1 24 4 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/6d849180ee042e274227ca09da5896cc.pdf e4ad402279d58bd9cd5f11d405cd1975 PDF Text Text Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 1 Re-imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Introductory Reflections for the Articles Page December 12, 2012 At my retirement in 2004, Christ Community Church was exceedingly gracious in so many ways, one of which was to collect a number of my sermons and publish them under the title Re-Imagining the Faith. I could not have named it as well; it succinctly expressed the story of my thirty-seven years as pastor of that congregation. It was at the First Reformed Church of Spring Lake, Michigan, that I was ordained to the Christian ministry on June 30, 1960. From 1960, just out of seminary, to 1964 I served that Spring Lake congregation. During those four years I was in no way seeking to re-imagine the Christian faith; in fact, I would have been threatened by the thought. My understanding of Christian faith was orthodox, evangelical in the Reformed tradition as conveyed by the Dutch Reformed Church rooted in the Netherlands and brought to this country in the nineteenth century emigration from the Netherlands. It was, however, in those four years through pastoral experience that my orthodoxy was being tested. That whole story is critical to my theological pilgrimage, but I won’t go into it here, except to say that a move to a very conservative, evangelical Reformed congregation in New Jersey [in 1964] only accentuated my struggle, which was really about the view and authority of Scripture. I left New Jersey for the Netherlands to pursue post-graduate studies. I was indeed fortunate to be received and accepted by Professor Dr. Hendrikus Berkhof, Professor of Dogmatics at Leiden University. As I was leaving his study after my first appointment with him in the early Spring of 1967, I saw a piece of paper pinned on a drape, on which was written: 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. In those lines by Alfred Lord Tennyson I knew I had found my teacher and my task. My little system had had its day; I longed to find the Sacred Mystery toward whom my little system, now broken, had pointed. Though I had earned a Master of Divinity and a Master of Theology following my BA from Hope College, I was about to embark for the first time in my life on an intellectual and spiritual quest with an open mind and heart – seeking truth wherever it might lead me. For the first time in my life I began with questions rather than answers to be proven and confirmed. It was a liberating moment; finally I was ready to learn. © Grand Valley State University �Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 2 Lest I be misunderstood, my failure to gain an education, to learn, was not the fault of the institutions from which I attained degrees, nor the teachers who taught me. To be sure, a denominational seminary has not the task to lead students to new visions of the faith but rather to teach the faith system, the confessional foundation of the church that supports it and governs it. That being said, I must confess the problem was mine. All my energy and intellectual gifts were committed to learning and then teaching evangelical Reformed faith. The last word had been spoken; now it was my calling to proclaim and teach it. And I was deadly serious about it. But no longer. After my little system began to break in those seven years of pastoral ministry, I knew I had to begin again to see if indeed I could come to new insight and understanding that would enable me still to be a Christian minister with a message in which I could passionately believe and proclaim. The fact that at my retirement a book of my sermons was published with the title ReImagining the Faith is the finest tribute I could receive, witnessing to the journey that began in the late 60’s under the guidance of Professor Berkhof and that continued all the years after my return to the Spring Lake congregation in 1971. Through all those years I was about re-imagining the faith and, even in retirement, the journey continues. As I look back over my ministry that continued in Spring Lake following my four-year European sojourn, I realize that what I essentially gained was an ability to think theologically, to think critically. No longer was there a set confessional system of theological propositions to be explained and defended. I was full of wondering, of questioning, of questing for a deeper understanding of biblical faith in the context of contemporary culture. My new posture found expression in preaching and teaching but it was with the birth of the journal Perspectives, a Journal of Reformed Thought in 1986 that I began to articulate that new posture on central theological/biblical themes. My first article was on the theology of Robert Schuller as I will describe below. But from then on I addressed some critical themes that reflected my own groping for a new understanding of biblical faith. As I was working on the thread of those pieces I received a note from Professor Dr. Hendrik Hart who had begun reading the articles I had given him. In response to questions he raised, I gave some background about my experience in the RCA. Our correspondence I include here: Email from Hendrik Hart, November 20, 2012: ... I’m reading Dick’s articles in Perspectives. I was entirely unprepared for them because Dick keeps saying that he was a latecomer in moving beyond conservatism. But the first piece, from 1987, digs into the God-Jesus-male cluster with a vengeance. And so it is with most of the pieces. They are radical in choice of topic, position and approach. They © Grand Valley State University �Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 3 are not mealy-mouthed either. The language is clear, direct, and hard-hitting. I would have thought that, early in the game, the pastoral side might emerge, knowing how upset conservatives might be. Not so. So where’s the conservatism? The only evidence for Dick’s pleading a late start in getting beyond conservatism is that the style of argument has not been touched by the then rising postmodern spirit. But that took time for all of us. OK, if I’m near the mark with this, how would you characterize where you were in 1987, Dick? What readings or experiences would have spawned those articles and how did you expect they would be perceived? By your congregation, by your classis, by Perspectives readers? I am curious because, if I go by my own memories, I think there was a mixture of urgency and naiveté. In 1983 I wrote “Must I Believe in God as Father?” in The Banner. It was a soapbox piece and the editor and I had previously discussed at length how this should be done. I think I wrote very carefully, so I was fully unprepared for the storm of invective that broke over me, as well as for the complete silence of supporters. Only now (right now!) does it occur to me that the problem may well not have been the piece as such (it was about praying to God as Mother), but the heading. Why did I not see that 30 years ago? So, if you can, tell us something about why you may have written things possibly unaware of how they would be perceived or of how you would endanger yourself. Did you know you were taking risks? Reply from Richard Rhem: Henk, great to hear from you and I am pleased you are reading the articles. It so happens that I have spent over a week gathering my writings over the years of my ministry post Netherlands. (I have a few more for you, especially two pieces that appeared in The Reformed Review, Western Seminary’s journal. In 1972 I gave a lecture at Western which was published in The Reformed Review – “A Theological Conception of Reality as History – Some Aspects of the Thinking of Wolfhart Pannenberg.” Then in 1986 I wrote in a [tribute] for Gene Osterhaven – “Theological Method: The Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age” – which dealt with Küng’s paradigm change in connection with Tracy and referring to Gadamer, etc. Those three pieces were received quite well. Then the RCA founded Perspectives. I just found the first editorial by Rev. Dr. James Van Hoeven – first editor and major figure behind the project. (That he was brother-inlaw to Ed Mulder, General Secretary, got the Journal underway.) Jim wanted me on the board of editors and immediately asked that I write about Schuller’s new reformation. I had been inspired by Bob Schuller upon my return from the Netherlands - my leadership people felt, having been out of the country for four years, I needed such exposure. It worked. Within four months of beginning again in Spring Lake, the First Reformed Church became Christ Community and a second service in the morning was added (and eventually a third). About 28 of our people attended Schuller’s Institute for Successful Church Leadership. But Bob Schuller was under fire for his book New Reformation and being too easy on sin!! Therefore Jim Van Hoeven thought I should do an article on Schuller. It was quite well received. You ask about whether I wrote with awareness of reaction from the church. I’m sure I was naive but, according to Jim’s first editorial, this new journal’s purpose was to “engage issues that reformed Christians meet in personal, ecclesiastical, and societal life.” It also aimed to be in conversations that “help shape the identity and mission of the Reformed Church in America.” © Grand Valley State University �Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 4 Jim continues, “If in the process, Perspectives can enable a community of scholars to be formed – women and men from within the church who bridge race, region, and discipline, who enjoy the give and take of thoughtful discourse, and who do not mind if their Sundays sometimes get pretty rough [an allusion to a Mark Twain quote with which he opened] – this enterprise will have fulfilled its expectations.” The editorial moves to a quote from Robert Bly: “Certainty lives on either side of the border, but truth lives on the border.” Jim continues, “The editors of Perspectives will push themselves and the church toward that border, theologically. This means, on the one hand, Perspectives will affirm and deepen the richness of the Reformed tradition. Tradition tells us who we are, gives us a definition, a point from which to set our course, and reminds us ‘we belong...to our faithful Savior Jesus Christ.’ And yet truth lives on the border. The danger of too much tradition is that it turns a good thing into idolatry. The church’s faith and life must always be creative. …holding to the tradition, being creative, living on the border is part of what it means to be Reformed, according to the Word of God.” That was January, 1986, the first issue. Perspectives was initially sent free of charge to ministers, members of boards and agencies, elders on request. It was to engage the leadership of the RCA in creative conversation. I really believed that, naive as I was... It is coincidental that you raise the questions my writings raised as your brother Peter has asked me to write an overview of the thread that runs through my articles to introduce them on a Web site of an archive of my work. I have begun writing after sorting through piles of files. That piece will answer some of your questions, but let me respond to your questions regarding my being a late bloomer. Throughout my education I was trying to reinforce the faith structure of my childhood. I never challenged or raised a question. Yet, beneath my sturdy dogmatism, there was an insecurity: I wondered if the faith/church would survive – not because it wasn’t God’s truth but because the darkness arrayed against the light was formidable. A pastoral experience in Spring Lake showed me that an inerrant, infallible Bible wasn’t enough. During my last year there, the Covenant Life curriculum from the RCA/Presbyterians came out. I taught the foundation papers in Spring Lake and then introduced the curriculum to the New Jersey congregation. It created an uproar from a few who felt it was weak on Scripture [long story]. For me – finally owning my own questions – it was very helpful. I knew I would have to spend years bringing that congregation around or make good on my desire to go to the Netherlands for postgrad work. Berkhof accepted me and proved a great mentor and friend. Thus began my first real education because finally I was open to the quest. But, Henk, I was 32! Four years in Leiden and my return to Spring Lake where I began to preach out of the reservoir of the Leiden years. This I knew: the orthodox view of Scripture was the bottleneck. I felt a real freedom to explore in that marvelous community. I taught Berkhof’s Christian Faith, Küng’s On Being a Christian and Does God Exist? Coming from a serious study of Pannenberg, I was ready for Küng whom I came to appreciate deeply. I mentioned my writings/lectures in The Reformed Review in 1972 and 1986. These were about the theological method. But, as I wrote earlier, it was Perspectives that gave me the occasion to address issues before the church. Yes, I was naive, but I was also totally free in bringing to expression © Grand Valley State University �Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 5 what I had been thinking about. Now I was 51, Henk: no youngster, but just finding my voice. I was blessed with a congregation that allowed me to “think out loud”. That was my preaching style and it was a safe and honest place. Thus when Perspectives came along I expressed myself quite honestly. The “Habit of God’s Heart” piece I knew was treading on dangerous terrain, but I tried to be careful, wondering but also being honest about my hope that God’s grace was universal. As time moved on I got the assignments that were controversial because I was a pastor in a safe place. I think there was only one other pastor on the board of Perspectives. The rest were professors at colleges or the seminaries and were reluctant to take on the themes I tackled. So, my conservatism in the traditional form ended when I left for Leiden in 1967. From there I had to begin again. I consumed book after book. Berkhof would say, “You must begin to write,” but I said, “I just found six more footnotes leading to a dozen more books!” Trying to answer your questions: by 1987 I had been engaged in serious theological reading/thinking for 20 years. Perspectives gave me the opportunity to bring to expression all I had been thinking/teaching/preaching about. I felt safe and confident and thus put myself on the line. Perspectives was not the Church Herald, read by RCA lay folk. The Banner was something else. You wrote in a very much more conservative context to a well-informed readership in the bastion of Calvinist orthodoxy. As for “the silence of supporters,” I know that well. When my Grace article appeared, I was teaching homiletics at Western. A colleague also on the board of editors, present and participating in the discussion about the theme, in favor of my writing...but when the storm rose, in a faculty meeting asked, “Why did you feel you had to write that piece?” He also, I’m told, said if I had changed six words there would have been no problem. I must say, Henk, it never occurred to me that I would get into trouble. My congregation was solidly supportive and I had fine collegial relationships with the RCA leadership and I honestly felt I was being a positive influence for good in the RCA. In the end it was not RCA leadership but young, threatened pastors in the Muskegon Classis that spelled my demise in the RCA. It is all quite a story. And now to return to the thread of my articles. My second Perspectives piece was entitled “Karl Barth: Preaching and Theological Renewal.” I set forth Barth’s own experience of preaching and the high regard he had for the preaching moment – very inspiring. But then, in a series of articles, I addressed contemporary issues in the Church and my own deepening grasp of those issues. February 1987, pp. 4-6: “An Accident of the Incarnation.” The issue was the male domination of the church. I argued that the maleness of the Incarnation was an “accident,” not of the essence of God’s revelation in human flesh. In the January 1988 issue, I wrote a piece, “Purgatory Revisited.” Hans Küng at the University of Michigan in the Fall of 1983 lectured on questions surrounding death, © Grand Valley State University �Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 6 heaven, hell and the future, subsequently published under the title Eternal Life. Küng got me to thinking. I suspect it was a beginning step toward the hope of universal grace. In the September 1988, issue I brought to full expression my hope and growing conviction that God’s grace would finally bring all God’s children home. The piece, entitled “The Habits of God’s Heart”, elicited major responses from RCA ministers and the public readership – positive and negative, the latter predominant. In the April 1991, issue I became even bolder. I wrote of my growing conviction that my faith community, the community of Reformed faith issuing from Calvin’s Geneva by way of the Netherlands had never come to terms with the Enlightenment - the place of critical rationality and historical consciousness in the understanding of the Christian credal tradition as espoused by the Reformed community in this country. It was Hendrikus Berkhof’s Two Hundred Years of Theology that made me aware that the community of which I was a part “was not even engaged in the struggle.” The article was entitled “Sleeping Through a Revolution.” As one can well imagine, I got some serious response, including from my beloved theology professor, Dr. Eugene Osterhaven – who treated me gently however. Someone challenged me on biblical grounds, on my use of Scripture. That drove me on to my next piece, “The Book That Binds Us” in the December 1992, issue. My bold contention was that the Bible is being misused. It is being asked to function in a way it can no longer be expected to function, a way it was never intended to function. In the March 1993, issue I returned to the theme of “An Accident of the Incarnation” with a focus on God language. I wrote in collaboration with my colleague, Colette Volkema De Nooyer, who did the major work. In the May 1995 issue, I “completed” as it were the thread I was weaving with an article “Interreligious Dialogue – What is Required of Us?” I had recognized long since that the orthodox understanding of Jesus’ death as atonement blocked openness to the other in interfaith discussion. In this piece I gave that full expression. The article concluded: My intention is not to advocate Hick or Ogden or any other thinker who is addressing the matter of interreligious dialogue. Rather, I wish to point to the necessity of honestly drawing out the consequences of the recognition that human grasp of the truth develops, evolves, and needs ongoing assessment and adjustment – and sometimes conceptions need to be rejected. By use of historical imagination, the originating experience that gave rise to a theological formulation needs to be recovered in order to express the same reality differently, in order to make the experience available in a totally different cultural context. Rather than seeing this as a burden, a cause for fear and defensiveness, it should be seen as an exciting challenge. Is not such a pursuit of the truth to love God with mind as well as heart? And is not the recognition that every biblical and theological expression is marked by the human and historical limitations that adhere to all human thought the © Grand Valley State University �Re-Imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage Richard A. Rhem Page 7 reason there is need for continual reformation? To be Reformed is not to be in possession of a set of timeless and eternal truths but, rather, to refuse to absolutize any human arrangement or formulation. It is not to be saddled with a set of truths that were once new, innovative, and destabilizing of the established order of the sixteenth century, or the first century. It is an approach, a spirit, a posture that is open to new knowledge, fresh insight, and cumulative human experience within historical development. The church has managed to spend the century in a state of schizophrenia, pursuing research in the academy and sharing the results in the lecture hall, while the liturgy, prayers, hymns, and sermons have given little evidence of the honest engagement with insights of the modern period. My mentor, Hendrikus Berkhof, claimed the only heresy was to make the gospel boring. I would add another – the heresy of orthodoxy, the evidence of a failure of nerve and lack of trust in the living God. It is the heresy of an inordinate lust for certitude that seeks premature closure, the shutting down of the quest for truth and growth of knowledge in the magnificent and mysterious cosmos by the creatures whom the Creator calls to consciousness and embraces in a Grace that pervades the unfolding cosmic process. © 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. Series Introduction to Articles Page in Web Archive 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-4-20121212 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource Re-imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage 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 Introduction to the Articles created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) entitled "Re-imagining the Faith: A Theological Pilgrimage", as part of the series "Introduction to Articles Page in Web Archive". Tags: Spiritual Quest, Reformed Theology, Authority of Scripture, Critical Thinking, Universal Grace, Orthodoxy, Nature of Religion, Sacred Mystery. 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 2012-12-12 Authority of Scripture Critical Thinking Nature of Religion Orthodoxy Reformed Theology Sacred Mystery Spiritual Quest Universal Grace https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/bd409e4b0ac831607e1014339fba5651.pdf 3aa0fa32066e21470ff6490fadc3df92 PDF Text Text The Book That Binds Us 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 December 1992, pp. 12-17 The Bible is the book that binds conservative Reformed orthodoxy, binds not in the sense of holding us together but, rather, in the sense of shackling us, immobilizing us as we attempt to address the Word of God—the Word of judgment and grace—to our contemporary situation, to present human experience. The 1992 Synod of the Christian Reformed Church, in its anguishing debate and failure to move forward on the question of women in office, is only the most recent instance of our inability to bring the scriptural witness into fruitful dialogue with present human experience and the knowledge and insight available to us from the various disciplines of human research. The Bible is being misused. It is being asked to function in a way it can no longer be expected to function, a way it was never intended to function. Until there is a radical revisioning of our understanding of the place of Scripture in shaping our faith and forming our practice, the church will be deadlocked, at an impasse, firing salvos of accusation and recrimination from opposing camps while the body bleeds and languishes. It is painful to read the account of the Christian Reformed drama as it has taken shape over the past two years since the Synod of 1990. A similar drama was played out in the past in the Reformed Church in America, which now has opened its offices to women but continues to be a house divided, living in a coexistence filled with dis-ease. Advocates of both positions in the Christian Reformed Church cite Scripture and claim to be faithful to its authority. But a great gulf separates the two sides, and it is difficult to imagine them reaching agreement. Cultural…climate of opinion does work its ferment on the staunchest of orthodoxies, and time is on the side of those who seek to open the offices to women. That will come. But the Christian Reformed Church will be much like the RCA at present—of two minds on the issue. The church will live with a pragmatic © Grand Valley State University   �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 2   accommodation but without a unified, joyful vision of truth, of justice, energized by fresh insight and understanding. In this journal April 1991,I wrote, In theology old paradigms keep their adherents even when theological development has left them behind. But they can do so only by some form of authoritarian claim. In the case of Reformed orthodoxy, the authoritarian claim of the Bible has held theological movement hostage, hindering meaningful dialogue with the sciences and philosophy. We are theologically stuck, and we will not become unstuck until we learn to value Scripture as authority, but break loose from its authoritarian use. In that same article I referred to a statement of Hendrikus Berkhof in his Two Hundred Years of Theology that Herman Bavinck turned away from dogmatic theology in his later years, sensing that the modern period needed a much more vigorous renewal of theology than he was able to produce. And I raised the question whether he might not have recognized that his own objective principle of knowledge—the Scriptures—blocked him from fruitful engagement with the rapidly expanding horizons of knowledge in the modern period. I stated again that the orthodox Reformed view of Scripture and its hermeneutic make it impossible either to engage the cultural assumptions that are the legacy of the Enlightenment or to be in dialogue with the probings of the present, postmodern period. The current dilemma of the Christian Reformed Church confirms my contention. The question of women's ordination cannot be solved by appeal to Scripture alone. What must be recognized is that the Bible is not a book of propositional truths, timeless and eternal, covering the full spectrum of cosmic reality, to be applied objectively to questions of faith and practice. Rather, it must always be heard as a cumulative witness of those encountered by the God of Creation who came in judgment and grace to Israel and in the humanity of Jesus. The canon of Scripture includes that witness spanning centuries, but the canon has been closed for subsequent centuries to the present while the human story has continued on with dramatic development and amazing breakthroughs in the understanding of the cosmos, of historical development, and of the human person. In the present debate in the Christian Reformed Church we can see the failure on both sides to acknowledge the legitimate place of contemporary experience in the discussion of women's ordination. Each side is claiming biblical authority for its position. Obviously, something is wrong, and what is wrong is the view, shared by the opposing sides, of how the Bible functions in such a discussion in relation to present experience. It is my contention that the failure to engage contemporary experience stems from a failure to recognize the function of a living tradition of faith. © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 3   Let me say clearly, I stand unreservedly with those who advocate opening all ecclesiastical offices to women. They can mount a biblical case for their position. But their opponents can mount an equally strong argument against women's ordination if it is assumed that the Bible must provide the answer for or against that ordination. It is clear that what is at issue is not women as women in office, their giftedness, leadership capacity, or spirituality. The issue is the Bible, how it functions in the life of the church, where its authority lies. Until the church wrestles with the authority of Scripture in determining the shape of its faith and the form of its practice, it will not be able to make progress on any theological front or come to consensus on any doctrinal debate. The apparent issue being debated will never be the real issue; lying behind it will always lurk the question, “But what does this do to the authority of the Bible?” In Reformed orthodoxy, the Bible carries not only authority; it is used with authoritarian coerciveness and uncritical literalness that brings every new discussion to an impasse whether the question be the ordination of women, the status of homosexual or lesbian persons, of creation versus evolution, of ethical issues such as abortion, genetic engineering, or euthanasia. In Bondage to the Bible The Bible is the book that binds us. In our academic, theological institutions we acknowledge that the Bible is not a scientific text, not a chronicle of history in the modern sense of historiography, that it comes to expression through human persons with all the limitations that entails. But we have never been honest with the church about the implications of our recognition of the nature of the Bible. Somehow the critical study of Scripture, the results of two hundred years of intensive study of its formation and its contents, has never trickled down to the people. We have continued living in the paradigm of Protestant orthodoxy deriving from the Protestant scholasticism of the seventeenth century. By that time both the Roman Catholic and Protestant Churches had battened down the hatches and set themselves against the emergence of Renaissance humanism, which came to full flower in the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century. Rightfully, the church resisted the drive for human autonomy and the enthronement of human reason, but it fought fire with fire; the theological enterprise took on a strongly rationalistic character and attempted in intellectual formulation to ground certainty, buttressed by an authoritarian church (Roman Catholic) or an authoritarian Scripture (Protestant). The historical-critical study of Scripture created a crisis for the churches of the Reformation, and a battle ensued that our churches have yet to settle. It is incredible, in light of what is widely recognized about the nature of the © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 4   Scriptures, that there should be such a prevalence of literalism in our understanding of the Bible. In his Dynamics of Faith, Tillich distinguishes two stages of literalism. The first is the “natural stage” before making a clear distinction between the symbolic and the factual; it consists “in the inability to separate the creations of symbolic imagination from the facts which can be verified through observation and experiment.” This represents the first naiveté, and such literalism creates no problem for the mediation of meaning. But when the symbol system is broken or seriously undercut in the continuing growth of knowledge and understanding, to continue to assert literal correspondence between symbol and fact is to fall into a “reactive literalism.” Literalism in this second stage is “aware of the questions but represses them, half consciously, half unconsciously.” This path is chosen by “people who prefer the repression of their questions to the uncertainty which appears with the breaking of the myth.” Reactive literalism cramps the figurative language of the Bible into the narrow framework of interpretation appropriate only to the literal usage of modern science. The desire is for certainty, but not, as Barth says, the certainty of faith that is given and given again, but the certainty of human control. Identifying the Bible with revelation, elevating the doctrine of inspiration so that the written word is inerrant and the truth infallible represents a “lust for certitude.” That phrase comes from Charles Davis. In his Temptations of Religion he discusses the social construction of all human knowledge, which excludes the possibility of “a revelation insofar as that implies an a priori claim to absoluteness and universality.” He contends, Revelation in that sense is given as an absolute in the order of knowledge; it is regarded as a set of unquestionable data, from which all opinions may be evaluated. It represents an attempt to limit criticism, to put a stop to the endless questioning of human thinking by establishing an a-critical point, a point not subject to criticism because beyond criticism. (18) To reject revelation in that sense is not, he claims, to exclude God's manifestation in our midst in word and event. It is, however, to exclude an a priori absoluteness and universality as violating human intelligence and freedom. Davis quotes Peter Berger: The theologian is consequently deprived of the psychologically liberating possibility of either radical commitment or radical negation. What he is left with, I think, is the necessity for a step-by-step re-evaluation of the traditional affirmations in terms of his own cognitive criteria (which need not necessarily be those of a putative “modern consciousness”). Is this or that in the tradition true? Or is it false? I don't think that there are shortcut answers to such questions, neither by means of “leaps of faith” nor by the methods of any secular discipline. (The Sacred Canopy, 187) © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 5   Davis recognizes how fearful such a recognition of the social construction of our reality is. To become conscious of the extent to which our “knowledge” and “values” are social fictions is “to look into the abyss, the void, surrounding human life in every direction.” Such honest recognition is very rare in the church; rather, theologians and preachers reinforce reactive literalism, feeding the lust for certitude. But should there not be an honest facing of what is widely recognized in our postmodern world—that human knowledge is socially constructed and symbolically expressed? When we do so, we are faced with an alternative. According to Davis, We can respond to the nothingness by a nihilism that interprets it as chaos, as meaninglessness, as the ultimate absurdity making everything absurd. Or we can respond to the void as positive nothingness, as mystery. That is the religious response. Faith in the last analysis is a basic trust in reality, an openness to mystery, a being drawn toward the abyss in selfforgetfulness and awe and love. Faith acknowledges the relativities of finite human existence without the nihilistic denial that these do, however gropingly, lead us toward absolute meaning and value. (21) The Bipolar Reality of Scripture And Present Experience The Bible contains the words of those in Israel and in the event of Jesus Christ who were encountered by God in judgment and grace, who witnessed to the Word of gracious salvation more or less adequately in their stammering words and historically conditioned understanding. But God is not dead. God still encounters us. God's Spirit still illumines the human understanding, not only in reference to the biblical witness but in the larger landscape of human experience. In the ongoing life of the church we must take seriously not only the Bible but also authentic contemporary experiences of being human in this world. We are people rooted in history, creatures of the cosmos, whose secrets scientists are probing, bringing to light fascinating findings. What of our knowledge of history and the awesome development of human knowledge in the respective disciplines of science? Because it lies outside the Bible's primary focus and purpose, is it therefore of no account in shaping our faith and forming our practice? Is it reasonable to assume that we can engage critical questions of ultimate human concern and determine crucial action and behavior as a human family living together on Spaceship Earth by reference alone to the Bible? It is precisely the theologian's task to coordinate the bipolar reality of Scripture and present human experience. Theology performs a hermeneutical function; its task is to interpret the biblical tradition in the present context of the church's life—an ongoing process that is never finished, always provisional, necessarily open-ended. All interpretation is a mediation of past and present within the history of a faith tradition. And the present is a moving target. Breaking the Impasse: Scripture and Tradition © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 6   How can the church move forward with theological discussion that will illumine contemporary human experience and shape the faith and practice of God's people in the image of Jesus Christ? What connects the canonical biblical witness to the present? What forms the bridge between the revelatory events in Israel's history and in Jesus Christ—to which the biblical story witnesses—and our present experience of being human in this world? We need a new understanding of the place of the living tradition of faith as lived out in the community of faith. We must recognize the elements at play here: the revelatory events, the witness to those events in the biblical canon, the church as the community constituted by that witness and the place of ongoing witness, and the whole spectrum of human knowledge and cumulative historical experience that continues to grow and develop. As I engage anxious folk in our churches who fear faith is being diluted and biblical Christianity is being jeopardized, I get the impression they assume that there was a time of pristine revelation infallibly recorded in the writings of the New Testament and that apostolic truth was rather quickly overlaid with church tradition that distorted that truth. Then, it is claimed, in the Reformation of the sixteenth century, the apostolic Christian faith was recovered and brought to expression in its original clarity in the creeds and confessions of the church, reformed according to the Word of God. That is a delusion, a colossal distortion of the way of the gospel in the church over nearly two thousand years. Yet it is still cavalierly asserted for popular consumption. A more accurate portrayal of the situation must recognize the interpretation of the revelatory events in Israel and in Jesus Christ by the witnesses to those revelatory events; that interpretation was instrumental in constituting a faith community. That faith community (Israel and the church) was formed out of the witness to revelation and, in its ongoing life, that community reinterpreted its understanding of the original revelatory events and continued to translate its faith understanding in ever new historical circumstances. We can trace the process already in the canonical Scriptures. For example, Israel's faith is reinterpreted by the prophetic word in terms of Israel's ongoing historical experience. Development can also be seen within the New Testament in Christological understanding. The primitive Christology of Acts is not at all the full-blown incarnational Christology of the fourth gospel. With the setting of the limits of the canon, such reinterpretation and development did not cease. We distinguish the biblical witness from the postcanonical tradition, but it was a historical decision of the church that determined the breakpoint. And the lines are blurred. Common agreement as to the canonical books was not reached until around a.d. 400. © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 7   The problem of the canon reopened at the time of the Reformation. The Protestant churches excluded the Apocrypha, a whole series of Old Testament writings that had been recognized as canonical for over a thousand years. Luther, in his September Bible of 1552, openly separated Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation from the other New Testament writings, thereby constituting a dual canon. Erasmus questioned the authenticity and authority of Hebrews, James, Jude, and 2 and 3 John. Zwingli thought Revelation should be rejected, and Calvin's expositions cover every book except Revelation. In the introduction to his commentaries it is clear, according to Barth, that he had doubts not only about the books mentioned by Luther, but also concerning 2 Peter and 2 and 3 John. The history of the canon indicates a shifting and a questioning that denies the possibility of a claim of absolute certainty regarding its limits. But even within the present Protestant canon we can see the process of translation and reinterpretation of the faith traditions, as stated above, and that process has never ceased. The preaching of the church is the bridgehead where the biblical text comes to contemporary expression. The heart of the preaching task is the hermeneutical moment when the words of the text that witness to the Word that once sounded find fresh expression in the hope that through the preacher's stammering words the Word might again be heard—that the living God might speak here and now. Every historical formulation is provisional; to absolutize an interpretation at any point on the historical continuum is idolatry. The historically conditioned interpretations of the Christian faith through the centuries vary in the degree to which they express a faithful interpretation of the originating revelatory events in Israel and in Jesus Christ, in the degree to which the original revelatory luminousness shines through. Sometimes there is clarity, sometimes distortion. There is action and reaction; the pendulum swings. In the nineteenth century the climate of opinion dominated by Newtonian physics and historicism smothered the witness to the newness and freedom of God's engagement with our world. Against a truncated, liberal faith expression, Barth boldly proclaimed the “Wholly Other,” the God who shatters “our little systems.” In the wake of the renewal of the church and the rediscovery of God's liberating grace in the sixteenth century, Reformed orthodoxy fell into the sterility and rigidity of Scholasticism. It absolutized its interpretation of the faith as though it were a statement of timeless and eternal truth unalloyed with the cultural assumptions of its day. Reformed orthodoxy failed to recognize that this interpretation was forged out of the crisis created by the ascendancy of rationalism as the Enlightenment was coming to flower, and so it declared the autonomy of the human person and human reason as the measure of truth. © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 8   What we must recognize is the constant interplay of the biblical witness and contemporary interpretation and the fact that we are part of a faith community that is living out of and carrying forward a living faith tradition. We have an anchor in the past; the church has demarcated certain writings as canonical. Present interpretation of the Christian faith and shaping of Christian practice will always involve serious listening to the biblical witness. But the present determination of faith and practice will not treat the intervening centuries between biblical times and our own as a vacuum. The history of the transmission of the faith will also be mined for wisdom, insight, and guidance. But neither do we live in a vacuum. Our contemporary expression of the faith and the shaping of our practice will finally have to be our truth. Finally, our witness and life must be authentically our own, our voice bringing to expression the living tradition. Jaroslav Pelikan differentiates that sense of the living tradition from traditionalism. Tradition, he says, is the living faith of the dead; traditionalism is the dead faith of the living. If we would move forward in our understanding of all reality before the face of God, we must come to a new appreciation of the living tradition of biblical faith as a dynamic movement. Hendrikus Berkhof acknowledges that as a rule Protestant dogmatics has no separate chapter on tradition. But this disregard of the concept of tradition cannot be maintained, he argues. In Christian Faith he writes, Revelation means that God enters the field of history to bring about an encounter with men which transcends human history, and which therefore goes far beyond the temporal spatial bounds of the original field of revelation. The encounters which took place at that time were means and suited for leading to further encounter in other times and places. Hence the revelation of Christ in the New Testament, in spite of, or rather because of its definitive nature, is not the end but calls forth as its sequel the coming and the work of the Spirit. The Spirit proceeds from Christ to continue and interpret his saving work world-wide. This coming of the Spirit is a new redemptive act, of the same importance as the coming of Christ of which he is the complement and counterpart. It is one continuous revelational event. Fixation without interpretive transmission petrifies the faith…. Berkhof contends that if the concern of revelation is the continuing encounter between God and humankind, then tradition is theologically of the same importance as Scripture. The redemptive work of God must be “handed over,” faithful to the fixated form (Scripture) but verbalized such that it becomes intelligible in other times and places. © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page 9   The current impasse in the conservative Reformed churches is the result of fixation with the biblical writings and a failure born of fear to find fresh expression for contemporary faith. Sola Scriptura. That was the clarion call, the battle cry of the reformers. Faith will be shaped, practice formed by reference to Scripture alone. The claim can be easily understood given the historical context, and the return to Scripture as the authoritative witness to revelation proved fruitful in the life of the church. But there was a loss as well: it was the sense of tradition as the living, ongoing, mediating, and interpreting expression of biblical faith as it is confessed and lived in the community of faith, the church. Tradition. In Fiddler on the Roof Tevye booms out the word claiming that life is as precarious as a fiddler making music on a perilously steep roof and that balance is maintained by tradition. According supremacy to tradition over Scripture in the Roman Catholic Church allowed it to drift from testing its faith and practice by the Word of God and to lose the clear sound of the gospel. Tradition and Scripture were a dual source of authority, but tradition had the ascendancy. The recovery of the authority of Scripture to exercise its critical function was a great contribution of the Reformation. But such movements as the Reformation are reactionary; often there is such a strong reaction to the status quo being attacked that the pendulum swings too far. How does the cumulative, growing experience of humankind become incorporated into faith's vision and practice? The witness of prophets and apostles continues to be heard in the pages of the Bible. But what of the ongoing encounter of God's Spirit with the church as it moves through history confronted by new questions, immersed in circumstances beyond that of the biblical world? It is in the living tradition of the faith community that new experience and fresh discoveries are brought into dialogue with the biblical witness. The tradition, like a fiery river of lava, moves with the current of history, a stream continuous with the erupting volcano, yet ever moving through new landscapes. This function of tradition was brought home sharply to me by the New Testament scholar Krister Stendahl, who joined Rabbi David Hartman in an all-day, JewishChristian dialogue on the theme “Faithful Interpretation.” Stendahl spoke of tradition as an instrument of continuity and change. Continuity was obvious to me; tradition connects backward to the past. But is tradition an instrument of change? Indeed, he argued. By means of the tradition we enter the new and negotiate the future. Stendahl spoke warmly and charmingly of a visit to Swedish relatives in Minnesota. There he experienced life as he remembered it in Sweden when he was a child and visited his grandparents. In Minnesota the Swedish tradition is frozen, as is true in most immigrant ethnic communities. If you want to see a piece of Sweden past, he said, visit Minnesota, for there the tradition has become a museum piece. But Stendahl has recently returned to the United States after © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page10   serving for a time in Stockholm as Bishop of the Swedish Lutheran Church. If you want to experience the living tradition of the Swedish people, you must go to Sweden where the dynamic tradition is continuing to evolve, he pointed out. Stendahl offered a vivid image: a boa constrictor periodically wriggles out of its skin, leaving the skin behind, an empty shell. He pictured a biologist taking the skin, measuring it, analyzing it, and then having it stuffed and mounted—a museum piece. Someone exclaims, “There's a snake!” But, says Stendahl, that's not the snake. The snake has wriggled out and away and is still living—in new skin—still making history. The living tradition of Christian faith is the contemporary reinterpretation of the biblical witness in light of the cumulative historical experience of the church and the growing store of human knowledge. In Words Around the Table, Gail Ramshaw writes, Tradition is not like an obsolete edition of the encyclopedia, full of half facts, and old prejudices. Tradition is not like a 1948 etiquette book that lists the activities and even the fabrics forbidden a widow in deep mourning: All we can do is grimace and ignore it. The tradition of the church lives. We can read medieval books being discussed, we can unearth attitudes that were subsequently buried, we can make tradition different tomorrow than it was yesterday or today. Where “tradition” repeats tired slogans out of context, when “tradition” yells louder and louder to drown out queries, it becomes a sarcophagus that the dying church deserves. But when tradition is the history of the movement of the Spirit, darting here, hiding there, migrating halfway around the world, it can serve as one expression of God's Truth. As much as any contemporary theologian, David Tracy has addressed the question of the faithful interpretation of the Christian tradition to make it accessible to a serious and reasonable public. As I have been contending, he sees systematic theology's task to interpret, mediate, and translate the meaning and truth of the continuing living tradition in dialogue with the biblical witness in light of present human experience. Where this is not the case, the notion of authority shifts from a truth disclosed to mind and heart to an external norm for the obedient will. Then 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. (Analogical Imagination, 99) In an earlier work, Blessed Rage for Order, Tracy calls for a revisioning of the Christian tradition. He explains: © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page11   [T]he revisionist theologian is committed to what seems clearly to be the central task of contemporary Christian theology: the dramatic confrontation, the mutual illuminations and corrections, the possible basic reconciliations between the principal values, cognitive claims, and existential faiths of both a reinterpreted post-modern consciousness and a reinterpreted Christianity. (32) The revisionist theologian is not motivated by the desire for relevance, Tracy argues. Rather, The reality of the situation is both more simple and more basic: when all is said and done, one finds that he can authentically abandon neither his faith in the modern experiment, nor his faith in the God of Jesus Christ. (4) The church lives in a creative tension because it lives in a bipolar reality of Bible and present experience, an ancient faith and the undeniable reality of the modern experiment. We need a new understanding of the Bible and a new appreciation of tradition if we would be faithful to the Word and present to our world. In An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, John Henry Newman describes the church, tradition, the cosmos itself after the manner of an organism. Their development is seen as an organic process. This view was in contrast to a fundamentalistic view that regards revelation and tradition as a fixed, unchanging body of truths and rejects all change and pluralism. Newman was able to accommodate ongoing human experience in his organic view of tradition. In What Is Living, What is Dead in Christianity Today? Charles Davis comments on Newman's view: The result was a concept of tradition as cumulative experience, subject therefore to change whether as development or as decline, which distinguished [him] as conservative, from reactionaries, who did not acknowledge history and development. In a religious context the conservatives... were those who saw tradition as a dynamic process rather than as a static deposit. (33) This is not enough for Davis to meet the situation we face today. He calls for a more radical revisioning of faith, raising the question, Are we not in a situation that cannot be met by an orderly development of traditional categories; but which demands something radically new? (34) One may lean more to Newman's view of a growing organic process or to Davis's with his call for radical revisioning, but the option not open to an honest facing of the present crisis of the church is a conception of the Bible, theological © Grand Valley State University �The Book That Binds Us Richard A. Rhem Page12   formulation, and Christian practice as fixed, into which contemporary human experience and present human knowledge on all fronts must be crammed. In a recent issue of Context, Martin Marty lifts a quotation from Newman from Ian Ker's Newman on Being a Christian. Marty writes, “With development and change in mind—over against a static picture of God, the human, faith, and doctrine—we read: It is indeed sometimes said that the stream is clearest near the spring. Whatever use may fairly be made of this image, it does not apply to the history of a philosophy or belief, which on the contrary is more equable, and purer, and stronger, when its bed has become deep, and broad, and full. It necessarily rises out of an existing state of things, and for a time savours of the soul. Its vital element needs disengaging from what is foreign and temporary.... It remains perhaps for a time quiescent; it tries, as it were, its limbs, and proves the ground under it, and feels its way. From time to time it makes essays which fail, and are in consequence abandoned. It seems in suspense which way to go; it wavers, and at length strikes out in one definite direction. In time it enters upon strange territory; points of controversy alter their bearing; parties rise and fall around it; dangers and hopes appear in new relations; and old principles reappear under new forms. It changes with them in order to remain the same. In a higher world it is otherwise, but here below to live is to change, and to be perfect is to have changed often. References: © 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-4-19921201 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1992-12-01 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource The Book That Binds Us 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 December 1, 1992 entitled "The Book That Binds Us", it appeared in Perspectives, pp. 12-17. Tags: Authority of Scripture, Experience, Faith Tradition, Critical Thinking, Faith, Mystery. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Authority of Scripture Critical Thinking Experience Faith Faith Tradition Mystery https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/98826b791b8335a577b40a24441d8d1f.pdf 4f89485f5759cb8a57dc7c293481ccdd PDF Text Text An Alternative To Church As Usual 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 September 1991, pp. 12-15 Our discussion went on for nearly two hours. The pain in ministry was expressed in example after example. Pastors—competent, committed, working hard, even loved and respected by the community—were nonetheless seeing little or no church growth; the traditional congregation in instance after instance was dying. I was one of only two pastors in the circle; the others served the church in the academy. Finally, the group leader turned to me and said, “In all of this discussion about the pain of ministry and grim prospects for the church, you’ve not said anything.” It was true; I had said nothing. I am not unaware of heartbreak, disillusionment, and despair in the ranks of clergy colleagues, frustration among laity, unrest in congregations, but the experience is foreign to me. I have had quite the opposite experience: delight in ministry; the joy of growth; a flourishing community rich in gifts, supportive, positive in spirit—making ministry for me a challenging, fulfilling vocation. Two decades of pastoral experience in the congregation I presently serve have seen the numbers multiply nearly five times over. The giving has grown proportionately, the site and facility expanded, and a large team is now engaged in creative ministry. Now, as I enter my fourth decade of pastoral ministry, I do so with greater zest, confidence, and joy than when ordaining hands set me aside for this task. I had listened and felt the hurt. I knew I had no answer, no formula for success, no quick fix to make the pain go away and turn it all around. Further, I, too, wonder about the future of the institutional forms of the church which, not only at the local level, but even more critically at the level of denominational structures, are experiencing sickness unto death. I felt disinclined to give some triumphalistic testimony of success in ministry. Someone suggested I write a piece explaining what people are fleeing when they come to Christ Community Church. I resist that idea lest it appear that large numbers have joined from other congregations, which really is not the case. Yet, © Grand Valley State University   �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 2   there are many among us who have fled the institutional church at some point; they have simply dropped out, despairing of finding an authentic spirituality and sensing that the church was a source of manipulation and coercion, imposing shame and reinforcing guilt, rather than offering release from it. They found the church to be ever so much like a dysfunctional family. Others have fled the reactionary posture of the church on contemporary issues, the slowness of the church to address matters of human sexuality, feminist concerns, and concerns for justice and peace. Weary of fighting, waging battles about questions on which contemporary society has reached a responsible consensus, some have left the church with bitterness and cynicism. Yet, eventually the hunger for spiritual reality sets them on a quest and many have found a home and kindred seekers in this community. We have welcomed many others who sense they had been cut off, rejected. The human situation is messy. At some point most folks color outside the lines; traditional expectations are shattered. And, too often, precisely at that point, the church is awkward, daring not to reach out and embrace lest it appear to sanction the life beyond the pale. If not in word, perhaps in body language, a person stained with grit picked up along the way senses he or she threatens accepted morality and the proper mode of behavior. I like to speak of Christ Community as “an alternative to church as usual.” Over and over again, witness is borne to the tangible experience of “something different.” To flesh out the ingredients that create the alternative is not an easy task, and I hesitate even to try, lest, defining too specifically, that elusive spirit be lost, becoming one more “formula for success.” What follows renders no formula, and what is proffered comes with the acknowledgment that Christ Community is fragile, flawed, and riddled with weaknesses. It is simply the story of a pastor and a congregation over two decades. The story actually begins in 1960 when I became the pastor of this congregation for the first time after seminary graduation. During those first four years of preaching and pastoral work, the theology with which I entered the ministry was tempered by concrete experience. Mary was a bright, lovely high school girl. She was one of those exceptions to the rule; her parents had nothing to do with the church, but she did—on her own. She was in worship, church school, and youth groups. She had a significant spiritual experience, was baptized, made a good confession. She was radiant and I was her spiritual guardian. For summer work, she left the community to join a friend whose mother was a strong Mormon. When she returned, she was in spiritual turmoil. I cited the Scriptures; she the Book of Mormon; two authorities and an impasse. I lost her and I was shattered. © Grand Valley State University �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 3   In that experience, I came to see that my every claim was banked on the person’s accepting the authority of the Bible as the exclusive source of saving truth. Otherwise, I was stumped. The foundation of my theological system was beginning to crumble. Moving to a conservative congregation in the East, I began to research the nature of biblical authority. At that time, the Reformed Church cooperated in the publication of a new curriculum for church school, and it was introduced by study papers that dealt with the questions of Scripture’s normative function in the church and scriptural interpretation. I became convinced that my own understanding of biblical authority was untenable; if I were to continue to preach, I needed a new basis upon which to do it. Evangelical passion was possible for me only if it could be coupled with intellectual integrity. I needed to find “my gospel” or I knew I would never be able to preach with power and authority, with a note of authenticity. That was the existential quest that led me to pursue graduate study in the Netherlands. Hendrikus Berkhof, then professor of dogmatics at the University of Leiden, agreed to become my mentor in a doctoral program in which my major area was the history of dogma. Hearing my questions and sensing the nature of my quest, his first assignment for me was to read Barth’s Church Dogmatics, Vol. I.1-2, The Doctrine of the Word of God. I was amazed; Barth took the Scriptures seriously, as seriously as I had ever experienced. I thought to myself, one day conservative Christian thinkers will run to Barth for refuge, if ever they discover the dynamic of this great mind and heart. I read with a voracious appetite. Pages 522 and 523 of that volume lie open before me now, dog-eared, as much underlined as not, margins full of my jottings as I struggled to understand Barth. Barth writes, The Reformers’ doctrine of inspiration is an honoring of God, and of the free grace of God. The statement that the Bible is the Word of God is on this view no limitation, but an unfolding of the perception of the sovereignty in which the Word of God condescended to become flesh for us in Jesus Christ, and a human word in the witness of the prophets and apostles as witnesses to His incarnation. (p. 522) As the passion and vitality of the sixteenth-century Reformers’ experience was replaced by the second-hand experience of their spiritual heirs, there was an effort to establish certitude of faith through a high doctrine of inspiration. Barth contends that the statement “the Bible is the Word of God” was transformed from a statement about the free grace of God into a statement about the nature of the Bible “as exposed to human inquiry brought under human control.” Barth goes on to point out that the eventual historical investigation of the Bible in the Enlightenment period was simply a logical consequence of viewing the Bible as under human control rather than as available as the instrument of God’s © Grand Valley State University �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 4   revelation by God’s free grace. He gives a thorough review of the history of the elevation of the doctrine of inspiration. I found myself in Barth’s description: But ever more clearly and definitely a certainty was sought and found quite different from the spiritual certainty which could satisfactorily have been reached on these lines, and which on these lines would have been recognized as the only certainty but also as real certainty. What was wanted was a tangible certainty and not a divine, a certainty of work and not solely of faith. In token of this change there arose the doctrine of inspiration of the high orthodoxy of the 17th century. (Ibid., p. 524) And the consequences? Should there be found even the minutest error in the Bible, then it is no longer wholly the Word of God, and the inviolability of its authority is destroyed. (Ibid.) Barth rejected the attempts of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries to make the Scriptures the object of historical investigation as one might investigate any literary piece, and he rejected, as well, the attack on the seventeenth-century’s supernaturalism. He insisted, We must attack it rather because its supernaturalism is not radical enough. The intention behind it [seventeenth-century supernaturalism] was ultimately only a single and in its own way very “naturalistic” postulate that the bible must offer us a divina et infallibilis historia; that it must not contain human error in any of its verses; that in all its parts and the totality of its words and letters as they are before us it must express divine truth in a form in which it can be established and understood; that under the human words it must speak to us the Word of God in such a way that we can at once hear and read it as such with the same obviousness and directness with which we can hear and read other human words.... The Bible was now grounded upon itself apart from the mystery of Christ and the Holy Ghost. It became a “paper Pope,” and unlike the living Pope in Rome it was wholly given up into the hands of its interpreters. It was no longer a free and spiritual force, but an instrument of human power. And in this form the Bible became so like the holy book of other religions, for which something similar had always been claimed, that the superiority of its claim could not be asserted in relation to them or to the many achievements of the human spirit generally.... The intention of establishing the authority of the Bible along these lines was to avoid historical relativism, but it opened up the way to it, and theology and Church did not hesitate for a moment to tread that way. In content the 17th century doctrine of inspiration asserted things which cannot be maintained in face of a serious reading and exposition of what the Bible itself says about itself, and in face of an honest appreciation of the facts of © Grand Valley State University �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 5   its origin and tradition. Therefore the postulate on which 17th century man staked everything proved incapable of fulfillment (Ibid., pp. 525-26) I was reading my own spiritual biography; the existential pastoral experience that had exposed the vulnerability of my own theological position and triggered the serious search for a new basis for preaching and pastoral care led me to the discovery that I had fallen into the very pitfall against which Barth warned. I struggled. Berkhof watched me dangle. I wanted him to give me answers, to solve the mystery of biblical authority. He only smiled and let me keep working. He did tell me he, too, had walked the path I was on, but I would have to find my own way. He was not forthcoming with answers but was most helpful in aiding me to clarify the questions. I remember suggesting I should write my dissertation on this matter. I was convinced there would be little theological progress on any front if in the RCA we were not freed from a doctrine of inspiration that, for all the protestations, looked suspiciously like the seventeenth-century version Barth attributed to the orthodox who lost the vitality of faith by lusting for certainty they could control. He responded simply, “Do you realize what they will do to you?” My dissertation subject did not develop in the area of biblical authority, but I did come to an understanding that enabled me to remain under the authority of Scripture as Word of God while recognizing as well the human nature of that witness and the continuing work of God’s Spirit making the witness the Word of God here and now. Just as I was forging a new foundation for preaching and pastoral care, I experienced a personal crisis, a painful divorce and breakup of my family. It seemed my future ministry was in jeopardy just when I felt more strongly than ever the desire to engage in the ministry of the Word. Then the congregation I first served, which is the Spring Lake, Michigan, congregation I still serve, invited me to return, an act of grace and, for me, the greatest confirmation of my call to ministry I have ever experienced. Grace became a tangible human experience. Grace was incarnate in this people. They touched me and I knew the touch of God. They took me in, supported me in the care of my three small children, believed in me, and through them, I was healed. That took courage, for in 1971 that was a radical thing to do. That is where it all started, I believe, for my experience became a paradigm for the ministry of grace in this congregation. Two decades of exhilarating pastoral ministry have issued from a mediation of grace from people to pastor. The conjunction of intensive theological reflection and concrete human experience created the occasion for a congregation to become an alternative to church as usual. That combination continues to be fruitful as we strive to live into our name, Christ Community, a name we chose in © Grand Valley State University �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 6   1971 to express a new vision and to create a new image. Newness did not come without cost, without a willingness to let go of congregational patterns which had grown and developed over 101 years of life in the Spring Lake community. The name change signaled a willingness to die to what had been, trusting the God of resurrection to create something new. A theological vision, hammered out of the dialogue with Scripture and concrete human experience, is at the center of our life. For me, human experience has driven me to theological reflection, and theological investigation has freed me to proclaim good news with evangelical passion and intellectual integrity. The vision that shapes us could not have evolved had I not come to a new understanding of Scripture, as indicated above. I believe Scripture is normative, God’s Spirit moving the human author to witness to the “happening” of God’s revelation. Scripture arises out of the history of Israel and Jesus, the locus God in freedom chose to unveil God’s eternal purpose for Creation, the “place” in which God’s grace has come to clear demonstration. But, the story goes on. Just as the biblical witness is the interpretation and reinterpretation in light of ongoing historical experience of living under the reign of God, so the church keeps alive the story of Israel and Jesus Christ, but must constantly re-frame the given story, casting it in new perspective, as it moves through history’s unfolding landscape. Any expression of Christian faith must be shaped through dialogue with that witness. The Bible is the inspired preaching of the community of faith, but preaching in the power of the Spirit is today, as well, Word of God. God’s revelation in Israel and Jesus is listened to in the context of concrete human experience. Revelation “happens” as Barth insisted, and it still happens. Traditionally, the Scriptures have been used in an authoritarian manner, laying the “then” over “now” in a prescriptive way. One preaches “correct beliefs” and is locked into specific practices of life and worship. We are seeking rather to experience God in concrete human experience illumined by Scripture so that our faith and our life connect. In preaching and teaching I have cultivated openness, affirmed diversity, and encouraged respect for a broad spectrum of opinion. A closed belief system disallows the possibility of a full human experience, which is always developing, to remain connected to one’s authentic spiritual perceptions—which cannot help but receive the impact of present experience. If an external rule holds absolute authority, then I cannot honestly evaluate my own concrete human experience. I have the answer before I can formulate the question. Where such biblicism is the rule, the gulf between “correct belief” and actual experience widens. Subscription to a doctrinal system that is absolutized forces compartmentalization of religious belief from everyday experience of the world and life. © Grand Valley State University �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 7   If there is a center to the theological understanding that shapes our total existence as a people, it is the theology of grace. Out of the barrenness of Sarah’s womb (Gen. 11:30) God began a movement with particular focus in order to realize the universal purpose expressed in creation. A theology of creation embraces the covenant of grace initiated with Abraham, through whom God would bring grace to all nations. God’s electing love found expression in the covenant community, not to the exclusion of the many, but on behalf of the many. If I would point to one theological insight that has transformed my preaching and released me to embrace all who come and, consequently, has formed the mind and heart of this community, it is the universal extent of God’s grace. I will not argue universalism; I think when we come to “isms” we generally know too much; we become ideological. But that God’s grace is of far greater extent than it has been traditionally understood is a deep conviction and it has changed my ministry. The limits of grace can be debated. Christians differ. But that to which I witness regarding my own experience of ministry and the tone quality of the congregation cannot be denied. It is rooted in a theology of grace that takes historical shape in Israel and the church and embraces creation. A profound sense of God’s grace brings one a very great freedom, freedom from fear and defensiveness, freedom from the anxiety of what the future holds for human development, scientific discovery, or philosophical formulation. Grace brings freedom and creates openness. There are no questions we dare not ask, no perspectives we fear to bring to expression. The people have joined me in a pilgrimage of faith. There is no “Christ Community line.” They trust me and give me freedom to probe and test, and I give them freedom to agree or disagree. I have continued to do serious theological study and I offer classes in theology. For example, we have studied Berkhof’s Christian Faith, Küng’s On Being a Christian, Does God Exist?, and A Theology for the Third Millenium, along with David Tracy, Charles Davis, Edward Schillebeeckx, and many others. I always let the congregation know where I am investigating, what questions are pressing to me, and in which direction I am moving. We do theology together—indirectly. Out of concrete human experience, the stuff of our present experience of life in family, community, and world, we think theologically. The biblical story illumines experience, and experience elicits new light from the Scriptures. Our theology is not a static given; it is in process, an ongoing adventure of seeing our life in God’s light, a joyful and serious endeavor of discovering what it means to live before the face of God. By seeking to define and clarify the questions that move our human existence, rather than claiming to have answers, we give space for a broad spectrum of © Grand Valley State University �An Alternative to Church As Usual Richard A. Rhem Page 8   persons to join the journey. The openness of the community creates freedom to be open to any contemporary quest for meaning, for transcendence. Those who are empty and rootless are not impressed if handed a ready-made answer before their question is sensitively heard. The recent widespread interest in the work in mythology by Joseph Campbell, popularized by the interview with Bill Moyers and published under the title The Power of Myth, is just one example of the spiritual quest of multitudes who have given up on the institutional church as a place where their quest might be satisfied. What responsibility do we bear for their despair of finding in the church some clue to spiritual reality, to the experience of God? Secure in the grace of God, our faith is not fragile. When I encounter the defensiveness and fear so common in our churches today, I am amazed at the lack of confidence in the truth of biblical faith as though it need be protected from the challenge of new insights and angles of vision. God’s grace—before it, I am in awe, humbled, full of gratitude. I rest in it and feel a freedom to let God be God, to entrust my flawed self and fallible understanding to God s mercy. I don’t know why some experience anguish in ministry and I have known such joy. I know all is Grace; therefore boasting is excluded, but so is despair. There is enough pain in the church to go around, and simplistic solutions and pious clichés only deepen the woundedness. Our story is simply a story of trust, resting in the good and gracious God, letting go of yesterday’s formulations if they no longer connect with today’s experience; letting go of church structures that have outlived the purpose for which they were created. Maybe the truth is that the institutional church has to die. Maybe our pain stems from our desperate attempts to rescue structures which are warring against the larger purposes of the Sovereign One. Maybe our techniques and promotional schemes, our growth strategies and evangelism campaigns are human control measures borrowed from the marketing strategy of a consumer society. We may have to let the church die, but God is not dead. Reference: Karl Barth. Church Dogmatics, Vol. I.1-2, The Doctrine of the Word of God. First published 1957; T & T Clark Ltd., 1961. © 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, Church Dogmatics, Vol I, 1961. 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-4-19910902 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1991-09-02 Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Title A name given to the resource An Alternative to Church as Usual 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 September 2, 1991 entitled "An Alternative to Church as Usual", it appeared in Perspectives, September 1991, pp. 18-21. Tags: Authority of Scripture, Faith Community, Church, Universal Grace, Inclusive, Spiritual Journey. Scripture references: Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, Vol I, 1961.. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Authority of Scripture Church Faith Community Inclusive Spiritual Journey Universal Grace https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/7c3ab0948502431a0f039b033c70b549.mp3 4d1d624e873ec3b3954f7951edd16977 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b17103643d78369907a994a433c5a008.pdf 0aab3867ebf25f094e4fb3f3379d550f PDF Text Text By What Authority? A Littlefair Legacy, 2 Mark 11:15-19, and a reading from Duncan E. Littlefair Richard A. Rhem Christ Community Church Spring Lake, Michigan February 15, 2004 Transcription of the spoken sermon In The Reading From the Present, there are two citations from sermons of Duncan Littlefair in the 70s. I will read only the last couple of paragraphs. In the first, he had advocated the use of the mind and the intellect and the intelligence in dealing with the problems that face us as a society, and then in the bottom couple of paragraphs, he said: We stand at the dawn of a bright new era in life, the era of individuality and freedom, a time in which each person will be his own authority. We will be our own hero. We will find our own way. We will not count on and be dependent upon established authority from outside and above. We will have the authority within ourselves. We will be God in active form expressing the eternal and the infinite through ourselves. We stand at the dawn of such an era. Amen means may it be. I would say Amen to that. As I mentioned last week, I didn’t think of much else except Duncan and his legacy, once in Florida I learned of his death and the request that I do his memorial service, and while I was trying to think about what to preach here, I finally just gave up and thought why not preach here what I really want to say to you anyway and do it in a reflection and a remembrance of the things that I learned from Duncan. So, this week and next week and then on Ash Wednesday we will be reflecting together on some of those core pillars of Duncan’s own vision and faith which have been of such great impact to me and to the broader community. The central core of it all centers around this question of authority. I’d never met anyone who lived with such a sense of inner authority as Duncan Littlefair. I have never encountered anyone who lived with such a sense of selfconfidence, a confidence, an inward strength that simply was not dented or moved in any way in any encounter that I ever had with him or any experience of © Grand Valley State University   �By What Authority? Richard A. Rhem Page 2   him in any situation. He was a very strong, self-confident person who lived out of his own center and was his own authority. There were those on occasion who would accuse him of arrogance and he didn’t even defend himself against that. I’ve heard him say, “Well, if you call that arrogance, call it arrogance.” But, it wasn’t arrogance, for if you check the dictionary, arrogance has to do with an unwarranted claim to power or authority, and that was not the case with Duncan. There was no unwarranted assertion. What he was, what he believed, his vision, his understanding would be stated straightforwardly, no fudging, no fuzziness, set out there for you to hear, to agree or disagree, to acquiesce or to confront, and he reveled in all of it. If you check the word authority, you find it is the same root as author which is to create or to cause to grow. Authority in the dictionary has a very interesting dual definition. On the one hand, I suppose most commonly, authority connotes to us that power to act and to enforce obedience. The police have authority to arrest us if we are exceeding the speeding law and so forth. That may be the most common sense in which we speak of authority. But, also in the dictionary, I read that authority can be the influence of an idea or a person that has gained esteem and respect. So, on the one hand authority is the imposition of power over another. On the other hand, authority is that which is given or ascribed to one who has earned the esteem and the respect of the other. Of course, it was the second case with Duncan. He repudiated, he would rail against any claim of power to enforce. It was detestable to him, particularly in the Church or the religious life, that there would be one who would impose his or her views or positions on another, or on a community at large, who would have that kind of power to enforce conformity to a creedal affirmation or ecclesiastical discipline. But, he could not help being seen as an authority even against his protest simply because of the remarkable person he was whose leadership was an intrinsic quality of his being and widely recognized. The authority ascribed to him was the consequence of the respect and esteem with which he was held, to say nothing of the brilliance of his mind and his thinking. It was the incarnation of that vision and idea that caused people to see him as a figure of authority, but never did he claim it. Never did he plead for it. Never did he assume it. He was his own authority. He lived in about as complete and total a freedom as anyone I have ever known, as straightforwardly, as clear-eyed as anyone I’ve ever known, and it was his intention, I would say it perhaps was the center of his own ministry, to enable others to come to that same point of self-confidence, recognizing within themselves the source of authority for the way they lived, the values they held, the vision with which they lived. The long-time friendship of Lester deKoster and Duncan began with them being debating partners. Lester, of course, was at the other end of the spectrum of Duncan in terms of this issue of authority. There is a very wonderful video of the Littlefair Years at Fountain Street, and Lester, on camera says, “I would say, as © Grand Valley State University �By What Authority? Richard A. Rhem Page 3   espoused by Duncan, religious liberalism means that the person is his own authority. So, now I’m saying, I think, the religious liberal wants to choose among his authorities and it all ends up finally at himself.” Well, Lester, coming from his beloved crimped and cramped Calvinism, with his continuing assertion of the absolute authority of the Bible as the Word of God, was very sensitive to where the issue lies, and it does lie at that matter of authority, and this was a point of discussion many times at Duba’s table because it really doesn’t matter what topic you’re talking about, if you talk about it long enough and keep probing at it long enough, it comes down to what is your authority? On what basis do you make that claim or deny that claim? At the table we were always very much aware of the fact that one was either speaking out of an adherence and a loyalty to, in this case, an ancient text, or one was speaking out of one’s own being, thinking, feeling, as a volitional creature. So, when I saw that on camera recently reviewing again that video, I smiled at Lester putting his finger on the core issue, the matter of authority. And it is the key issue in the religious community as well as the larger community, and it has very practical implications for the way we live and what’s happening in our society. I generally begin Saturday morning reading The Grand Rapids Press religion section. I usually get energized to preach about something or other, and yesterday as I did that, thinking about this sermon, I went through and jotted down a couple of items. The lead story was of the messianic synagogue, people who are described as a small community locally with communities strung around the world. Not a large group, but the question was are they Jewish or Christian? There are people who believe that Jesus was the Messiah, but they continue in Jewish observances, which quite rightly they claim Jesus would have kept himself. As the article indicated, they are often criticized both by the Jewish community and the Christian community. The Jewish community said “You can’t really be authentically Jewish if you’re talking about a Christian Messiah, a Messiah-Savior figure,” and the Christian community saying, “Why don’t you just get with it and move on?” It looks like a wonderful community of people. It looks like they have a wonderful spiritual experiences and emotional fulfillment together, but the reason I noted it was that one of the teaching elders said, “It is pretty clear in the Bible that God intends to reestablish the nation of Israel.” It’s pretty clear in the Bible? Well, I guess maybe it is. Paul really did think that. Of course, it is clear if you just take that ancient text, take that word that says that. But, you might say Paul was also thinking Jesus was going to come back right away and he was at the end of history and the curtain of history would soon drop. Don’t you wonder, if he was wrong about that, he might have been wrong about this? There was a similar kind of a statement in the article on the Southern Baptists who have now extended the ban on women as military chaplains. They’ve been traveling at breakneck speed backwards lately, the Southern Baptists. They © Grand Valley State University �By What Authority? Richard A. Rhem Page 4   apparently have about twenty women in chaplaincies that this will not effect, but they will not extend it anymore because they have determined that a chaplain in the military do pastoral work, marry, bury, and so on, and actually if they do that, then they are in a position of authority and that would contradict I Timothy 12 which says that no woman shall be in leadership or exercise authority over a man, which I think is really a wonderful idea. But, I don’t think it’s going to work. But, this is the point. These things have very practical implications. Take, for example, the question of the reestablishment of the nation Israel. If you are an orthodox Jew of a certain stripe, then you believe that, but you not only believe that, you believe that there are certain borders, certain parameters in the geography that have to be settled by Israel, have to be again Israel before Messiah can come. In that critical, tragic, explosive, violent situation that seems so hopeless in the Middle East today, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is over borders, and the settlement movement, the architect of which was Ariel Sharon. The present Prime Minister cannot dismantle settlements without violence of his own people because this is not for them a political question, this is a religious question. If they don’t inhabit the land, Messiah cannot come. If you absolutize an ancient text, take it out of its historical context, out of its socio-cultural setting, you get that kind of thing. And so, the settlers who are living on those outlying borders, will die rather than be moved because it’s a question of whether or not God will be able to act and to establish the nation in the ancient borders and bring in the Messianic Age. Or, the Southern Baptist issue - how do you settle the question of the place of women and the gender balance on the basis of the Bible, which comes out of a particular culture? The Southern Baptist pastor who was quoted said, “Finally, the Bible is our guide and not culture or what everybody’s thinking.” I want to say, “You know what? There was a day when the Bible came out of a culture. A culture shaped it and what it said pretty much everybody was thinking, and what you have done is frozen a piece of history and perpetuated it down through the centuries while life continues to develop. And so, finally you have an ancient text that doesn’t resonate at all with where life is down here.” It is a very tricky question and it has tremendous implications for the way we live today. You cannot, with this text, solve the burning sociological issues of our time. Look at how the nation is all upset now over this same-sex marriage thing. States rushing to constitutional amendments, people bemoaning the fact that this might challenge the sanctity of marriage. I want to say, “Why?” You can’t get it out of this book, but it is this book that stimulates people and drives them to that kind of emotional response which can very easily turn violent and, at worst, divides the body politic and creates acrimony and accusation and condemnation. I don’t often like it when Hollywood celebrities have a microphone in their face. I wish they would do us all a favor and just be silent at such a moment, but once in a while one says something pretty good and Tom Hanks said recently, “You know, © Grand Valley State University �By What Authority? Richard A. Rhem Page 5   in any evening when two human beings stand up and look at each other and say, ‘I love you and I’ll be lovingly faithful to you forever,’ is a good evening.” If we would do as Duncan had always pleaded, if we would use our intelligence, if we would gather as much knowledge as we can, if with civility and dignity we could speak together and converse together and probe together, we could move together, we could take advantage of the light that has dawned upon us and continued to cause our corporate, community life together to be more reflective, rather than being pinched and cramped by an ancient text or an ancient institution with an hierarchy that is ruled by the priest. The implications of it are tremendous. The issue of authority is right at the core of the religious community, the religious experience, and the broader community of humanity, as well. This, of course, has always been the issue in the Church. That’s why when Jesus came and did his thing in the Temple, whatever he did, it was a prophetic act and Israel had been inured with prophetic acts throughout its history. It was marked by that. The thing that made Israel unique was the prophetic voice, because every religion has a priesthood and priests keep the machinery going and the prayers being said and the rituals intact, and they are guardians of the tradition. They keep it all going and it is a very valuable function. But, the prophet stands outside on the steps of the Church and says, “Thus saith the Lord.” Whatever happened in the Temple, Jesus was calling to a head his own challenge to that Temple establishment and there are all kinds of reasons for that which have been uncovered more and more in our day in fascinating studies of our time, social cross-cultural studies of that time. But, Jesus, in a prophetic act, confronted the established religious setup of the day and so the guardians of the traditions said, “What are you going to do about it?” The problem was, you see, Jesus had what Duncan had - when he spoke, people listened, because somehow or other, what he was saying resonated with their human experience. In another place in the Gospels it says, “He spoke as one who had authority, not as the scribes and the Pharisees.” The irony is that the scribes and the Pharisees had authority. They had the power to enforce. Jesus had that intrinsic authority that was compelling because it resonated with that which was down deep in the human soul. They came and said, “By what authority did you do this?” In other words, “You can’t just do what you want to do in this Temple because we have the authority to grant that privilege or to withhold it.” Jesus knew this was not a sincere question about “Really, Jesus, talk to us, tell us about what’s really going on with you. Who are you? What are you saying?” No, they were trying to figure out a way to fence him out and so he didn’t play their game. But, he was the example of that prophetic voice. Ah, you say, in the Hebrew scriptures, for Jesus, that was the word of God. Really? But, it certainly was filtered through the human person, and we ascribe to Isaiah and Jeremiah and Amos and Obadiah the word of God. © Grand Valley State University �By What Authority? Richard A. Rhem Page 6   I preached a sermon in Coopersville when I got out of seminary, the ordination sermon for a friend of mine and I said to him in the sermon, “Jeremiah said, ‘Thus saith the Lord.’ You can never say that. You must say, ‘Thus hath the Lord said.’” Get the difference? I took away from him the immediacy of the address of the word of God. I was saying God has spoken and all you can do is say what God said. I was wrong. I was wrong even according to my own tradition. I didn’t understand it at the time, but I was wrong even according to good Calvinism. At the table, Lester would have said to me, “It’s the Word of God incarnate, it’s the Word of God written, it’s the Word of God preached and they’re all the Word of God.” That’s presumptuous. I can’t say my sermon is the Word of God. Duncan said, “Yes you can! Yes, you must!” Oh, really? “It is the Word of God according to you!” That makes a difference. If I preach here and I assume that what I preach is simply my own stuff and not a word of God, I will preach a bloodless, lifeless, passionless, convictionless message that will move you not at all, and that’s what Duncan would detest. “You have to preach with a conviction; it is the Word of God!” But it is the Word of God as you understand it. Lester would say, “It is the Word of God, period.” To Lester, I had to say, “That’s arrogance and that’s dangerous.” Because if I can claim that my word is the Word of God, period, then I can send you out in the streets to do violence in God’s name, and it happens over and over again. Oh, it’s tricky. It’s subtle, this matter of authority. To say that authority is coming out of my own center is not to say that it is simply a human thing. It is to say that the only manifestation of the Word of God is filtered through the human being and the human soul. But, it is the human being and the human soul, finally, that must take responsibility for that word, believing it to be a word beyond one’s self and yet never able to absolutize it. Lynne Deur is publishing a little book of my sermons, and I had to re-read some of those sermons for her because she had edited a bit and one of them was from 2001, “Dropping the Salvation Fantasy,” a rather daring title for me. As I was reading that sermon, I was reminded again that I wrote down in five minutes eight points as to where I had come, from one place to another, and I took them to Duba’s table. I wrote them on this little piece of paper and kept it in my Bible ever since, because Duncan blessed it. Just off the top of my head, I said, this is where I have moved: © Grand Valley State University �By What Authority? • • • • • • • • Richard A. Rhem Page 7   from conservative orthodoxy to liberal openness, from supernatural theism to religious naturalism, from religion as verifiable truth to religion as experience of the sacred dimension of reality, from religion as dogma to religion as poetry, from religion as institution to religion as community, from religion as consisting of absolute truth to religion as emerging experience, from Christianity as exclusive to Christianity as one magnificent window opening on the holy and the sacred, from religion as salvation from damnation to religion as celebration of life. That was such an energizing, liberating experience to sit down and to write those things and to affirm that is where I am. I’m not trying to reconcile it, fit it into this book, or this institution. I value this. I love the Church. I know that without 2000 years of tradition and institution we wouldn’t be here this morning. But, finally, this is where I’ve come. I know you couldn’t run the Roman Catholic Church on this kind of thing. You can’t even run the Episcopal Church or the Methodist or Presbyterian. But, you can run a local, independent community where every one of you is charged to live out of your own center, to be the center of your own authority, recognizing that as the emanation of that divine Spirit in us all, so that in a sense, as we look into each other’s face, we look into the face of God. Or, on Valentine’s Day weekend in that closing solo of Les Miserables, realizing that to love another person is to see the face of God, knowing that to know that and experience that is quite enough. By what authority? That’s the Word of God as I understand it. © 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 Sound A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds. Event Epiphany VI Series A Littlefair Legacy Scripture Text Mark 11:15-19, Location The location of the interview Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI References Readings from Duncan E. Littlefair 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 KII-01_RA-0-20040215 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2004-02-15 Title A name given to the resource By What Authority? 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> Subject The topic of the resource Clergy--Michigan Reformed Church in America Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.) Sermons Relation A related resource Richard A. Rhem - An Archive of Sermons, Prayers, Talks and Stories: http://richardrhem.org/ Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 application/pdf Description An account of the resource A sermon given by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on February 15, 2004 entitled "By What Authority?", as part of the series "A Littlefair Legacy", on the occasion of Epiphany VI, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Mark 11:15-19. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives Authority of Scripture Littlefair