternal Life?, p. 139 from Starker als der Tod, pp. 92f.).
© Grand Valley State University
�Purgatory Revisited
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
Küng concludes,
That is to say that since it is a question of dying into the dimensions of
God, where space and time are dissolved into eternity, nothing can be
discovered, either about place and time or about the character of this
purifying, sanctifying consummation (p. 139).
A Lutheran theologian, Hans Schwarz, discusses the views of Ladislaus Boros
(The Mystery of Death, p. 129), who suggests something similar—the significance
of the final decision at the moment of death. Boros, he maintains,
decisively modifies the traditional concepts of purgatory and death. Boros
agrees that the Church has only gradually developed the doctrine of
purgatory. Though the Scriptural basis of purgatory may be obscure, the
fact and the essential nature of purgatory are of such quality that it must
be called a “truth of revelation.” However, through his hypothesis of a final
decision, Boros seems to view purgatory as the “point” of intersection
between life and death. Purgatory is no longer conceived of as a process of
purification which can be measured similar to the days and years we live
here on earth. According to Boros, “purgatory would be the passage, which
we effect in our final decision, through the purifying fire of divine love. The
encounter with Christ would be our purgatory.”...Boros replaces an
untenable concept of purgatory with the idea of a confrontation with
Christ in death…[H]e calls death “man’s first completely personal act”
and, “therefore, by reason of its very being, the place above all others for
the awakening of consciousness, for freedom, for the encounter with God,
for the final decision about eternal destiny.” (On The Way To The Future,
pp. 142f.).
It has been obvious to me as I have pursued this subject that those who have
reflected on the biblical material, the whole context of Scripture, the revelation of
God in Jesus Christ, and the human person are very restrained in their
conclusions and very cautious in their statements. There is in all serious inquirers
into this question,
—a recognition of the serious nature of human decisions,
—an acknowledgment of the urgent need for repentance and faith,
—a reckoning with the reality of evil and human wickedness that demands
response if there is any justice,
—a serious view of judgment as the exposure of our lives to the scrutiny of
the God of truth.
All responsible biblical thinkers recognize that God takes us seriously; our wrong
and guilt are not simply soft-pedaled, and our exposure to God’s light and truth
will be painful, even while we are conscious of being embraced within a larger
grace. Judgment will be experienced: No one will “get away” with anything.
© Grand Valley State University
�Purgatory Revisited
Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
If an eternal hell is questioned, it is not because passing through God’s final
examination is not a serious matter, and neither is it because there is no sense of
the need for change and renewal of the person who through the earthly
pilgrimage has become scarred and tainted, falling far short of God’s intention.
Recognizing that one cannot simply move from the ambiguity, partial insight,
fickleness, and unfaithfulness of one’s human experience into the presence of the
God of light and truth, there is the belief on the part of some that a purifying
process will be necessary.
C. S. Lewis has dealt as creatively and profoundly as anyone with the questions of
heaven, hell, and purgatory. In The Great Divorce, he records an imaginary
conversation with the Christian writer, George MacDonald, on the outskirts of
heaven. Lewis exclaims,
“But I don’t understand. Is judgment not final? Is there really a way out of
Hell into Heaven?”
“It depends on the way ye’re using the words. If they leave that grey town
behind it will not have been Hell. To any that leaves it, it is Purgatory. And
perhaps ye had better not call this country Heaven. Not Deep Heaven, ye
understand....[Yle can call it the Valley of the Shadow of Life. And yet to
those who stay here it will have been Heaven from the first. And ye can call
those sad streets in the town yonder the Valley of the Shadow of Death:
but to those who remain there they will have been Hell even from the
beginning.” (The Great Divorce, p. 63)
Lewis’s fertile imagination is thought provoking; great caution is there; our
curiosity will not be satisfied this side of death’s portal. Yet, he clearly seems to be
saying that the life processes and the significance of choice do not end at our
death.
In his Letters to Malcolm, chapter 20, Lewis speaks clearly on the subject of
purgatory:
Our souls demand Purgatory, don’t they? Would it not break the heart if
God said to us, “It is true, my son, that your breath smells and your rags
drip with mud and slime, but we are charitable here and no one will
upbraid you with these things, nor draw away from you. Enter into the
joy”? Should we not reply, “With submission, sir, and if there is no
objection, I’d rather be cleaned first.” “It may hurt, you know.”—“Even so,
sir.”
I assume that the process of purification will normally involve suffering.
Partly from tradition; partly because most real good that has been done
me in this life has involved it. But I don’t think suffering is the purpose of
the purgation. I can well believe that people neither much worse nor much
© Grand Valley State University
�Purgatory Revisited
Richard A. Rhem
Page 9
better than I will suffer less than I or more. “No nonsense about merit.”
The treatment given will be the one required, whether it hurts little or
much.
My favourite image on this matter comes from the dentist’s chair. I hope
that when the tooth of life is drawn and I am “coming round,” a voice will
say, “Rinse your mouth out with this.” This will be Purgatory.
I have raised questions for reflection more than coming to fixed conclusions
about this subject veiled in mystery. But the questioning will prove fruitful if we
open again for discussion a subject of intense existential interest, confident that
the faithful and gracious covenant God will finally realize his eternal purpose for
us who have been predestined to be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ.
References:
Hendrikus Berkhof. Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Study of the Faith.
Wm. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1979.
Hans Küng. Eternal Life?:Life After Death as a Medical, Philosophical, and
Theological Problem. Doubleday, 1984.
C. S. Lewis. The Great Divorce. First published HarperColins, 1946; HarperOne,
Later Printing edition, 2009.
C. S. Lewis. Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer. Harcourt, Inc., 1964.
Hans Schwarz. On the Way to the Future: a Christian view of Eschatology in the
light of current trends in religion, philosophy and science. Augsburg Publishing
House, 1972.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
References
Hendrikus Berkhof, Christian Faith, 1979, Hans Küng, Eternal Life?, 2003, C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce, 1946, Letters to Malcolm, 1964, Hans Schwarz, On the Way to the Future, 1972
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19880101
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1988-01-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Purgatory Revisited
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on January 1, 1988 entitled "Purgatory Revisited", on the book Purgatory Revisited, written by Hans Küng, it appeared in Perspectives, January, 1988, pp. 4-7. Tags: Purgatory, Judgment, Grace, Sin, Non-exclusive. Scripture references: Hendrikus Berkhof, Christian Faith, 1979, Hans Küng, Eternal Life?, 2003, C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce, 1946, Letters to Malcolm, 1964, Hans Schwarz, On the Way to the Future, 1972.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Grace
Judgment
Non-exclusive
Purgatory
Sin