1
12
29
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/155cceca97b9dcc136bcc99177ab35e9.pdf
b838883e348994ae193e82c613a4c740
PDF Text
Text
Awareness and Gratitude
Thanksgiving Day weekend
Text: Psalm 100:3; Psalm 65:11; Psalm 8:4
Richard A. Rhem
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
November 21, 1999
Transcription of the spoken sermon
It was my intention some weeks ago to speak to you about awareness, that
consciousness that leads us to gratitude and thanksgiving, but when I intended to
do that, I didn't intend to do it the way I intend to do it today. What I intend to do
today is to review with you the past three Lord's Days that we have experienced
together. I don't want simply to move on without us having a moment to reflect
on it together and to lift it up into our consciousness in order that through that
awareness we may be led to a greater level of thanksgiving.
Three weeks ago was All Saints Day; the dancers lighted a candle as the necrology
was read, each person honored, and then with those lights here, they danced in
community until one by one they peeled off and went out, hands joined, lights
burning, but symbolizing the fact that eventually, one by one, we are all removed
from the community, not into the darkness, but into the community of light. I
was told, as I myself experienced, that there were not a lot of dry eyes here.
Then we had Amy-Jill Levine, a Jewish scholar who had told me absolutely that
she would not preach and I could not list what she would do as a sermon and so it
had to be an address or a lecture, and she preached to us. A Jewish woman
preaching from her scripture. The reason she said she wouldn't preach was that
that is to tell the good news of Jesus and she is a Jew, but her insight into her
own Hebrew scriptures and into the New Testament documents was illuminating
and inspiring and we came to love her with all her humanity, her humaneness,
and her humor.
And then last week - what can I say of that whole weekend, culminating in a
wonderful worship with Bishop John Shelby Spong? I want to bring to awareness
those experiences, the presence of the bishop with us, our sensing his humanity,
his grace, his positive demeanor, his pastoral sense - all of that is worth a Sunday
morning's reflection, bringing it to awareness.
© Grand Valley State University
�Awareness and Gratitude
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
To be aware - that's a gift of our humanity, to be conscious, to be self-conscious,
to be able to get out of our skin and observe ourselves, to feel and to know that
we're feeling, to think and to know that we're thinking, to experience and to know
that we are experiencing That's consciousness. That's what makes us human. It's
a marvelous gift. Some of us have dogs or cats that we love very much, but they
just go about their business of living: eating, reproducing, sleeping. They never
get out of their skin to understand what they are doing, although now and again
there is a dog that seems to have moments of consciousness. But, we do. To be
aware. To know what we're doing and why we're doing it, to live with
intentionality, to be able to reflect upon our experience, to savor it over again,
awareness, consciousness, intentionality. That leads to gratitude, and I want us
for a few moments this morning simply to reflect on what we have experienced
together. I'll cast it somewhat in a personal mode. It’s really the only way I can do
it because I'm talking about my story which is your story, but you would have to
tell your story also in personal terms.
As we speak personally I think we are speaking communally because we have
experienced something together that cannot be taken for granted. There has been
a richness here that is unusual, and I don't want us to let it go without awareness
in order that we might be truly thankful.
A Jewish woman preaching. A woman preaching That’s something that couldn't
be taken for granted not very long ago. On the day of my ordination I got a
wonderful letter from my father who said that when I was in my mother's womb,
he prayed for me and dedicated me to God, if I were a boy. If I were a girl, well,
what can you do with a girl?
I remember in 1984 when you graciously gave to Nancy and me a sabbatical. We
spent the first three months of '84 in Schenectady in old First Church, and it was
an old, grand tradition and a great, old liberal congregation, and for years they
had a joint service with the Jewish synagogue once a year. It happened while we
were there and it was at the synagogue and we went. We were a part of the
congregation. I didn't have any part to play. I remember that I felt somewhat
awkward. I didn't know if it was a good thing or not. I'd never known any Jewish
people. I wasn't sure whether I should join in the worship in a Jewish synagogue
of my God whom I knew only through Jesus Christ, whom I thought at that time
superceded the Jewish faith. I still remember my awkwardness. Now I had a
Jewish woman preach in my pulpit. Well, I've come a long way, Baby, not only
the fact that A. J. was here to preach, but the fact that, getting to know the Jewish
community, even coming to envy a bit being Jewish, loving that culture, coming
to hold in great affection those people. On All Saints Day we talked about
fundamental trust. Then on that Sunday with A. J. here, the gift of the JewishChristian Dialogue committee, I spontaneously invited Rabbi Alan Alpert to come
and we sang the last verse of "Great Is Thy Faithfulness" together as we embraced
each other, and someone said, "You know, there were tears all over the place
because that was a sign and a symbol of what this community is." I do know that
© Grand Valley State University
�Awareness and Gratitude
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
when I ended the song , Iwanted to say to him, "Begin the Benediction in
Hebrew," but I didn't have a lot of voice. It touches something very deep and it
feels very right.
And then the Bishop comes, purported to be the most controversial churchman in
the country, certainly in the mainline Protestant tradition – in the Episcopal
Protestant tradition what Hans Küng has been in the Catholic tradition - a gadfly,
a catalyst, pushing and probing and needling in order to push the Church into the
21st century, in order to have a faith to express with integrity. I spent 45 minutes
on the telephone with the religious editor of The Grand Rapids Press addressing
all of those controversial comments that are made in newspaper articles. Read
those articles and we judge people. It didn't do any good. But then the Bishop
comes and here he is as I had promised you, a gentle giant full of grace who
comes with that great pastoral heart and who is so impressed with you. You drew
from him. On the way to the airport Sunday afternoon he absolutely crashed. He
said, "You know, I could have gone another three or four hours with the people
there because they energized me." You drew it out of him and he and Christine
were so impressed with you. They said in all of their travels, in all of their
visitation of churches, they've only had a couple of experiences that would have
matched what they sensed in you, what this community has captured. And we
had that exhilarating experience of having someone from the outside say
gracefully and articulately all of that which we have ever hoped and dreamed to
be and to become.
Well, you can't take those kinds of things for granted and we shouldn't just let
them pass by. So, I'm spending another Lord's Day simply savoring it in order to
bring it to consciousness, in order to come to a deeper awareness, in order that
we might be grateful, adequate to the gift that God has given us. As I think of all
of that, let me just say it in a couple of items here, reflecting on it.
I'm so very grateful for the awareness I have that fundamental trust in God is
prior to, independent of, and more important than my specific belief system. My
little belief system, oh, it’s a grand system, it's a grand tradition, but my little
Christian faith tradition is but a pointer to a Mystery that cannot be grasped,
comprehended in a belief structure. I have a fundamental trust in a God who
transcends my little tradition, and the respective, great traditions of the world.
They're all important and they're all good, some more adequate than others as
pointers to the Absolute Mystery, but all of them simply human constructs
through which one is moved to the experience of the Ultimate. The Bishop said it
very simply and very clearly, that distinction between the experience of God and
the explanation of the experience. The explanation is relative; the experience is
the thing. The explanation is always in terms of one's immediate context and
one's world view and one's understanding of reality so that it's always time
anchored and limited and always needs to be restructured and refreshed and
revisioned, re-imagined. The structure itself, be it Christian faith or Jewish faith
or Buddhist meditation, all of those are simply human belief constructs that
© Grand Valley State University
�Awareness and Gratitude
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
would point us beyond themselves to the God beyond all tribal gods, in whom we
lose ourselves in that abyss of love.
I am aware that I have journeyed a long way. I am aware that I have moved from
a very conservative, exclusive, defensive Christian to an unabashed, unapologetic
pluralist, and have a freedom and a joy and a celebration in my religious faith
such as I never would have thought possible years ago. That is an awareness that
brings gratitude, and gratitude causes one to be humble and gives one deep joy.
That's the awareness that I have in reflection, and I hope you do, too, because we
have traveled a long road and we've come to a beautiful place, and it is the place
for which I believe the world is longing, that place of grace, full of love, where we
stand before the infinite and inexhaustible ground of our being, who calls us to
live fully, to love wastefully, and to be all that we can be.
© Grand Valley State University
�
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/8427ecf0b03c26f5faefa7e3b5da7e5d.mp3
9055bf368f8958d4595f874283e987bc
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
Pentecost XXVII
Scripture Text
Psalm 100:3, Psalm 65:11, Psalm 8:4
Location
The location of the interview
Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01_RA-0-19991121
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1999-11-21
Title
A name given to the resource
Awareness and Gratitude
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University
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
Text
Sound
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 November 21, 1999 entitled "Awareness and Gratitude", on the occasion of Pentecost XXVII, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Psalm 100:3, Psalm 65:11, Psalm 8:4.
Awareness
Gratitude
Intentional
Pluralism
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/1007ab87214d3a4b8978ca2520db88fe.pdf
e3511f546e3243f70b11cb76dc36aec4
PDF Text
Text
Is Christianity Dying?
From the series: Tough Questions; No Easy Answers
Scripture: Habakkuk 1:1-5; 3:17-19; Luke 3:1-9; 19:37-38
Richard A. Rhem
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
August 10, 1997
Transcription of the spoken sermon
Is Christianity dying? That is a tough question and there is no easy answer. Let
me acknowledge at the outset that no one can answer that question with
certainty.
Is Christianity in trouble? Yes.
If that is challenged by pointing out that it is in trouble in Europe and the West in
general, but flourishing in Africa and some other regions, I would respond by
saying that the same secularizing tendencies and advance of scientific knowledge
that have put it in peril in the West will have to be dealt with wherever the
Church extends itself.
I suspect Christianity as an institutionalized religion is dying in the form in which
we have known it. But, perhaps the question, "Is Christianity Dying?’ is not the
best way to formulate the question. It would be better to ask as does Charles
Davis in the book he entitled What Is Living, What Is Dead in Christianity
Today? And I even prefer a further sharpening of the question: "What can
Christianity become for us?"
That is a crucial question and that is the really critical matter: What can this 200year-old religious tradition, through which and in which we have been formed,
become for us?
To become a significant shaper of our lives and an ongoing, dynamic faith
tradition, Christianity must undergo a major creative transformation. Continuing
on its present course in fundamentalist form, or even in strongly orthodox or
timidly mainline expression, Christianity will not continue.
Let’s probe this question and as we do, I will do as I have been driven to do
throughout this series - I will focus on the phenomenon of religion because,
obviously, Christianity is a religion and to examine it, we must be clear about the
nature of religion.
© Grand Valley State University
�Is Christianity Dying?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
Lest you forget, I say again; religion is a construct of the human mind. We create
religions as human beings.
A religion is a humanly constructed symbol system that provides an orientation
for our lives, supplying us with a map for negotiating life’s passages, offering us
an interpretation of culture, history, human action and the transcendent Mystery
of our existence.
Feuerbach in the 19th century saw religion as a human invention arising out of the
human situation of need and threat. In Feuerbach’s understanding, God was
simply a human projection of one’s own idealized self.
We have recognized the genius of Feuerbach’s analysis of religion, but we have
demurred at one critical point; we have claimed that the creation of religion on
the part of humankind is the consequence of a prior address from beyond or from
our depths, an address that puts us in question, that calls forth our response in
the form of religious faith, devotion and practice.
Religious faith or awe or wonder or fear is response to an experience of some
Reality. Charles Davis writes,
The reality experienced in faith does not manifest itself as an object. It
reveals itself as the term of a feeling response but remains hidden from us
or unknown inasmuch as it does not appear to consciousness as an
apprehensible object. ... feelings rest upon a oneness between the subject
and what is felt.... Feelings are responses springing from what we are.
They are responses of our being to reality as we meet it. Our feeling
responses depend upon what we have become as beings, what we are as
persons. Feelings are the resonance of reality upon human subjects, the
arousal of our personal being through union with a reality present to us. In
the case of religious feeling, the response of our spiritual effectivity to
transcendent reality precedes knowledge and continues without any direct
knowledge of a kind that would make the term of that response a known
object. The reality that draws us where our own being falls off into
nothingness, the reality that gives a sense of basic fulfillment at the center
of our emptiness, remains outside our intellectual grasp. (pp. 9-10)
Feuerbach’s claim that religion is a merely human activity with no referent
beyond the human subject remains an unproven and unprovable assertion. The
same is true for the claim I make that faith is response to that which encounters
us, to the Mystery that meets us, but can never be grasped because it remains
hidden.
This is the watershed; the great Divide. But the claims are beyond verification;
each of us must decide if we believe we are addressed by Someone, Something
beyond us, or, conjuring up a fiction.
© Grand Valley State University
�Is Christianity Dying?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
To conclude the latter is the end of religion as a viable, meaningful human
activity; to conclude the former sees the variety of religions and religious beliefs
and practices as modes of response to a Reality beyond us, although present to
us. And that is our claim.
That being the case, we can see Christianity as a human creation in response to
the Mystery as manifested in Jesus of Nazareth.
In sum: we affirm the Mystery we term God and we affirm the nature of that
Mystery as defined in Jesus, the concrete, human, historical expression of the
Mystery.
Well, perhaps you breathe a sigh of relief; Christianity is then a genuine article, a
faith response to the Mystery of Reality, to God. And that is true enough, except it
is not the only religious response to the Mystery; religion is a universal
phenomenon of humankind. Are we prepared to say that our response in the
Christian tradition is the only response that reveals the Mystery and mediates a
saving, healing communion?
That’s one question; but there is a second: Has the tradition faithfully and
adequately responded in light of the ongoing drama of creation and human
development?
Let’s deal with the second question first and let us be reminded of the temptation
to which all religion in institutional form is subject, the temptation to freeze a
given form and absolutize it, denying the dynamic movement of history and
human development, and thus denying the imperative that the religious symbol
system remain open to re-symbolization, to fresh expression and new forms.
I chose the scripture lessons with this tendency of religious institutions to
absolutize themselves in mind.
A late seventh century B.C.E. prophet in Judah surveyed the moral and spiritual
life of his people and found it wanting. Habakkuk, in the prophetic book that
bears his name, cries out to the God of Israel,
O Lord, how long shall I cry for help,
and you will not listen?
Or cry to you, "Violence!"
and you will not save?
In a word, the prophet cries out to God to do something to turn the nation from
its spiritual decay. The writing goes on to record the Lord’s response - the work
becomes a dialogue between God and the prophet. God’s response:
© Grand Valley State University
�Is Christianity Dying?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
... a work is being done in your days that you would not believe if you were
told.
We learn that Judah is indeed in for judgment and that to be inflicted by the great
and growing power of Babylon. Thus Habakkuk has his answer: God is doing
something, but now the prophet has a larger problem. How can the God of Israel
utilize a pagan power to bring judgment on God’s chosen people? Judah had
strayed from God’s ways and the prophet sought God’s movement to judge and
through judgment bring grace. But Babylon or, as they are called in the text, the
Chaldeans? No way! That was too much. Israel was God’s chosen; Judah was
God’s special people. Habakkuk simply could not conceive of God raising up a
foreign power against God’s own.
That attitude was always present in the tradition of Israel and always challenged
by Israel’s own prophetic voice. It is such an attitude that was attached by John
the Baptism who called the Jewish people to repentance on the banks of the
Jordan River outside Jerusalem.
It was the first century C.E., a time of apocalyptic expectations, a time of great
ferment and expectation of some dramatic in-breaking of God ringing down the
curtain of history. John the Baptist, like Habakkuk before him, was a fiery
preacher of judgment calling God’s people to repent and prepare to meet their
God.
But the party line of the religious establishment resented such radical preaching
and the exposing of their spiritual and moral apathy. Were they not God’s elect,
immune to God’s purging action? No, claims John the Baptist.
Do not begin to say to yourselves, "We have Abraham as our ancestor;"
for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to
Abraham. Even now the ax is lying at the root of the trees... Luke 3:8-9
Jesus, too, ran headlong into the religious establishment, the guardians of the
institutional forms and traditions of Israel. Luke tells us of the Palm Sunday
procession to Jerusalem. The disciples are praising God with joy and no doubt
displaying a festive holiday spirit. The Pharisees tell Jesus to make them cease
their celebration, to which Jesus responds,
... if these were silent, the stones would shout out.
And Luke tells us, Jesus came over the crest of the hill and saw Jerusalem in full
view and he wept. He wept for what he saw as the inevitable horror that would
befall the city because of the mind-set, the spiritual blindness he had encountered
in the Temple establishment, which was also the center of political power.
© Grand Valley State University
�Is Christianity Dying?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
If you, even you, had only recognized on this day the things that make for
peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. ... you did not recognize
the time of your visitation from God. ...Luke 19:41-44
What is my point?
Simply this: Religion is a human construction in response to an address from
beyond, an encounter with the Mystery of Reality that becomes present in the
consciousness of humankind. All religious response is not the same, offering
equal clarity or illumination, resulting in equal fruitfulness in human lives. Some
responses are the result of penetrating insight, the Gift of the Spirit. Some have
less of beauty and elevating capacity, but no religion is absolute; none is without
human limitation and distortion. And none is absolutely essential for the
unfolding of the Mystery of the cosmic drama.
Let me expand on that for a moment. I raise the question, "Is Christianity
Dying?" in this message. I would never have conceived of such a question when I
arrived here in 1960, nor when I returned in 1971. To contemplate the demise of
Christianity would have been beyond the boundaries of my thinking. Jesus was
God’s supreme and last word; Christianity the one true religion, the result not of
human construction, but totally of God’s revealing. History was moving toward
an End at which point Jesus Christ would appear on earth and bring in the
Kingdom of God.
It never occurred to me that such simplistic thinking was one more instance of
Habakkuk’s horror at the thought of Babylon breaking Judah, or John’s
opponents who said, "Hey, we have Abraham as our father," or the religious
establishment who refused God’s visitation in Jesus.
Neither was I at all aware of the uncritical arrogance of such a position;
o
The arrogance of assuming God’s ways were synonymous with the
human religious response of my tradition;
o
The arrogance of assuming no other human religious response
could be the consequence of a genuine encounter with God;
o
The arrogance of assuming God’s ultimate purposes could not be
accomplished apart from my religious system.
It just never occurred to me. In spite of the prophetic core of the Hebrew
Scriptures and the ministry of Jesus in his own conflict with the established
religious structure, I failed to see that I had made an idol of my own tradition and
absolutized it, as though God had created it rather than recognizing it as a human
creation of response.
© Grand Valley State University
�Is Christianity Dying?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
That it is a human response, a human construct does not mean that it is not
response to authentic encounter, that the encounter has not yielded genuine
insight into the nature of the Mystery as gracious, nor that the structured
response does not mediate healing grace. All of that, I believe, is true of our
Christian faith tradition; all of that has indeed been the fruit of Christianity.
But, it is not the only tradition; it is not alone the true glimpse of the Truth.
Earlier I raised two questions: Has Christianity faithfully and adequately
responded to the Light of the ongoing drama of Creation and human
development, and is it the only response that is genuine response to the Mystery?
To the second question, I answer "No." To the first "Yes" and "No." Yes,
Christianity has been a faithful response mediating true insight and grace, but
"No," in the sense that it has become frozen, absolutized itself and failed to
continue to remain open to new knowledge requiring new symbols bearing fresh
understanding of the Mystery that is God, the cosmic process, the meaning of
human existence and the wonder of it all.
Unless Christianity undergoes creative transformation, it will die. In a recent
interview in The Christian Century, a Yale professor of the philosophy of religion
speaks of the failure of Christianity any longer to provide the integration of all
other elements of life. Louis Dupré contends,
... religion must in some way integrate the profane and the sacred.
Obviously, Christianity no longer plays an integrating role in the life of
modern societies. Certainly for most people in the West, especially in
Western Europe, it has lost its creative, formative power. Christianity has
become simply one element of civilization among many others, and by no
means the most important. In the past religious integration was handed
down by a tradition. But that tradition itself has lost its authority in the
eyes of our contemporaries, including most believers. (July 16-23, 1997, p.
655)
Dupré sketches a historical perspective much as we have been attempting in this
series. Why, he was asked, is it especially difficult to be Christian in our time? To
that question, he responds,
Culture as a whole has become secular in a way that it has never been
before. One may plausibly argue that the 18th century was the first nonChristian century. Most leading thinkers and artists, even if they were not
opposed to Christianity, ceased to take their inspiration from it:
secularization became dominant. Still, even at that time, Western culture
was so penetrated by Christian values and ideas that one might mistake
entire passages of Voltaire or Diderot as having been written by believing
Christians. Eighteenth-century culture was still steeped in a tradition that
had been Christian since its beginning, and it was extremely difficult for
these thinkers to free themselves from a language saturated with religion.
© Grand Valley State University
�Is Christianity Dying?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
The 19th century was different. It was an epoch marked by a virulent
antitheistic campaign to clean the culture slate of all Christian traces. Yet
these attacks were the work of an elite; culture at large retained distinct
remnants of its Christian roots.
Even today ties still exist between Christianity and culture in Europe and
more so in the U.S.. But on a more fundamental level, the West appears to
have said its definitive farewell to a Christian culture. Little of the old
hostility remains. Our secular colleagues are happy to recognize the debt
our civilization owes to the Christian faith to the extent that the faith,
having been absorbed by culture itself, has become simply another cultural
artifact. Christianity has become an historical factor subservient to a
secular culture rather than functioning as the creative power it once was.
The new attitude of benign atheism was, I think, prepared in the late 19th
and early 20th centuries by the three most prominent secularizers of the
time, Marx, Freud and Nietzche.
The interviewer then asks:
Why single them out? How did they differ from the earlier atheists you
mention?
For Marx, Freud and Nietzche, the idea of forcibly eradicating religion had
become unnecessary. Religion for them was a passing symptom that was
rapidly vanishing by itself. Already Marx had moved beyond the idea of
atheism as a mere assertion of the unreality of God. For Marx,
concentrating on atheism distracts us from the positive task of liberating
humanity from social oppression. Lenin’s active atheism, in which he used
the state to try to destroy religion, is actually a fallback to earlier attitudes
about religion. Freud admitted that no one can be forced not to believe.
But as rational thought shows nothing in favor of religion and everything
against it, to persist in a faith because no argument can decisively refute it
is for Freud the sign of a lazy mind. Nietzche preached a spiritual gospel, a
new religion without God, beyond Christianity and atheism, that could still
learn much from the old faiths.
Moving further in that direction, contemporary secular culture, especially
in its communications media, shows a surprising openness toward
religion. But little suggests that this interest surpasses the purely
horizontal cultural level. Culture itself has become the real religion of our
time, and it has absorbed all other religion as a subordinate part of itself. It
even offers some of the emotional benefits of religion, without exacting the
high price faith demands. We have all become atheists, not in the hostile,
antireligious sense of an earlier age, but in the sense that God no longer
matters absolutely in our closed world, if God matters at all.
© Grand Valley State University
�Is Christianity Dying?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
Further along in the interview, Dupré suggested what I believe will be essential if
Christianity is to be renewed and find new and vital expression. He had spoken of
the necessity of individual spiritual renewal and then the statement was made,
Your view of the spiritual life seems to encourage interfaith encounter.
He responded,
In our age we have come to understand our faith within the context of the
aspirations, desires and needs expressed in so many forms since the
beginning of the human race. We have learned to respect these many ways
of humankind’s longing for God in the light of our own faith. Some
Christians have been inspired to integrate pious attitudes and meditative
practices derived from other faiths within their own, without betraying
Christianity’s unique identity. In doing so they are following ancient
examples. Christians have received so much from the Hebrew mother faith
of which they are no longer aware. Also from the fourth century on, Greek
fathers generously borrowed Neoplatonic speculation to an extent that, via
Gregory of Nyssa, Dionysius and Maximum Confessor, late Greek piety has
shaped the very nature of Christian mysticism. Why should we then not be
allowed, as even the desert fathers were, to borrow meditative exercises
that centuries of pre-Christian practice have left us?
In fact, here also the analogy of faith urges us to see the existence of other
religions in the light of God’s providence. Buddhist silence may help the
Christian in deepening insight into the mystery of the Trinity where the
Father is the silent source of the eternal Word. And how could God’s
omnipresence in Vedantic Hinduism not remind the Christian of the
Spirit, qui replevit orbem terrarum—who fills the entire world? Such
analogies cannot be fortuitous to the Christian mind, and we do well to
heed them as signs of a divine Providence that, with loving care, rules not
only Christians but all humans.
It would be wrong, however, to regard these analogies as justifying a
syncretistic relativism that entitles each person to compose his or her own
religious collage. This attitude, all too common today, shows a lack of
respect not only for one’s own faith but also for those faiths one so casually
dismantles for spare parts. It is yet another manifestation of that radical
anthropocentrism, the main enemy of sincere religion, that tempts
believers to bring the language of transcendence down to the level of
purely human wants and choice. Without detracting from the providential
nature of other faiths, Christians cannot ignore the fact that this same
Providence has led them to a faith that is not a "choice" but, for those
chosen to it, an absolute summons. To relativize faith is, I think, to subvert
its fundamentally divine character.
Here I think Dupré points to that which we have begun to experience -
© Grand Valley State University
�Is Christianity Dying?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 9
that encounter with other genuine faith traditions not only leads us to a
new respect for the breadth of response to the Mystery in the broad
spectrum of religious traditions, but also deepens us in our own faith
tradition and enhances our own spiritual experience, enriching it and
authenticating it as indeed revelatory and the mediator of grace.
What we are recognizing is the distinction between faith as response to the
address of God, the Mystery of our existence, and the structure of beliefs that
are formulated in response to that revelatory encounter. Such a formulation of
beliefs is the human construction of a religious tradition. The encounter is
initiated from the other side. Religion is the consequence, a human activity of
reflection and the attempt to give some shape to the experience of the Mystery. In
the words of Charles Davis,
The absoluteness of faith is the absoluteness of total demand and total
response in an experience of unrestricted love in relation to hidden
transcendence or mystery. Faith is the drive toward transcendence, the
thrust of human beings out of and beyond themselves, out of and beyond
all the limited orders and human certainties under which they live, in an
attempt to open themselves to the totality of existence and reach unlimited
reality and ultimate value. It is a total response to the felt reality of a total
demand. That absoluteness of faith should not be confused with a
certitude of belief. (p. 67)
Faith, Davis points out, gives assurance of a lived relationship, not absolute
intellectual certitude. The human construction of religion takes the form of
concepts and propositions. These cannot give absolute certitude; they are human
constructs, not to be identified with the Divine. They are pointers, gropings,
partial, limited, in a word - human.
As David claims,
Faith has a paradoxical character. It is a presence that is at the same time
an absence, because no positive experience can lay hold of the
transcendent. At the heart of faith is a negative experience, an experience
that seems like a non-experience, because it is the breakdown of every
finite experience, of all our concepts, images and feelings. Faith follows a
narrow path between idolatry on the one side and nihilism on the other.
Much religion is idolatrous inasmuch as it absolutizes some finite
experience or expression. When faith is not idolatrous, it is difficult to
distinguish from nihilism, because the presence it mediates is as
transcendence, an absence on the human level, its plentitude is a void or
emptiness of finite reality and meaning, its love co-exists with a sense of
abandonment. What distinguishes the negative experience of faith from
the unfaith of nihilism is precisely the refusal of closure, the willingness to
accept a world without boundaries, even though on the cognitive level that
© Grand Valley State University
�Is Christianity Dying?
Richard A. Rhem
Page10
demands the surrender of a stable truth, a fixed center, a final meaning of
our religious texts and of our human existence. (p. 76)
Is Christianity dying?
In its present form, unless it undergoes creative transformation, "Yes."
But, God is not dead; the Mystery continues to breathe through the whole cosmic
process, enlivening all that exists, beckoning us toward fuller spiritual life. And
the concretization of the Mystery in the humanness of Jesus, in which our faith
tradition finds its center, still challenges us to humane existence lived in the
Presence of God.
This is the amazing possibility to which this incredible moment in our life
together calls us; this is the opportunity of a lifetime. We are cut loose, set free,
not to separate ourselves from our spiritual heritage, but to open ourselves to a
whole new appreciation of the encounter from beyond ourselves, calling us
beyond every limited understanding and formulation to wonders not yet dreamed
of.
Thus, Christianity will not die, but live, transformed, standing in continuity with
the heritage of faith we have entered into, continuing to provide us with insight,
meaning and confident assurance.
Its authentication will be its capacity to connect with our ongoing human
experience. No longer will authoritarian claims, whether of tradition, Church, or
Bible, be submitted to. That is not to deny the reality of divine revelation; it is
simply to recognize in Davis’ words, that
The appeal to revelation belongs to a culture in which the important truths
concerning human life and society are handed down by teachers having
authority and are proclaimed for acceptance as sacred.
Such a culture no longer exists for us. Post Enlightenment, the appeal is rather to
critical rationality and that presupposes an open community of discourse in
which all the members participate in seeking knowledge and in which any claim
to acceptance must rest upon evidence and argumentation open to scrutiny and
criticism by all.
Biblical criticism will not be reversed. We simply know, as Davis declares,
The typical biblical book does not come down to us all of a piece from
some acknowledged prophetic figure or divine messenger, but as the
documentary sediment of the history of a people, with originating factors
too complex for disentanglement with more than changing probability.
This has changed our understanding of the authority of a biblical text. It is
© Grand Valley State University
�Is Christianity Dying?
Richard A. Rhem
Page11
not that of an oracle from on high but that of an expression of the religious
identity of a particular people. (p. 110)
Nevertheless, what we find in the Bible are paradigms of faith, expressions of the
total response of persons and a community of persons whose experience of
having been addressed elicits the absoluteness of trust in the Mystery of grace.
Habakkuk found himself in turmoil over the ways of God; his parochialism was
shattered; he did not pretend to understand. But his encounter with the Holy One
of Israel issued in that beautiful expression of trust with which his writing
concludes. In a word, he says, "Strip me of everything, let disaster come;
Yet I will rejoice in the Lord; I will exult in the God of my salvation. God,
the Lord, is my strength; he makes my feet like the feet of a deer, and
makes me tread upon the heights.
Such trust is absolute, even when life is confusing and answers to our questions
evade us.
Such trust is enough in life, in death.
References:
Charles Davis, Interview, The Christian Century, July 16-23, 1997, p. 655f).
© Grand Valley State University
�
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/db1c0b8c4e1d51a10971cd4c559cc50d.mp3
08823404cd64b316f074b5e2c0838f97
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
Pentecost XII
Series
Tough Questions: No Easy Answers
Scripture Text
Habakkuk 1:1-5, 3:17-19, Luke 3:1-9, 19:37-38
Location
The location of the interview
Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI
References
Charles Davis, Interview, The Christian Century, July 16-23, 1997, p. 655f.
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-0-19970810
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1997-08-10
Title
A name given to the resource
Is Christianity Dying?
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University
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
Text
Sound
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 August 10, 1997 entitled "Is Christianity Dying?", as part of the series "Tough Questions: No Easy Answers", on the occasion of Pentecost XII, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Habakkuk 1:1-5, 3:17-19, Luke 3:1-9, 19:37-38.
Mystery
Nature of Religion
Pluralism
Religion as a Human Construct
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/341452f085bac8d63bb25d1dc74a70f6.pdf
f0273bcd2c2c12ae6fed468f9e375d51
PDF Text
Text
That’s the Answer; What’s the Question?
Eastertide
Text: Acts 3:12, 16; Acts 4:12
Richard A. Rhem
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
April 13, 1997
Transcription of the spoken sermon
I suggested to you last week that, in the wake of the resurrection, the Jesus
Movement was dynamic, alive, confident, joyful, vibrant, and on the move,
spreading across the ancient world like a burning fire, and that the Jesus
Movement had eventually become institutionalized and that we are, down the
pike 2000 years, a part of the institutionalization of that spirit of fire that broke
out in the wake of Jesus' resurrection. Spirit needs form. Movements always
become institutions, and institutions initially flourish and then they flounder and
fail. They have a period of youthful exuberance, of middle-aged mediocrity, and
finally weariness and defensiveness. They become sick of soul. It can be traced in
all sorts and conditions of human organization and institutional life, and we just
happen to be at the tail end of what was a great story - the story of the Christian
Church.
Israel had its story, its day in the sun. The Christian Church has had a 2000-year
run. There's something breaking and the future form isn't yet evident, but out of
the ashes of the Church's present sickness of soul will arise the Phoenix that will
have a luster and a glory far beyond anything of which we have yet dreamed. I
announce it ahead of time. How else could I be a prophet?
The authorities, the guardians of the tradition, the temple crowd thought that
they had gained themselves some time and some peace. They weren't bad people
and they weren't really into crucifixion but, if need be, they would let Jesus die in
order that the status quo might be maintained. Like the High Priest, Caiphas,
said, "Better that one man die for the people that the nation be spared." Spoken
like a true pragmatist. The kind of thing that you would expect some wise, old
head in the councils of power to say. Not really wanting anybody to bleed, but
better that one bleed that the status quo might be maintained.
Institutional leadership is a burden. You sort of carry the whole world on your
shoulders. You're responsible to keep everything together, responsible to keep the
natives from getting restless, that life can go on with a modicum of civility and
decency and comfort. And so, sometimes you have to make tough decisions.
© Grand Valley State University
�That’s the Answer; Question?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
"Jesus? Well, Jesus will have to die, and then we can get on and this uneasy
tension with our occupying power, Rome, and particularly those of us who are in
the clergy, high priesthood will be able to maintain our position and our privilege
because the perks aren't what they used to be, but they still aren't bad."
So, Jesus dies and then, lo and behold, that crowd is convinced that he's not dead
at all. They experience his presence and they say to one another, "The Lord is
risen!" And they begin to experience a new transformed understanding of life,
reality - that God, the God of Israel, the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, the
God Whom their forefathers and mothers worshipped is a God, obviously, Who is
not into death but into life, and will not tolerate the darkness but will affect the
light, and the end, obviously is not death, but life, and power and joy. The
presence of the living Christ transforms that dispirited band of defeated disciples
into flaming evangelists filled with good news.
Luke, who tells us the story of Jesus in the Gospel by his name, tells us that he
has researched the sources. Writing now several decades later, when there is
already the early institutional Christian Church, Luke writes volume II, the Book
of Acts. After telling about the day of Pentecost and the outpouring of the power
of the Spirit of God, the spirit of the Living Christ, he relates the incident that we
read a moment ago - Peter and John approaching the temple, still practicing their
Jewish prayers, three o'clock in the afternoon, a beggar at the door seeking alms,
his only means of livelihood. He is a cripple from birth. Peter and John say to
him, "Silver and gold have we none, but such as we have, we give to you." (I
usually say that, too. Silver and gold have I none. such as I have I give unto you.
Here's a sermon.) But, Peter and John say, "In the name of Jesus Christ of
Nazareth, rise up and walk!" They grab him by the arm just in case he didn't
believe them, and he feels the strength come into his limbs. He walks, he begins
to leap and to dance and to praise God, and, well, you would have been surprised
this morning if you would have found a bag person out there with a hand out
suddenly come down this middle aisle, dancing and praising God. I trust the
ushers would be present to usher him out because we do things decently and in
order here, we don't want too much frivolity or praise or dancing or leaping for
joy. Right?
But, all the people, obviously, are amazed, astounded. So, they come crowding
around and Peter and John say, "Look, this is no big deal. What do you think? Do
you think we did this? Do you think it's through our power or our piety that this
man stands before you, healed? Not at all. It is the name of Jesus. The God of
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob has anointed his servant, Jesus. That is, Jesus is the
Messiah, Jesus is God's anointed one, that connection between heaven and earth.
He is the conduit of divine power. It is through Jesus, the name of Jesus that
awakened faith in this man, that caused strength to seep into this man. This man
stands before you well, healed, full of health in the name of Jesus, not us."
© Grand Valley State University
�That’s the Answer; Question?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
Peter never missed an opportunity to preach, so he gave his witness to the
resurrection, and that, of course, was the sore point, so once again the authorities
have to move in. They thought they had done away with this pest. They thought
they had gotten rid of this threat to good order, mediocrity and boredom, but
obviously, they still had to deal with the problem. So, they arrested Peter and
John. What else do you do? When you're in authority you just throw them into
the holding tank overnight, let them cool off and think about it. But in the
morning, they arraign them, they bring them before the whole high priestly
family. Now, you've got a lot of vested interest here, and they say once again, "By
what name, what power, what's the secret?" How did you do it, in other words?
Peter, not always known for a sense of humor, but I think this time with a little
needle, (even Christians needle once in a while; they confess it the next morning),
said, "Oh, so we are arrested for doing a good deed?"
Someone gave me a lapel pin the other day that says, "I got caught doing
something right."
Well, Peter and John got caught doing something right, and the irony, of course,
wouldn't be lost on those in authority and so, once again, at the drop of a hat they
preach Jesus living, risen, powerful, healing, and they conclude with that old
declaration that was the very heart and center of that Jesus Movement which was
a movement of Jews who believed Jesus the Messiah. They said, "The name of
Jesus. It was in the name of Jesus, for there is no other name under heaven given
among humankind whereby you can be healed. In the name of Jesus, because
Jesus is God's conduit to history. Because Jesus is God's anointed one. Jesus was
that one conceived by the spirit of God, filled with the Spirit of God, living in the
power of the Spirit, crucified and raised in the Spirit."
This is post-Pentecost stuff, and Peter and John give testimony to the fact that
the eternal God, the God that Israel knew, the God of Abraham and Isaac and
Jacob - that God of power, that God Who creates and Who makes alive, that God,
through Jesus, made that man well. And there's no other way to be made well,
because there's no other God, and that God is the God of life and of wholeness
and of living.
The word for salvation is a word that also has out of its root, salve. It means
healing or wholeness, and it is interesting in this context that we have this man
spoken of as standing there full of health, in full health, and then in the 12th verse
of the 4th chapter, the word salvation is used, because often in the New
Testament salvation was used as a word that pointed to that total restoration of
the human person - physical, emotional and spiritual. And so, Peter's testimony
is that the eternal God Who is connected to us in the bridge person, Jesus, is the
God of life and of healing, Who creates wholeness and there's no other way to get
it. Not through Moses, not through David or Isaiah or Jeremiah or Peter or John.
It is through Jesus' name, Jesus who is the historical embodiment of the eternal
© Grand Valley State University
�That’s the Answer; Question?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
God, that's the way of healing and wholeness and health and salvation, life. That's
the answer.
Now, what's the question?
Well, obviously, the question is whether or not a Buddhist can be saved, isn't it?
Wouldn't that be the logical question that would fit that answer?
I read all the commentaries I could on the passage and it didn't say anything
about Buddhism or Hinduism or Muslim faith or whether or not other world
religions had any true knowledge of God or mediated any grace of God. There
wasn't any reference to this "burning issue," this burning question.
Commentaries, good scholarly commentaries, some liberal and far-out, some
conservative and ignorant, the whole spectrum, is what I mean to say, wherever
you want to look. No one addressed the burning issue - is there salvation in any
other than Jesus Christ? This text spouted everywhere, as though once you've
said Acts 4:12, you've solved the thing, there's nothing more to talk about, and the
Bible commentaries don't even address it! I wonder what's wrong with them?
Or, might it be that the Church in its soul-sickness is so mesmerized by a nonproblem that it missed the whole point of the passage?
The answer is that Jesus Christ is the embodiment of God, the conduit of grace
and healing, the one through whom life comes and life is transformed.
What's the question? The question is - How can I find wholeness? How can I be
healed? How can I be transformed? How is this world going to be transformed?
How is creation going to be mended? That's the issue.
In that early movement of Jesus people, if you had said to Peter, "Can a Buddhist
be saved?" Peter would have said, "Who?" "What?" I mean, Peter makes this bold
declaration in this conflict situation. Do you think everything being said between
the Israeli negotiators and the Palestinian negotiators is right on the mark,
measured carefully in these days? Netanyahu and Arafat make statements, they
look at each other and they talk to the press, don't they? They're in a conflict
situation. The future of Jerusalem is at stake. The future of Israel is at stake. The
future of the Palestinian state is at stake. The whole complexion, the future of
their lives is at stake. Why do you think we have to go back there time after time
after time to broker the peace once again? Why do we have to go back again and
again and throw them together? Why do we have to force them into a room and
lock the door and make them talk? Because their whole life, their whole future is
at stake! Do you think they're rationally sitting back and carefully calculating the
whole dimension of reality? They are so focused on that issue which is like a
pyramid set on its head, their whole life is determined by what happens in these
days, and they are making statements and claims and counter-claims, and so was
Peter and so was John and so was Caiaphas and so was Annas. They were in a life
© Grand Valley State University
�That’s the Answer; Question?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
and death conflict situation. They were talking to each other, making their
boldest declarations.
Two thousand years later, in the cool of the situation, we take that statement that
was made with hot blood, rip it out of its context and make it an answer to a
question that wasn't even being raised.
Our old friend, Krister Stendahl, says the right answer to the wrong question is
always wrong. And I even hesitate to deal with these biblical texts because, you
know, I can prove anything to you from this book. There's enough stuff here on
the one hand and on the other. So, it is not enough. It is a sign of a weak,
defensive, dying institution that it goes crawling through these pages looking for
a text to say, "Ah! You see? You see what it says?"
Dear friends, we've got to use our heads, to think. Because if you want to use Acts
4:12 as an answer to the wrong question, then I'll use Acts 10:38 as the right
answer to that question. Peter's now in the house of Cornelius. Cornelius is a
Gentile. Peter comes into that house expecting lightning to strike him dead
because he's not supposed to be in the house of a Gentile. He's not supposed to
have a ham sandwich with this man. And suddenly, he says, "Oh, I see. God
shows no partiality, but rather, everyone in whatever nation who fears the Lord is
acceptable to Him."
Well, in Acts 4:12, Peter, you said this. Acts 10:38, Peter, you said that. What are
you, nuts? What are you, Luke, trying to confuse us?
Luke would say, "Look, folks, use your head. Think. Think. For God's sake,
think!" Jesus of Nazareth, God's reconciling presence in the midst of the world.
Jesus of Nazareth, full of grace. Jesus of Nazareth who touched lepers and caused
the blind to see and the lame to walk, Jesus of Nazareth who put his arms around
the world - we've made him the one who draws circles that leave people out when
he's the very one who drew the circle that brought people in.
Question? What is the question? How will the world be transformed? How will
the kingdom be mended? How will creation come to wholeness? How can I find
peace with God? How can I find grace in my life? How can I have the forgiveness
of my sins and the removal of anxiety and fear? How can I come to find meaning
and purpose in my life?
The answer is Jesus. Jesus of Nazareth, Jesus, who was the embodiment of the
God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, the God of Israel, the only, only God Jesus, here, historically in our midst, becomes the beacon, the sign, the pointer.
Jesus who calls us not to worship him, but to follow him in worshipping God, and
following in ways of justice and compassion and with all others. The answer is
Jesus.
© Grand Valley State University
�That’s the Answer; Question?
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
I have no other answer for you. That isn't even an issue. For here and there, now
and again, more often I'm meeting others who speak about that same God, that
same sense of peace and grace and worship, devotion, and I say, "In what name?"
They have some other name, because there was some other particular revelation
of that One Universal experience of Grace. And then I say, "Well, you didn't come
my way," and then they quote Jesus to me, who says, "Those who are not against
us are for us who are also doing good things." Then I realize that it's so
important, when I've experienced the answer that is Jesus, that I learn the
question.
© Grand Valley State University
�
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/aa684086cf1d4b2412653378b07c51c8.mp3
560c975b467777cd820fe93cdd5226e2
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
Eastertide III
Scripture Text
Acts 3:12, 16, Acts 4:12
Location
The location of the interview
Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01_RA-0-19970413
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1997-04-13
Title
A name given to the resource
That's the Answer; What's the Question?
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University
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
Text
Sound
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 April 13, 1997 entitled "That's the Answer; What's the Question?", on the occasion of Eastertide III, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Acts 3:12, 16, Acts 4:12.
Compassion
Inclusive Grace
Pluralism
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/2b648f9c8b4d7e595089e58f24973425.pdf
33904c27e10276e6c462b647910c0670
PDF Text
Text
Beyond Reason: Discovery in Worship and Mission
Christian Unity Sunday
Text: Isaiah 49:6b; John 1:9
Richard A. Rhem
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Epiphany, January 19, 1997
Transcription of the spoken sermon
(On this Christian Unity Sunday, the choirs of the two parishes, St. Mary's
Catholic Church and Christ Community Church, in Spring Lake, have joined
together in Antonio Vivaldi's "Gloria," during the 10:00 am worship hour. The
choirs have been singing together, on occasion, since 1973, and there exists a
special affection between the two parishes.)
(Scripture is read by Jim Penrice, a seminarian intern at St. Mary's, from
Mundelein Seminary.)
On behalf of our pastor and all of your sisters and brothers at St. Mary's parish, I
bring you warm greetings on this cold morning. Somewhere in the scripture it
says, "It is good to be here." And it certainly is good to be with you today to
worship together as sisters and brothers in Christ.
This is a reading from the book of the prophet Isaiah:
Listen to me, O coast lands, and hearken, you peoples from afar. The Lord
called me from the womb, from the body of my mother he named my
name. He made my mouth like a sharp sword. In the shadow of his hand,
he hid me. He made me a polished arrow. In his quiver he hid me away.
And he said to me, "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will be
glorified." But I said, "I have labored in vain. I have spent my strength for
nothing and vanity, yet surely my right is with the Lord and my
recompense with my God." And now the Lord says, who formed me from
the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob back to him and that Israel
might be gathered to him, for I am honored in the eyes of the Lord and my
God has become my strength. He says it is too light a thing that you should
be my servant, to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved
of Israel. I will give you as a light to the nations that my salvation may
reach to the end of the earth." Thus says the Lord, the redeemer of Israel
and his Holy One, to one deeply despised, abhorred by the nations, the
servant of rulers. Kings shall see and arise, princes, and they shall
© Grand Valley State University
�Beyond Reason: Worship
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
prostrate themselves because of the Lord who is faithful, because of the
Holy One of Israel who has chosen you.
I invite you to please stand for the proclamation of the Gospel:
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word
was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through
him and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was
life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness and
the darkness has not overcome it. There was a man sent from God whose
name was John. He came for testimony, to bear witness to the light that all
might believe through him. He was not the light, but came to bear witness
to the light. The true light that enlightens every man was coming into the
world.
This is a great experience for us; it is the Sunday designated by a large part of the
Church as Christian Unity Sunday. It's a time in which we acknowledge that
which is not true, but that which ought to be true. We acknowledge that we know
better than we do, and, over the past 25 years of my second term here in this
congregation, one of the great experiences for me has been the warm friendship
between our neighboring parishes, St. Mary's and Christ Community. We have
sung Christmas carols together; we have joined together in ecumenical services;
the choirs have made presentations as this morning; we've had good fellowship
together in our halls with hot chocolate and good things to eat - it's been
enriching for me to experience the unity and the community between these two
parishes, and I've heard the same thing from many of you. I've heard it also from
the people of St. Mary's when we've had these occasions because, prior to that, we
lived in the community together, perhaps we were neighbors, maybe we worked
together, but on Sunday morning there was this kind of "Iron Curtain" that
divided us and no one gave us permission to embrace one another as brothers
and sisters in the faith. And so, it has been a beautiful experience for two
neighboring parishes, one Roman Catholic, one Protestant, to recognize that the
things that divide us are superficial and the things that make us one are
fundamental, and this morning is another wonderful experience of that unity that
we have in Jesus Christ.
God knows that unity is imperative for our world. The Roman Catholic theologian
from whom I have learned so much, Hans Küng, has said that there will be no
peace among the nations until there is peace among the religions, and there will
be no peace among the religions until there is peace among the churches. That
says it succinctly and pointedly, and it is true. Wherever you look in the globe
today, wherever there is trouble, potential violence, living on the edge of war, you
will find at the root of the conflict religious fervor, or someone using religion to
fuel the fires of discord and alienation. It is imperative that as people of faith we
learn to live together and in order to live together, it is imperative that we come
to experience that oneness that is ours because we are all the children of the one
© Grand Valley State University
�Beyond Reason: Worship
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
eternal God, who in the beginning brought all things into being and created
humankind in God's image with a heart that continues to yearn, to embrace all
God's children. I believe that's a biblical truth.
The passage from Isaiah is a very familiar passage; it's one of the servant songs in
that section of Isaiah 40-55, a servant poem in which, to begin with, the servant
seems to be Israel itself, and then moves to an individual who calls Israel to come
to itself and to realize its purpose, because the song indicates that Israel was to be
the place in which God was glorified on earth. God chose this people and in this
people God would show God's glory. And so, the servant is to call Jacob back to
God, to that prior claim to be that place where the light of God would dwell on
earth.
God chose Israel, not to the exclusion of the nations, but in order to bring light to
the nations, and in this poem after the servant hears the call to bring Jacob back
to God, the voice says, "But, that's not enough. That's too light a task. I will make
you a light to the nations in order that my salvation may be known to the end of
the earth."
I believe that Israel at its best, at its moments of most profound understanding,
saw itself to be the light of God to share with the nations in order that the world
might experience God's saving grace.
We in the Christian Church believe that that light came to sharp focus in Jesus. In
the prologue to his Gospel, John writes of the Word, the word that in the 14th
verse becomes flesh. In the meantime, that word speaks of a God Who is the
source of life and light for the world. The Gospel writer points to John the Baptist
and says John was not the light, but John came to bear witness to the light, and
that light that enlightens everyone was coming into the world. Christmas was the
coming in human flesh of that one who would say, "I am the light of the world."
Jesus was not, in himself, the source of light. Jesus was not the exclusive light
given to humankind. Jesus was the human flesh, was that supreme moment when
the light that flows from God, that enlightens everyone, was coming into sharp
focus. Jesus became the locus of the light, the light of God that enlightens all. I
believe that is biblically true.
But, if it's true, how can we realize it? How can we make it concrete in our world?
What I want to say to you this morning is that, beyond reason, the truth is
discovered in worship and mission. I say, beyond reason, because we will never
come to the experience and the realization of unity through rational discussion.
It is strange for me to say that, eh? I'm the incurable theologian. I am always
thinking, thinking, thinking. When I write with great persuasion, when I speak
with the tongues of angels, I think the whole world will understand. I can't figure
out why everybody doesn't see it! But, alas, I learned to my despair, that wellreasoned argument doesn't do it. It must be beyond reason; it must be
experienced. When it is experienced, it need not be discussed, debated or argued.
© Grand Valley State University
�Beyond Reason: Worship
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
When it is experienced, it is known; it becomes a reality, and it is my claim this
morning that the experience comes not as I wish it would come, by some finely
fashioned sermon, some theological discussion, some erudite essay - no. It will
come when it comes in worship and in mission. It will come when "Gloria in
excelsis Deo" is sung magnificently by human voice, accompanied by instrument.
It will come when we as a people are lifted into the presence of the living God,
when we are lifted out of ourselves and there is that transcendent moment when
we know ourselves caught up in wonder, love and praise. It is in worship, those
moments of adoration, those experiences when we lose our head, when we open
our heart, when our whole being pulsates, when our goosebumps have
goosebumps, and we know beyond any argument when we see two choirs
gathered together from two parishes from two great traditions singing one voice
to the glory of the one God - don't we know in that moment that we are together
the children of God who delight in the worship of that combined chorus? It is in
worship, whether in corporate worship like this or in other moments when in
different gatherings we may suddenly experience ourselves together.
You know that Saturday nights are sacred. I seldom venture out of the house, but
we did last evening for a special occasion - the birthday of the husband of the cochair of the Jewish-Christian Dialogue Committee, Sylvia Kaufman, and it was
one of those decade-turning birthdays, a very festive evening, a wonderful party.
Because Sylvia and Dick Kaufman are Jewish, there were Jewish friends and
relatives. But because they have been in that community so long, there were
Gentiles, as well, and people of all stripes. And because Sylvia is Chair of the
Jewish-Christian Committee, there were members of the committee. There
happened to be four clergy persons there, and in spite of that, it wasn't a bad
evening! Sylvia said, "How about our resident clergy blessing the meal before we
partake?" And so, we did - a Presbyterian, a ... (what am I?), a Lutheran, and a
Jewish rabbi, and for a moment that assembly there gathered knew a
transcendence that deepened the evening and we knew that we were one before
the true God Who gives us bread.
It is in worship that the superficial things that divide us are dissolved and we
know ourselves truly to be one. And it is in mission, it is when we are not thinking
the faith, but doing the faith. It is when our Parlour on Thanksgiving is filled with
the aroma of roast turkey and there are people from various parishes around the
community gathered together to roll up their sleeves and serve those who need a
place on Thanksgiving, washing the dishes, making this a place of hospitality. It
doesn't really matter what your brand is. Together there is a servant community
of the people of Christ serving as an expression concretely of the compassion of
God for all of those who would come. It comes in mission.
This is the birthday of Martin Luther King. It was 29 years ago that he was cut
down by an assassin's bullet. He was a prophet in our midst. We liked him not a
little, not a lot. He did not, of course, receive the honor in his life which is typical
for prophets. But, he had a dream and in the rich cadences of that black preacher,
© Grand Valley State University
�Beyond Reason: Worship
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
this nation was sensitized and we recognized the horror of the racism that was
encased in law, and his dream caught on and black and white together began to
make those moves to dismantle the structure of racism which is still far from
where it ought to be, but which has been moved immeasurably by one man who
had a dream of the day when people would be judged not by the color of their
skin, but by the character of their soul. The dream was caught by black and white
and young and old, and the landscape has changed, and we came together
because we were doing what was right and when we were doing what was right,
then we knew that there was a deeper unity that bound us together, that we were
all the children of God.
It is in worship and it is in mission that we come to experience the genuine unity
of the human family. I got a call three or four weeks ago from a man named David
or Daniel Fox. I had gotten a note to call this person. I didn't know who he was.
There were some notes scribbled about what he wanted, but they didn't make any
sense to me, and I've returned a few calls in the last few months that I wish I
hadn't, and so I wasn't too eager to dial up this number, but I did. I found out
that this was a gentleman who was a nephew of a chaplain in the Second World
War who had been one of the four chaplains who had gone down with a troop
ship. (Those of you who are older, like I am, will remember the story, perhaps.)
He knew that I was a minister in the Reformed Church of America at the time
and thought I might be able to give him some information about one of the
chaplains, Clark Poling, who was a minister in the RCA I pointed him to the
archives of the RCA and we chatted a bit about the story, which I did remember,
but he reminded me that it was early in the Second World War, the USS
Dorchester was torpedoed in the North Atlantic by a Nazi torpedo and they had
not enough life jackets on board.
There were four chaplains on board and those four chaplains took off their life
preservers and handed them to the troops. And, as the troops were scrambling
overside and into life boats, the chaplains stood on deck and they prayed for the
troops, for their survival and their safety. The ship was mortally wounded and as
it was slipping into that watery grave, the four chaplains stood on deck, linked
arm in arm, praying for their people. One was a Methodist. One was a pastor in
the Reformed Church. One was a Catholic priest, and one was a Jewish rabbi.
What a picture. What an image. As they slipped under those icy waters and came
into the presence of Light Eternal, do you suspect it mattered one whit that one
was Jewish, one was Catholic and two were Protestant? Of course, it didn't. You
know it didn't.
The reason I know that you know it didn't, is that about five years ago I had an
epiphany experience in this congregation. I was on my way to Brandeis
University to a think tank on congregational affiliation for Catholics, Protestants
and Jews. Do you remember? It happened to be Reformation Sunday and I told
you where I was going and for what reason and I suggested that perhaps I should
go to Brandeis and say to that group that what we really need to do, we who are
© Grand Valley State University
�Beyond Reason: Worship
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
from Geneva, is go to Rome and pick up our brothers and sisters there and go to
Constantinople, picking up more brothers and sisters, moving to Mecca and then
to Jerusalem where we might all experience the truth - that we are all together
the children of God. And you know what you did? It had never happened before.
For the first time in my ministry, you applauded the sermon and you said to me "We've known it all along. When will you catch up with us?"
You, the people, knew it. When I articulated it, you affirmed it, because you knew
it. You knew it here and my confidence for the future lies in the fact that you
know it and increasingly the people of God of whatever stripe will be saying to
ecclesiastical leaders, church bureaucrats and bishops and all kinds of such
animals, you will be saying, "Get out of the way!" because we're coming together,
because in your heart, you know it's true.
© Grand Valley State University
�
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/9f2f012ad9ce38692adcd6676146dc99.mp3
6f1888b33127356521eb6787d5dea25b
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 III
Scripture Text
Isaiah 49:6b, John 1:9
Location
The location of the interview
Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01_RA-0-19970119
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1997-01-19
Title
A name given to the resource
Beyond Reason: Discovery in Worship and Mission
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University
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
Text
Sound
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 January 19, 1997 entitled "Beyond Reason: Discovery in Worship and Mission", on the occasion of Epiphany III, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Isaiah 49:6b, John 1:9.
Community of Grace
Epiphany
Inclusive
Pluralism
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/83ef58ff7fd401a2fcfd54c26e691194.pdf
a6c401321cd204b372ff1c1e460f533f
PDF Text
Text
Dare To Follow the Light
Text: Isaiah 60:6-7; Ephesians 3:9; Matthew 2:2
Richard A. Rhem
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
January 5, 1997
Transcription of the spoken sermon
Epiphany, the manifestation of Christ, the Light of which the prophet in Israel
spoke, that Light of God which was Israel's treasure in order that they might be a
beacon to the nations, Matthew now sees coming to manifestation in Jesus.
There, in the face of Jesus, we see into the heart of God. And Paul with his
experience, being knocked off his horse by that light from heaven, realizes that
the mystery of God hid for the ages, now manifest, is that there is grace for the
whole world. That really is the Epiphany story. We read it in Matthew's Gospel,
and not only there but in the prophet, in Paul's understanding, the Light has
come. "The Light has come; the Light has dawned upon you."
The light has dawned upon us but we recognize immediately in that story of Jesus
as Matthew tells it that, when the light comes, the darkness is threatened, and all
hell breaks loose. This is the story of Herod, threatened by the announcement of
this newborn king, who passes a decree that the innocents should be slaughtered
in order to wipe out any pretender to the throne. Matthew is telling us
immediately in this joyous announcement of the birth of Jesus that the world will
not take kindly to the light, and that has been the story down through 2000 years,
has it not? It has been the story forever. The Christian Gospel is the
announcement of the Light of God. It is seen in continuity with that light that
dawned on Israel, and now for 2000 years the Gospel has been proclaimed and
the light of God has shined throughout the whole world.
This morning I want to suggest to you that it is not a question of whether or not
the Light has dawned. The question always before the Church, and the question
before us this morning is whether or not we will dare to follow the Light. I want
to suggest to you that Paul was a courageous person who made a radical break
with that heavy, sturdy tradition in which he had been nurtured. When
confronted by the Light, he recognized the call of God to take the Light to the
nations. We take that for granted. We celebrate Epiphany as the dawning of the
Light that had shone on Israel, which was now being manifest to the whole world,
symbolized by the coming of the Magi. So, it's ho-hum; we take it for granted.
© Grand Valley State University
�Dare to Follow the Light
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
But, you couldn't have taken it for granted if you had lived at the time of the event
itself. For Paul to realize, to sense a calling of God, to take the good news of the
Gospel of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles involved Paul going contrary to all of that
that had been nurtured in him.
Paul had to be a person of daring to say that the Gentiles can be reconciled to God
by God's grace without first becoming Jews. Paul was a radical reformer, and
there was great tension in that early Church. It was a long time before the
question was settled as to whether or not there would be a separate Jesus
Christian Movement or whether Paul could prevail within the Jewish community
itself to see in Jesus this Light of God. But, Paul had the courage to act on his
conviction and that at great cost. As he writes in this third chapter to the
Ephesians, the secret, long hid with God, but now made manifest, is precisely that
- that the grace of God is for the Gentiles so that Jew and Gentile will form one
new humanity. In another place in this letter he speaks about that wall of
separation being torn down. Paul had cut his eyeteeth on the idea of Jewish
separation, that separation over against all others. But, Paul says no more wall,
no more partition, no more separation. Now what God has said in Jesus Christ is
that God is moved to embrace all. That took courage and Paul paid for it dearly,
as many of his writings will indicate. My Epiphany message 1997 is this: Do we
have the courage to follow the light?
Our problem is not a lack of knowledge. I think the prophets and apostles and
preachers for ages have recognized that the light has dawned. But there has been
a failure of nerve to live out the implications of the light. It seems to me that here
we are 2000 years down from the event of the gift of that one in whose face we've
seen the light of the glory of God. What are the issues before us in the light of that
light; what is God calling us to do and to be in our day in order to follow the light?
It's one thing to dance in the light. It's another thing to behave and to act in light
of the light. I want to suggest to you, because of the nature of our situation, that
the stand we have taken as a congregation is the only responsible and reasonable
way in which the Church of Jesus Christ can respond to the light and follow the
light.
Bill Moyers has been in the news a lot lately. His Genesis series is very, very
popular, and he's done a lot of other things. I knew he was a Southern Baptist
minister, but I was surprised that Southern Baptists invited him to address the
Texas Conference, because the Southern Baptist Convention has been taken over
in the last decade or decade and a half by very conservative, fundamentalist
forces. But, Moyers addressed the Texas Southern Baptist Convention and he said
to them in a little clip I found in the newspaper, that there is a "whole new
religious reality out there" and you have to change from militant anger over the
fact that the universe is not closed and life is not static. Well, it sounds like he
really gave them both barrels, and he probably won't be invited back, but what he
said is true and we all know it. There's a whole new religious reality out there and
most of the Church wants to put its head in the sand as though it doesn't exist.
© Grand Valley State University
�Dare to Follow the Light
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
Isaiah thought the end was imminent and the light was dawning. Five hundred
years later, and Matthew thought the light had dawned and the end was
imminent. And now it's 2000 years later still. Do you suppose that God in heaven
is saying, "What in heaven's name are you people doing? Why don't you keep
following the light? Why don't you keep working out the implications of the
light?" Is it not evident to anybody with any sensitivity to our present global
situation that world evangelization that has been the impulse of the Church all
these years is an impulse that has hit a dead end? We do not see the
evangelization of the world according to the Gospel of Christ. We see the
resurgence of the great world religions.
We live in a global community that must increasingly become a community of
communities. We are able to communicate together in the world that has become
a neighborhood; we are learning the insights and the sensitivities and the light
that has dawned on others. Are we not being challenged to go into the arena and
share our insight and our light that has been God's gift through Jesus Christ with
others who share their gifts, as well? On the edge of the third millennium, should
we not be facing the reality of global consciousness and working out the
implications for our pluralistic world? Paul was confronted with a new situation a new door opened and Paul had the courage to go through that door. It is time
for someone to recognize that the mystery is even deeper, grander, and brighter
than even Paul understood, that God has a grander scheme, and that we have a
treasure in Jesus Christ to bring to the table in a world that sits down and
discusses the respective riches of the traditions, bringing together the Light that
God has given.
It's one thing to say the Light has dawned. It's another thing to have the courage
to live out its implications, and it does take courage. Such courage is exercised
only at considerable cost. That's the reason that the world is not transformed. It's
not a lack of light; it's a lack of courage.
I got a letter the other day from an old friend. Really a dear letter. Worried about
me, he says after a bit, "What if you've been wrong? What if the faith you once
held but have moved more and more away from is true?" He's a friend saying to
me, "What if you're wrong?" Well, he says I hear you say I'm willing to take that
chance. Finally, he says, "So, I invite you to take a fresh look, to ask again for
God's light." I say, "Fine. Don't think I don't."
I know that there is insight out there; there's a sense down deep in the core of
many people that the kind of things I have said publicly are what any reasonable
analysis would conclude, but it's costly and it takes courage to say it. That word
has appeared in letter after letter from around the world. "Thank you for your
courage." Do we have the courage to follow the light? How long will we bask in
the Light that has dawned without doing something about it because, without the
courage to act on the Light, the world will not be transformed.
© Grand Valley State University
�Dare to Follow the Light
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
The issue that got us into controversy a year ago was the issue of sexual
orientation and my recognition because of the growing light, knowledge, and
experience, that sexual orientation is not a moral issue. I have in my hands a
book which is brilliant. It's called Virtually Normal, written by Andrew Sullivan,
who is the editor of "The New Republic." It is splendidly written and beautifully
argued, and Andrew Sullivan, dealing with the whole matter of sexual
orientation, himself being a gay man, speaks about various groups lined up on
this issue - the prohibitionists, the liberationists, the conservatives, the liberals he comes to the liberals, and one would think that he, being a gay person, would
affirm the liberal attempt to create space for the gay/lesbian community. He is
appreciative of the legislation that seeks to rule out discrimination and that kind
of thing, but he says finally the liberals who believe in freedom are denying their
own most fundamental principles because this issue is not something that can
finally be legislated and it cannot be fixed by law. Then speaking for himself, but I
think speaking out of a profound experience and a brilliant insight, he says that
the key to the healing and liberation of any person of homosexual orientation lies
within themselves. He points to the civil rights movement of the 60s and he says
perhaps the most enduring legacy of the civil rights movement was not its
panoply of complicated and cumbersome laws, but the memory of the simple
courage of those who stood up in the face of considerable danger for their dignity
and equality. "What one remembers, what will never be erased from human
consciousness was the gleam of integrity in the eyes of those who took it upon
themselves to change their world, expecting no protection and no applause for
doing so. It is courage that gets noticed and courage that changes the world."
The pain of the homosexual experience requires that kind of catharsis to be
healed. Nothing else can replace it. That is the case with Jerry Crane, the teacher
in Byron Center who declared who he was in his faithful covenant relationship
with another, who to be sure was hounded out of his teaching job and who had to
endure two and three and four times as much press as I have, but who
nevertheless as a dignified human being, as a man of class and culture, had the
gleam in his eye because he was who he was and he stood there exposed in his full
humanity. He died this week, but his courage will change the world.
I'll tell you there are all kinds of us crouching in the bushes, and I'm not talking
now about sexual orientation, I'm talking about the things, the core values by
which we live - there are all kinds of us who believe things deep down that we've
never had enough courage to stand up and speak for. And there's only one thing
that really liberates the human soul; there's only one thing that brings us into the
fullness of the human experience - it is when we are true to the light as it has
dawned upon us. When the light has dawned upon us and we are true to it, we
may find ourselves in Ramah, weeping for our children, not able to be comforted.
But we will have been true, and when we will have been true, that will be enough.
© Grand Valley State University
�
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/482a107479c0f0dee2a4cc8fab1ca231.mp3
3c84ed5ea3e120e9c0c42966d8e7c48f
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 I
Scripture Text
Isaiah 60:6-7, Ephesians 3:9, Matthew 2:2
Location
The location of the interview
Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01_RA-0-19970105
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1997-01-05
Title
A name given to the resource
Dare to Follow the Light
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University
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
Text
Sound
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 January 5, 1997 entitled "Dare to Follow the Light", on the occasion of Epiphany I, at Christ Community Church, Spring Lake, MI. Scripture references: Isaiah 60:6-7, Ephesians 3:9, Matthew 2:2.
Epiphany
Light of God
Pluralism
Universal Grace
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/2308a79f451e0b7b398aae5a37b33baf.pdf
759320894839a494b0e424d7e7761f03
PDF Text
Text
The Analogical Imagination:
Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism
By David Tracy
(The Crossroads Publishing Company, 1998)
Review By
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Publication of Review Unknown
In the Preface to his study David Tracy states the task he sets out for himself:
The need is to form a new and inevitably complex theological strategy that
will avoid privatism by articulating the genuine claims of religions to truth
(p. xi).
He claims that theology, by its very nature, asks fundamental existential
questions because theology reflects on the reality of God, but it must develop
public, not private, criteria and discourse. Recognizing theology addresses three
publics: society, academy and church, each of which demands public criteria and
discourse, Tracy’s main focus is on Systematic Theology, which he understands as
fundamentally a hermeneutical enterprise and his development of that
understanding is to claim,
The issue of both the meaning and truth of religion is related to the
analogous issue of the meaning and truth of art. The central claim
advanced is a claim to both meaning and truth in our common human
experience of any classic. (p. xii).
Tracy recognizes the contemporary emergence of a sociological imagination
which he sees as analogous to the earlier rise of historical consciousness and it is
in such a social reality that the theologian must work. In such a context the
theologian makes his claim.
What is that claim? A claim to public response bearing meaning and truth
on the most serious and difficult questions, both personal and communal,
that any human being or society must face: Has existence any ultimate
meaning? Is a fundamental trust to be found amidst the fears, anxieties
and terror of existence? Is there some reality, some force, even some one,
who speaks a word of truth that can be recognized and trusted? Religions
ask and respond to such fundamental questions of the meaning and truth
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 2 of 20
of our existence as human beings in solitude, and in society, history and
the cosmos. Theologians, by definition, risk an intellectual life on the
wager that religious traditions can be studied as authentic responses to
just such questions. The nature of these fundamental questions cuts across
the spectrum of publics. Lurking beneath the surface of our everyday lives,
exploding into explicitness in the limit-situations inevitable in any life, are
questions which logically must be and historically are called religious
questions.
To formulate such questions honestly and well, to respond to them with
passion and rigor, is the work of all theology. (p. 4)
With such a vision of theology’s work, Tracy sets out to create a space in human
endeavor for such an undertaking. Claiming the common human experience of
encountering a classic in the spectrum of human culture, Tracy points specifically
to the classic in art which is universally recognized. He then claims the same
holds true for the religious experience; there have been religious expressions that
can rightfully be designated classic. As cited above,
The issue of both the meaning and truth of religion is related to the
analogous issue of the meaning and truth of art.
For Tracy, a Christian theologian, the classic religious expression is the event of
Jesus Christ. In Part I Tracy will develop his claim that a religious classic can be
portrayed through reasoning that is publicly recognized – there can be no appeal
to an external norm or private vision. This section he entitles “Publicness in
Systematic Theology.” From there he will go on to apply what he has claimed to
the event of Jesus Christ. Section Two he entitles, “Interpreting the Christian
Classic.”
The Preface announces the major question of Tracy’s The Analogical
Imagination: “In a culture of pluralism must each religious tradition finally
either dissolve into some lowest common denominator or accept a marginal
existence as one interesting but purely private option?” Tracy is not willing to
accept either option. A theological strategy must be found that can articulate the
genuine claims of religion to truth. This is the task he sets for himself: a
responsible affirmation of pluralism through the discovery of public criteria by
which truth can be affirmed.
Theology must develop public criteria of truth and discourse because it deals with
the fundamental questions of existence and because it speaks of God.
Recognizing that the theologian addresses three arenas, society, academy and
church, Tracy insists that the criteria of publicness applies in all three areas.
Theology is the generic name for three disciplines: fundamental, systematic and
practical theologies. Publicness is demanded of each. The primary focus of
fundamental theology is the academy, of systemic theology, the church and of
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 3 of 20
practical theology, society. They differ not only in their primary reference group,
but also in terms of their modes of argument, ethical stance, religious stance and
in terms of expressing claims to meaning and truth.
On the way to a responsible pluralism all conversation partners must agree to
certain basic rules for the discussion. Two constants are present: the
interpretation of a religious tradition and the interpretation of the religious
dimension of the contemporary situation from which and to which the theologian
speaks. In regard to the first, it is incumbent upon the theologian to make explicit
his or her general method of interpretation, to develop “criteria of
appropriateness” whereby specific interpretations of the tradition may be judged
by the wider theological community. In regard to the interpretation of the
contemporary situation, there must be an analysis of the “religious” questions,
the question of the meaning of human existence in the present situation.
There are major differences as well. Tracy addresses the question as to what
constitutes a public claim to truth in the three sub-disciplines of theology.
Fundamental theology’s defining characteristic is “a reasoned insistence on
employing the approach and methods of some established academic discipline to
explicate and adjudicate the truth claims of the interpreted religious tradition
and the truth claims of the contemporary situation.” (p. 62) Various models are
available but whichever model is chosen fundamental questions and answers are
articulated in such a way that any attentive, intelligent, reasonable and
responsible person can understand and judge them in keeping with fully public
criteria for argument. Personal faith may not enter the argument for the truth
claims in fundamental theology.
The systematic theologian’s major task is the reinterpretation of the
tradition for the present situation. Where the fundamental theologian will
relate the reality of God to our fundamental trust in existence (our
common faith), the confessional systematic theologian will relate that
reality to their arguments for a distinctively Christian understanding of
faith. (p. 65)
Christian theology…consists in explicating in public terms and in
accordance with the demands of it own primary confessions, the full
meaning and truth of the original “illuminating event”…which occasioned
and continues to inform its understanding of all reality. (p. 66)
Thus the task of the systematic theologian is an hermeneutical task. The
“illuminating event” Tracy calls a religious classic. As in a classic work of art, the
religious classic contains the possibility of ever new “disclosures.” Classics Tracy
defines as texts, events, images, persons, rituals and symbols which are assumed
to disclose permanent possibilities of meaning and truth. The hermeneutical
theologian seeks to articulate the truth – disclosure of the reality of God
embedded in the tradition for the contemporary situation.
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 4 of 20
There is today a strong case being made by many theologians for the necessity of
any theological theory or argument yielding to the demand of praxis.
Praxis…must be related to theory, not as theory’s application or even goal
as in all conscious and unconscious mechanical notions of practice or
technique. Rather praxis is theory’s own originating and self-correcting
foundation, since all theory is dependent, minimally, on the authentic
praxis of the theorist’s personally appropriated value of intellectual
integrity and self-transcending commitment to the imperatives of critical
rationality. (p. 69)
Tracy states his response to the theologians of praxis as follows:
The very notion of praxis is grounded in a distinction, not a separation;
truth as transformation always also involves truth as disclosure; speaking
the truth is never separable but is distinguishable from doing the truth;
cognitive claims are not simply validated through authentic praxes any
more than causes are validated through the presence of martyrs; the crises
of cognitive claims does not simply dissipate when the shift of emphasis to
the social-ethical crisis of a global humanity comes more clearly into
central focus…. (p. 79)
In sum: fundamental theology seeks metaphysical and existential adequacy to
experience; systematic theology seeks the disclosure of the original “illuminating
event” in the present situation; practical theology emphasizes the necessity of
truth as transformative. Tracy hopes for the possibility of collaboration between
these sub-disciplines and the communal recognition of the real need for all three.
Tracy moves the focus now to systematic theology asking from the perspective of
fundamental theology what one can argue on obviously public grounds for the
public status of all good systematic theology. The question is simply, “Is
systematic theology public discourse?”
It is Tracy’s contention that systematic theology is hermeneutical. This means
that systematic theology’s task is to interpret, mediate and translate the meaning
and truth of the tradition. Where this is not the case, where the notion of
authority shifts from a truth disclosed to mind and heart to an external norm for
the obedient will, theologians can no longer interpret and translate the tradition
but “only repeat the shop-worn conclusions of the tradition.” (p. 99)
Eventually, the central, classical symbols and doctrines of the tradition
become mere “fundamentals” to be externally accepted and endlessly
repeated. (p. 99)
Tracy points to the contrast of an hermeneutical theology:
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 5 of 20
The heart of any hermeneutical position is the recognition that all
interpretation is a mediation of past and present, a translation carried on
within the effective history of a tradition to retrieve its sometimes strange,
sometimes familiar meanings. (p. 99)
How is this done? Recognizing that one begins within a tradition which has
shaped one, that one is socialized, acculturated and thus without the possibility of
finding some position “above” one’s own historicity,
…the route to liberation from the negative realities of a tradition is not to
declare the existence of an autonomy that is literally unreal but to enter
into a disciplined and responsive conversation with the subject matter –
the responses and, above all, the fundamental questions – of the tradition.
(p. 100)
Tracy refers to Hans-Georg Gadamer’s model of conversation as a model for
understanding the dialogue with the tradition.
Real conversation occurs only when the participants allow the question,
the subject matter, to assume primacy. It occurs only when our usual fears
about our own self-image die….That fear dies only because we are carried
along, and sometimes away, by the subject matter itself into the rare event
or happening named “thinking” and “understanding.” For understanding
happens; it occurs not as the pure result of personal achievement but in
the back-and-forth movement of the conversation itself. (p. 101)
…The word “hermeneutical” best describes this realized experience of
understanding in conversation. For every event of understanding, in order
to produce a new interpretation, mediates between our past experience
and the understanding embodied in our linguistic tradition and the
present event of understanding occasioned by a fidelity to the logic of the
question in the back-and-forth movement of the conversation. (p. 101)
Using the model of conversation Tracy shows how one enters into the history of
the illuminating event. When interpreting a classic one recognizes its “excess of
meaning” demands constant interpretation and is at the same time timeless –
“a certain kind of timelessness –namely the timeliness of a classic
expression radically rooted in its own historical time and calling to my
own historicity. That is, the classical text is not in some timeless moment
which needs mere repetition. Rather its kind of timelessness as permanent
timeliness is the only one proper to any expression of the finite, temporal,
historical beings we are….The classic text’s fate is that only its constant
reinterpretation by later finite, historical, temporal beings who will risk
asking its questions and listening, critically and tactfully, to its responses
can actualize the event of understanding beyond its present fixation in a
text. (p. 102)
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 6 of 20
To be understood a classic cannot be repeated; it must be interpreted. Thus Tracy
claims
All contemporary systematic theology can be understood as fundamentally
hermeneutical. This position implies that systematic theologians, by
definition, will understand themselves as radically finite and historical
thinkers who have risked a trust in a particular religious tradition – They
seek, therefore, to retrieve, interpret, translate, mediate the resources –
…of the classic events of understanding of those fundamental religious
questions embedded in the classic events, images, persons, rituals, texts
and symbols of the tradition. (p. 104)
Tracy moves on to the normative role of the classics. He begins with the assertion
“classics exist.” It is true of all cultures. He claims,
We all find ourselves compelled both to recognize and on occasion to
articulate our reasons for recognition that certain expressions of the
human spirit so disclose a compelling truth about our lives that we cannot
deny them some kind of normative status. (p. 108)
Such expressions we call “classic.” Tracy defines the classic thus:
My thesis is that which we mean in naming certain texts, events, images,
rituals, symbols and persons “classics” is that here we recognize nothing
less than the disclosure of a reality we cannot but name truth….some
disclosure of reality in a moment that must be called one of “recognition”
which surprises, provokes, challenges, shocks and eventually transforms
us; an experience that upsets conventional opinion and expands the sense
of the possible; indeed a realized experience of that which is essential, that
which endures. (p. 108)
The experience of a classic work of art is used as an illustration of Tracy’s point.
Citing Gadamer, he writes,
The actual experience of the work of art can be called a realized experience
of an event of truth ....when I experience any classic work of art, I do not
experience myself as an autonomous subject aesthetically appreciating the
good qualities of an aesthetic object set over against me. Indeed, when I
reflect after the experience upon the experience itself, shorn of prior
theories of "aesthetics," I find that my subjectivity is never in control of the
experience, nor is the work of art actually experienced as an object with
certain qualities over against me. Rather the work of art encounters me
with the surprise, impact, even shock of reality itself. In experiencing art, I
recognize a truth I somehow know but know I did not really know except
through the experience of recognition of the essential compelled by the
work of art. (p. 111F)
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 7 of 20
I am transformed by the truth which I encounter. I experience self-transcendence
not as an achievement; rather it happens, it occurs. I am caught up in the
disclosure of the work.
Gadamer uses the phenomenon of the "game" to describe this encounter. In
playing a game I lose myself in the play moving into the "rules" of the game.
The game becomes not an object over against a self-conscious subject but
an experienced relational and releasing mode of being in the world distinct
from the ordinary, nonplayful one. In every game, I enter the world where
I play so fully that finally the game plays me. (p. 114)
This is what happens when one encounters a genuine work of art. One finds
oneself in the grip of an event, a happening, a disclosure, a claim to truth which
cannot be denied.
Tracy notes the process of encountering the text. The first movement is the
reception of the text. Secondly, if the text is a classic it will carry a force that will
claim attention. The third step of interpretation involves the "game" spoken of
above.
The dialogue will demand that the interpreter enter into the back-andforth movement of that disclosure in the dialectics of a self-transcending
freedom released by the text upon a finite, historical, dialogical reader and
received by the text from a now dialoguing reader. (p. 120)
The fourth step involves the larger conversation of the entire community of
inquirers.
To illustrate our claim that an encounter with a classic work of art demands our
attention and discloses truth which we cannot but recognize as an encounter with
reality, Tracy describes the production of a classic. The discussion of that creative
artistic process leads him to conclude:
In the paradigmatic expressions of the human spirit - in those texts,
events, persons, actions, images, rituals, symbols which bear within them
a classic as authoritative status, we find in our experienced recognition of
their claim to attention the presence of what we cannot but name "truth."
... That truth is at once a disclosure and a concealment of what, at our best
and most self-transcending in interpreting the classics, we cannot but
name "reality." (p. 130)
Tracy therefore argues for his contention that the systematic theologian is the
interpreter of religious classics.
Systematic theology intends to provide an interpretation, a retrieval
(including a retrieval through critique and suspicion) and always,
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 8 of 20
therefore, a new application of a particular religious tradition’s selfunderstanding for the current horizon of the community. (p. 131)
Applying this understanding of systematic theology’s task to the specific task of
the Christian thinker, Tracy declares,
In Christian systematics, that self-understanding is itself further grounded
in the particular events and persons of Jewish and Christian history:
decisively grounded, for the Christian, in God’s own self-manifestation as
my God in this classic event and person, Jesus Christ. (p. 131)
But now the crux of the matter is reached: how does the systematic theologian
address the wider public with discussion characterized by “publicness” thus
stopping the retreat of Christian faith into the sphere of privateness and yet
remain faithful to
the radical particularity of the relationship of my gift’s disclosure to the
particular events of God’s action in ancient Israel, in Jesus of Nazareth, in
the history of the Christian church? (p. 132)
Acknowledging the dilemma, Tracy believes it can be overcome. The means of
overcoming the dilemma is the recognition of the public nature of the classic:
grounded in some realized experience of a claim to attention, unfolding as
cognitive disclosures of both meaning and truth and ethically
transformative of personal, social and historical life. (p. 132)
Tracy therefore contends,
Whenever any systematic theologian produces a classic interpretation of a
particular classic religious tradition (as both Barth and Rahner have), then
that new expression should be accorded a public status in the culture…. (p.
132F)
Every classic…is a text, event, image, person or symbol which unites
particularity of origin and expression with a disclosure of meaning and
truth available, in principle, to all human beings. (p. 133)
And again:
Any person’s intensification of particularity via a struggle with the
fundamental questions of existence in a particular tradition, if that
struggle is somehow united to the logos of appropriate expression, will
yield a form of aesthetically sharable public discourse. (p. 134)
Chapter four deals with the interpretation of the religious classics. The classic,
Tracy claims, has these two marks: permanence and excess of meaning. They
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 9 of 20
demand interpretation, never mere repetition nor simplistic rejection. The
interpreter must plunge in, get caught up in the subject matter of the classic.
Engaging a major classic or being engaged by it is to be engaged by the questions
of the truth of existence. This is the task of the systematic theologian – to
interpret the religious classics of a culture.
While many in contemporary culture relegate religious questions to a primitive
state of the race’s development, Tracy raises the question,
Yet what if the authority of religion is not the authoritarianism in our
impacted memories of “religion” but the authority of those authentic,
indeed inevitable fundamental questions about the meaning of the whole
codified in the questions and responses of classical religious texts, events,
images, symbols, rituals and persons? (p. 155)
To be sure, the religions have been purveyors not only of authentic truth but
demonic destructive power. There is a great deal of conflict of interpretations on
the meaning of religion and in the modern period the claims of Feuerbach, Marx,
Nietzsche and Freud that describe religion as “projection” and “illusion” must be
faced. Arriving at one definition for the essence of religion is not possible. Yet
Tracy will not back off; he claims,
The questions which religion addresses are the fundamental existential
questions of the meaning and truth of individual, communal and historical
existence as related to, indeed as both participating in and distanced from,
what is sensed as the whole of reality. (p. 157F)
Religion, Tracy argues, is not just another cultural perspective alongside
morality, art, science, commerce and politics. In its own self-understanding,
a religious perspective claims to speak not of a part but of the whole. (p.
159)
In a very technical philosophical argument Tracy maintains
An ability to partly state – more exactly, to metaphysically state – the
abstract, general, universal and necessary features of the reality of God as
the one necessary existent which can account for the reality of a limit-of,
ground-to, horizon-to the whole disclosed in earlier phenomenological
accounts. (p. 161)
Religion has essential characteristics even apart from a single definition of its
essence and chief among them, Tracy claims, is "a limit-character." There is both
a "limit-to" dimension:
a dimension present in the "limit-questions" of scientific inquiry and
moral striving, and in those experiences (either negative, like anxiety as
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 10 of 20
distinct from fear, or positive, like fundamental trust, wonder and loyalty
as distinct from trust in and fidelity to a particular cause), disclosive of the
"limit-situation" which is the human situation. (p. 160)
and a "limit of" dimension:
The philosophical analyses of fundamental theology, therefore, free the
inquirer to study the possible meanings of such recognized "situational"
limit-experiences as finitude, contingency, mortality, alienation or
oppression and thereby to explicate, indeed to state, the character of that
reality as a limit-to our existence. In that explicit stating of a limit-to, the
inquirer may also be able to disclose or show the existence of a reality here
named a "limit-of" (alternatively horizon-to our ground-of). In its
metaphysical or transcendental form, the analysis can also partly state the
character of that reality of the limit-of. This is the case, in the Western
tradition, when the metaphysical reality of God as the one necessary
existent grounding all reality is explicated as the referent of just such
limit-experiences of a religious dimension to our lives", (p. 160)
Tracy uses Karl Rahner's work to illustrate how this philosophical analysis of
fundamental theology relates to the Christian conviction of the revelation of God
in Jesus Christ.
For Rahner, the philosopher of religion can provide persuasive
philosophical arguments for the necessary existence of an absolute
mystery as ultimate horizon to all thinking and living. If that argument
holds, then Rahner is correct to insist that the human being, now
understood as always already within that horizon of ultimate mystery, can
be redescribed, in his now famous phrase, as a hearer of a possible
revelation from this horizon, i.e., a self-manifestation by the power of
ultimate mystery itself.
In the actual experience of that self-manifestation of God in Jesus Christ,
the Christian believer now, according to Rahner, recognizes that the
concrete revelation is a pure gift or grace from the incomprehensible God
of Love. Then the believer "recognizes" that all reality is graced by that gift:
that all reality partakes in a "transcendental" revelation disclosed in the
categorical revelation of God's own self-manifestation in Jesus Christ; that
revelation, as "transcendental," is always already present in this concretely
graced world; that revelation as "categorized" is present in the gratuity of
God's self-manifestation in the events of "salvation history," decisively
present, for Rahner, in the event of the manifestation of who God is and
who we are in Jesus Christ. (p. 162)
Thus we are hearers of a possible revelation or self-manifestation of the absolute
mystery and for the Christian believer that manifestation has taken concrete
shape in Jesus Christ. In these terms the religious classic
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 11 of 20
may be viewed as an event of disclosure, expressive of the "limit-of,"
"horizon-to," "ground-to" side of "religion." ... religious classic expressions
will involve a claim to truth as the event of a disclosure – concealment of
the whole of reality by the power of the whole – as, in some sense, a
radical and finally gracious mystery. (p. 163)
An experience of such a classic religious expression will carry an authority which
will give to the religious person the conviction
that their values, their style of life, their ethos are in fact grounded in the
inherent structure of reality itself. (p. 163)
Tracy summarizes his contention in this discussion of the interpretation of the
religious classic as follows:
First, a defining characteristic of the situational "religious dimension of
common experience and language" is the "limit-to" character of the
experience itself, whatever its particular existential focus. Second, a
defining characteristic of any explicit religion – more exactly any classic
religious expression – is a “limit-of” character bearing the status of eventgift-manifestation of and from the whole, and experienced as giving the
respondent wholeness. (p. 165)
His approach in pursuing this line of argument – that the religious classic exists,
claims our attention and discloses truth which we cannot but name reality –
presumes an appropriate preunderstanding for the interpretation of religion. He
argues:
If one is guided by a sense for those fundamental questions, if guided as
well by that great modern tradition of interpretation of the sui generis
character of religion ... The interpreter is likely to find relative adequacy in
the kind of interpretations of the appropriate responses to the religious
classics described in different, sometimes conflicting ways by these great
modern phenomenologists of the sui generis character of religion. (p. 168)
... The kind of claim to attention that a religious classic, as religious,
provokes is a claim that discloses to the interpreter some realized
experience bearing some sense of recognition into the objectively awesome reality of the otherness of the whole as radical mystery. The
genuinely religious person (James' "mystics" and "saints"), it seems, do
experience that reality of mystery as the reality of the holy bearing
overwhelming and life-transformative force, (p. 168F)
The religious person speaks of revelation, the self-manifestation of an undeniable
power not one's own or at one's disposal. They cannot but acknowledge the
eruption of a power manifesting itself – a power of the whole revealing the whole.
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 12 of 20
For the whole experienced as radical mystery is experienced as giving itself
in the religious response. The whole, in manifesting itself, is also
experienced as freeing the real self of the respondent to its true freedom; a
freedom where the self's new ethos is experienced as grounded in reality
itself – a reality both disclosed and concealed as the whole by the power of
the whole. (p. 175)
Again Tracy explains the experience thus:
The same sense of radical giftedness both fascinates and frightens as it
shocks and transforms the self to believe what one dare not otherwise
believe: that reality is finally gracious, that the deepest longings of our
minds and hearts for wholeness in ourselves, with others, with history and
nature, is the case – the case granted as gift by the whole; the case
expressed with relative adequacy determined by the intrinsic inadequacy
of every classic religious expression. (p. 177)
We approach now the heart of Tracy’s argument as he discusses the religious
classic under the sub-divisions of manifestation and proclamation. Here he
makes a creative and passionate appeal for a genuinely ecumenically Christian
witness which brings together the strengths of the Catholic, Orthodox and
Protestant traditions rather than the more narrow focus of any single tradition.
Tracy's argument rests on his contention that truth becomes a realized experience
through the encounter with a religious classic. A classic expression encountered
frees oneself from the ordinary attempts to distance the self from any claims that
cannot be controlled as objects over against its own subjectivity.
... The interpreter of religious classics may admit that this classic
testimony bears a claim to truth. That claim is, more exactly, a nonviolent
appeal to the instinct of the human spirit for some relationship to the
whole. (p. 194)
The truth experienced in the classic has the character of event.
When technical rationality reigns, no recognition of the event-character of
truth can occur. Any interpreter of the religious classic must early decide
whether to impose some standards of technical rationality upon all
classical expressions or risk exposing oneself to another mode of
rationality; a mode proper to the thing itself as it discloses itself to
consciousness. We cannot, in fact, verify or disprove the claims of classical
religious expressions through empiricist methods….truth here becomes a
manifestation that lets whatever shows itself to be in its showing and its
hiddenness. (p. 195)
Neither the Enlightenment model of rationality nor traditionalist models of
heteronomy are capable of dealing thus with truth as event, occurrence. They
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 13 of 20
both interpret all claims to truth through the restrictive lenses of techniques
developed by autonomous and heteronomous interpreters. Just as one
approaches a classic in any field, so in religion one must be open to being caught
up in the "conversation," the "game," open to being transformed by the truth of
the whole which finds expression or which discloses itself through the concrete
religious expression.
Fundamental theology warrants the claims to truth of the religious
dimension to existence on ordinary public grounds; systematic theology as
interpretation warrants the claims to truth of a concrete religion on those
kinds of authentically public grounds appropriate to the kind of disclosive
publicness expressed in all classics.
This is the case, moreover, for radically experiential reasons: the realized
experience of the truth-character of the religious classic is an experience of
its purely given character, its status as an event, a happening manifested to
my experience, neither determined by nor produced by my subjectivity. (p.
198)
Tracy describes the structural similarity between the encounter with religious
classics and other classics.
Any classic will produce its meaning through the related strategies of
intensification of particularity and intensification of distanciation in
expression. The first journey of intensification into one's own particularity
will ordinarily free the person (or community) from the limitations of selfconsciousness into a sense of a real participation in, a belonging to, a
wider and deeper reality than the self or the community. That experience
of intensification, like all experience must involve some understanding
and some expression. When the struggle for expression – the second, selfdistancing journey of intensification – finds its appropriate genre, style
and form, then the self is positively distanced from the original experience
in order to express the meaning of that experience. Then a person can
communicate the disclosive meaning to others who may not now share it,
but can share its meaning through experiencing the now-rendered
expression. (p. 199F)
There is a difference between religious classics and other classics, however. It has
to do with intensity. The religious classic is an expression of the whole itself by
the power of the whole.
... The authentically religious impetus is one where the intensification
process is itself abandoned into a letting go of one's own efforts at
intensity. One lets go because one has experienced some disclosure of the
whole which cannot be denied as from the whole. (p. 201)
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 14 of 20
Finally one experiences a sense of resting in the radical and gracious mystery at
the heart of human existence. Such an experience demands expression:
a demand to express that experience and its meaning and truth in a form –
a text, an image, a gesture, above all, a style of life. The demand to express,
to render, to communicate sets in motion the distanciation process
whereby the self distances itself from its own self-consciousness and finds
the proper genre for some expression of that meaning and truth. (p. 201)
Summarizing the process, Tracy claims,
Both the expression and the experience of a religious "limit-of" disclosure
and concealment of and by the whole remains, therefore, intrinsically
dialectical throughout the entire process. The demands of the journey of
intensification into the fundamental questions of the meaning of existence
imply their opposite: a letting-go, a being-caught-up-in, a radical
belonging-to some disclosure of the whole by the whole. And the very
radicality of that belonging-to the whole posits itself by implying its
opposite: I as a self recognize that I am absolutely dependent upon the
whole, recognize myself as in actuality profoundly ambiguous in all my
experience, my understanding, my ability and willingness to live by and in
the radical mystery which envelops and empowers me. As the dialectic
intensifies, this recognition of the disclosure of radical mystery posits itself
as disclosure by implying its opposite: The mystery is also concealed from
me by and in its disclosure as mystery. The revelation is also a revelation
of hiddenness; the flooding, white light of its comprehensibility frees me to
recognize the dark impenetrable incomprehensibility of both the whole
and myself in the whole. (p. 202)
Then comes the command to communicate by incarnating that reality in a word,
a symbol, an image, a ritual, a gesture, a life.
Tracy moves now to discuss the classical forms of religious expression:
manifestation and proclamation. The dialectical process just described,
an existential intensification of particularity, expressing itself through
distanciation in a sharable form – will operate dialectically at every
moment in the process. (p. 203)
But now Tracy makes another proposal regarding religious expression.
When the dialectic of intensification of particularity releasing itself to a
radical sense of participation predominates, the religious expression will
be named "manifestation;" when the dialectic of intensification of
particularity releasing itself to a sense of radical nonparticipation
dominates, the religious expression will be named "proclamation." (p.
203)
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 15 of 20
The words "sacrament" and "word" are usually used to make this distinction, the
former being the predominate expression of the Catholic and Orthodox
traditions, while the latter has been characteristic of Protestantism. The
difference is also pointed out by the terms "mystical-priestly-metaphysicalaesthetic" and "prophetic-ethical-historical." Both types are found in the Hebrew
Scriptures and in the Christian tradition. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam
contain both expressions although from the East they may appear more in the
proclamatory mode. Likewise, although the Eastern religions are thought of as
mainly in the mode of manifestation, they too must be understood in the dialectic
of manifestation or proclamation. Tracy moves away from the common
theological designation of the difference – word and sacrament – and uses
instead the terminology of Paul Ricoeur – manifestation and proclamation – in
order to see more clearly how the religious live in this dialectic and cannot be
placed on one side or the other, although, of course, they lean to one pole or the
other. He contends that the manifestation-proclamation dialectic is fruitful for
understanding the complexity and the conflicts in Christian self-understanding,
which is the focus of Tracy's work. This distinction provides the main rubric for
the thought experiment Tracy is setting forth.
Tracy argues that the very positing of manifestation or proclamation implies the
other; each needs the other. He begins his examination of these poles with a
discussion of manifestation. He uses the work of Mircea Eliade as the clearest
example of religious expression as manifestation.
... Eliade' s classic achievement ... paradoxically serves a prophetic
religious role to challenge the dominant prophetic, ethical, historical
trajectory of Western religion in favor of its grounds in the power of
manifestation.... The "archaic" ontology articulated by Eliade becomes the
focal meaning for understanding religion as an eruption of power of some
manifestation of the whole now experienced as the sacred cosmos.
…
By entering the ritual, by retelling the myth, even by creatively
reinterpreting the symbol, we escape from the "nightmare" of history and
even the "terror" of ordinary time. We finally enter true time, the time of
the repetition of the actions of the whole at origin of the cosmos. In illo
tempore, the power from the whole was first disclosed as sacred. ... only by
entering into the originally nonlinguistic manifestations of power of the
sacred in the ritual, the symbol, the festival, the myth, can we participate
in, belong to, a realm disclosed in the other side of the ordinary: a realm
which has manifested itself as sacred, which exposes the ordinary as
profane, a realm which at the same time chooses any ordinary reality –
this rock, this tree, this city, this mountain, this rite – as the medium for
the saturated power of the sacred – the "center of the world." ... (p. 205F)
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 16 of 20
Thus the realm of the sacred can be experienced by being willing to enter the
purely given, that sheer event of manifestation. Tracy maintains that Eliade has
effectively challenged the Western Augustinian assumptions through his retrieval
of the genius of Eastern Christianity:
a theology oriented to and from, not history and ethos, but the cosmos and
aesthetics; a style of religious practice oriented not so much by the word of
scripture as by the manifestations of the sacred in image, icon, ritual, logos
and cosmological theologies; a way of being Christian that both demands a
radical separation from the ordinary via the rituals and myths of the
repetition of the origins of the cosmos and allows real participation in the
manifestations of the sacred available to our "divinized" humanity. (p.
208)
But there is another pole; the pole of proclamation:
Those religious expressions where the power of a word of proclamation
from God in an address to an ambiguous self occurs as the paradigmatic
disclosure of religious reality. (p. 208)
The pole of manifestation brings to expression the sense of participation in the
whole. Yet the very sense of identity in the moment of manifestation implies the
non-identity of the individual, finite self. Therefore the estranged self may be
addressed by a word of proclamation:
A word of defamiliarizing proclamation now experienced by the self as the
transcendent, unnamable Other which has now disclosed itself in word as
like a who: the self of God. ... This God speaks a word of proclamation
whereby and wherein the whole discloses itself in a new manifestation by
the presence of a personal, gracious, acting, judging, proclaiming God.
This God acts in the word-events of ordinary history and time. (p. 209)
This word shatters our sense of participation, disconfirming any complacency in
participation.
To shatter any illusions that this culture, this priesthood, this land, this
ritual is enough, to defamiliarize us with ourselves and with nature, to
decode our encoded myths, to inflict its passionate negations upon all our
pretensions, to suspect even our nostalgic longings for the sacred cosmos,
to expose all idols of the self as projections of our selves and our mad
ambitions, to expose all culture as contingent, even arbitrary. …To make
us recognize that Judaism and Christianity disclose a radical worldaffirmation only because they have first undergone a radical, decentering
experience of world-negation in the kerygmatic, proclamatory word of
address of prophetic religion. (p. 209)
…
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 17 of 20
The self finds that the response to that proclamation by the self and the
people to whom the self belongs is that radical paradigmatic response of
trust and obedience called faith. (p. 209)
The proclaimed word will be expressed in the realm of the secular which was
formerly thought of as profane but now is recognized as the arena in which the
power of the word must be heard.
... The very power of the proclaimed word – a word addressed by God to
both a community and a self, a word of address shattering their security
and their idols – demands that the major expression of one's religious
experience now be found in fidelity through word and deed in this time
and this history to the God who gives that word as enabling command. (p.
210)
The paradigm of proclamation does not eliminate the religious expressions of
manifestation. Without them there is no place for the word to be heard and do its
work. Yet the focus has definitely shifted.
The language of radical participation in the religions of manifestation will
now seem extravagant, sometimes even idolatrous. The rejection of the
ordinary as the separated profane will now, in the proclamation of the
word about the extraordinariness of the ordinary as the central expression
of God's word and action, will now itself be rejected in favor of a classical,
paradigmatic religious ethic of the secular. (p. 211)
The affirmation of the secular in contemporary Jewish and Christian
theology, therefore, is not properly understood as some collapse of
Christianity and Judaism in the face of contemporary secularism. Rather a
secular Christianity and a secular Judaism are, in fact, faithful to the
paradigmatic eruption of a proclaimed and addressing word-event which
founds these traditions and drives them on as their religious focal
meaning. Some desacralization of the claims of participation via
manifestation must occur whenever this kind of world-shattering and
world-affirming paradigmatic religious experience of proclamation
happens. For the very proclamation which affirms time and history and
demands expression in and for ordinary time and history frees Jews and
Christians in and for the world. When the paradigmatic religious power of
that word has become a nostalgic echo, a presupposition that is no longer
an impulse, then the great danger of a merely secularist Judaism, a merely
secularist Christianity, a finally secularist culture emerges. (p. 211F)
But where the proclaimed word is remembered, the word of world-negation and
world-affirmation, the Jew and the Christian are freed for the world. This was the
case in the Reformation according to Tracy. He calls it a classic religious event.
The Reformation was a response to the graced freedom of the Christian before
God's Word in Jesus Christ.
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 18 of 20
Where the paradigmatic power of that word saturates the religious
consciousness with its power, then the negation of all over-claims to
participation, the religious negation of the focus of "magic," "superstition,"
"legalism," and "ritualism" will burst upon any complacent resting in any
religion of manifestation, any non-dialectical solace in a too easy
humanism or any hardened priestcraft. (p. 212)
The word exposes the world's real ambiguity, its possibilities for both good and
evil and it points to a new time, a time of genuine newness, not just the repetition
of the origins of the cosmos. If liberal Christianity loses its sense of the word of
proclamation it loses its religious vitality.
It loses its religious dialectic of the world and the secular and becomes
another decent, ethical vision living in, by and for a world which sets its
agenda and writes the words for its decent, ethical, but ultimately
irreligious tunes. The liberal churches are always in danger of losing their
paradigmatic religious dialectic and becoming only psychological
counseling centers or resources for societal causes. And yet the fidelity of
the liberal churches to the world empowered by their listening to the
Christian word of proclamation compels them, as it must, to aid all
authentic causes of personal wholeness and societal justice. (p. 212)
Tracy points to Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer as leading examples of the
ministry of the paradigmatic word which shatters the idols of culture. Barth so
feared any claim to participation in the transcendent reality that he wanted to
admit of no point of contact; such a view sees a word-centered Christianity
devoid of all manifestation apart from the erupting power of the Word.
Commenting on the two poles, manifestation and proclamation in their recent
exponants referred to here, Eliade, Barth and Bonhoeffer, Tracy declares,
With the same kind of radicality as Eliade, Barth and Bonhoeffer will also
insist, "Only the paradigmatic is the real." Yet their paradigm of the
proclaimed word will drive them into a direct confrontation with the
equally radical "only" of Eliade through its dialectic in and for the world, in
and for time and history. For Eliade, manifestation discloses not an entry
into the secular but an escape from the terror, the nightmare, the banality,
the latent nihilism of ordinary time and history. Not the profane, not the
secular will save us; only an entry into the religion of manifestation, the
worlds of sacred space and the repetitions of sacred time can do that.
Eliade's work serves in the contemporary period as a classic expression of
the power of religion as manifestation releasing its dialectic of the sacred
and the profane and its passionately religious sense of radical participation
in the cosmos through the saturating repetitions of myth, ritual and
symbol. His is recognizably iconic consciousness. In an analogous manner
Barth and Bonhoeffer, with their distinct and sometimes conflicting
positions, represent two contemporary classic expressions of Christian
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 19 of 20
faith as a faith living by the power of the proclaimed word releasing its
dialectic of the word and the secular and its suspicion of "religious
participation" and repetition. (p. 213F)
It is Tracy's contention that we must not be forced to choose one pole or the
other. Christianity does not live by the "only" of Eliade or Barth. It is his purpose
to push beyond these oppositions to find a place where both can be embraced.
Both manifestation and proclamation are necessary to Christian religion.
The dialectic of the Christian religion is one in which the word does negate
any claim to a mode of participation which logically approaches identity or
existentially relaxes into complacency – a dialectic which, in fidelity to the
word, must radically negate all idolatries, yet a dialectic which implies,
includes and demands genuine manifestation. ... Christianity embraces
nature in and through its doctrines of creation – transformed, to be sure,
in the light of the doctrines of redemption and future eschatology. Indeed
Christianity celebrates nature in and through its doctrine of incarnation as
theophanous manifestation – understood, to be sure, only in the light of a
shattering, defamiliarizing cross and a transformative resurrection. (p.
214)
Tracy contends that a Christianity of word without real manifestation stands in
peril of becoming either fanatical or arid and cerebral and abstract. Barth
understood this dealing at length with the doctrine of creation. Manifestation,
Tracy argues, is always the enveloping presupposition of the erupting word of
proclamation.
Manifestation envelops every word from beginning to end, even as it
allows itself to be transformed by the shattering paradigmatic power of the
proclaimed word. But manifestation returns, thus transformed, to reunite
even the secular, the historical, the temporal, the self with the whole
disclosed in nature and the cosmos. A Christianity without a sense of
radical participation in the whole – that sense which Schleiermacher
named the "feeling of absolute dependence," which others name a
fundamental trust in the very worthwhileness of existence – is a
Christianity that has lost its roots in the human experience of God's
manifesting and revealing presence in all creation, in body, in nature, in
spirit, not only in history. (p. 215)
The powerful, eruptive word of proclamation that defamiliarizes us from the
world is yet itself rooted in the enveloping cosmos.
To speak Christian eschatological language is to speak a language where
the religious power of the whole has entered time and history in the
decisive proclamation of this particular word and event, where that power
has freed the "profane" to become the "secular" and has liberated the
present and the future from the exclusive hold of the sacred time of past
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 20 of 20
origin by empowering history and ethical action with religious power. (p.
216)
Tracy points to the sacramental view of Catholic Christianity:
Nature and the secular become sacrament in their transformationsublation by the word, the "prime sacrament" and decisive manifestation
or representation named Jesus Christ. There can be no negation of the
cosmos or nature. Indeed a sacrament is nothing other than a decisive
representation of both the events of proclaimed history and the
manifestations of the sacred cosmos. (p. 216)
If the kerygmatic power of the word in the sacrament is lost, the sacrament
becomes magic. But if the paradigmatic power of real manifestation is lost, the
word alone will not meet the deepest needs and satisfy the deepest longings of the
human heart. Christianity then becomes a righteous rigorism of duty and
obligation.
How can we hold on to both poles and not lose the necessary experience of either
manifestation or proclamation? Tracy believes it can be accomplished but only a
radically ecumenical Christianity can accomplish it.
By themselves, Protestant, Orthodox and Catholic Christianity seem
trapped in historically hardened emphases: unable alone to restore the
power of both proclamation and manifestation in a manner that does not
seem some uneasy compromise. ... This demand for both manifestation
and proclamation is incumbent upon all Christians who recognize the
reality of Jesus Christ as the Christian classic, i.e., as the decisive representation in both word and manifestation of our God and our
humanity. Thus will Christocentric Christians recognize that the
paradigmatic Christ event discloses the religious power of both
manifestation and proclamation ... both Christian manifestation and
proclamation are ultimately rooted in that God whose radical otherness in
freedom posits itself to us as the radical immanence of an all-pervasive,
defamiliarizing, shattering, enveloping love in cosmos, in history, in the
self. (p. 218)
Part II: Interpreting the Christian Classic
Tracy applies the methodological argument of Part I to a distinctively Christian
systematic theology in Part II. He has argued that there is a distinctly religious
classic among the other classics generally recognized and he contends that that
classic status means that the religious classic too has public status. Such religious
classics are “expressions from a particular tradition that have found the right
mode of expression to become public for all intelligent, reasonable and
responsible persons.” (p. 233). He asks then what are the classic texts, events,
symbols, images and persons in a tradition. While in the Christian tradition there
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 21 of 20
are several candidates for classic status, there is one which is the norm of all
others and which provides the focus for understanding God, self, others, society,
history, nature and the whole from a Christian perspective: the event and person
of Jesus Christ. Tracy claims,
One need not be a believer in Christianity to accord it (and thereby its
central, paradigmatic, classic event) authentically religious status: a
manifestation from the whole by the power of the whole. (p. 234)
Christology is the attempt to respond through some interpretation to the event of
Jesus Christ in one’s own situation.
…The Christian interpretation of this classic event recognizes in some
present experience of the event – more precisely, in the claim disclosed in
that event (paradigmatically in experiencing that event in manifestation
and proclamation) as an event from God and by God’s power. To speak
religiously and theologically of the Christ event is ultimately to speak of an
event from God. )p. 234)
The Jesus remembered by the tradition is experienced in the present mediated
through the word, sacrament and action. Jesus remembered as the Christ is the
experience of the presence of God’s own self.
The expression “The event of Jesus Christ” means for the Christian
tradition…that we recognize Jesus in the Christ event as the person in
whom God’s own self is decisively re-presented as the gift and command of
love. The always already reality of a graced world is made present again
decisively, paradigmatically, classically as event in Jesus Christ. The event,
as re-presentative of reality always already present to us as human beings,
is present again as the decisive that it happens. The event as command is
also present as the not-yet-actualized reality internal for each person and
for all history responding to that one decisive event of God. (p. 234)
Tracy will now examine this position to see if it is a relatively adequate
interpretation of the event and, secondly, to understand how this interpretation
differs from alternative interpretations.
The key for the interpretation of the event of Jesus Christ must be the claim
exerted in the present by that event as the claim that it happens now.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
References
David Tracy. The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism, 1998
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-4-19980101
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1998-01-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on January 1, 1998 entitled "The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism ", on the book The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism , written by David Tracy. Tags: Theology, Pluralism, Truth, Meaning, Sacred, Religious Tradition, Nature of God, Nature of Religion, Ecumenical, Karl Barth, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Mircea Eliade, David Tracy. Scripture references: David Tracy. The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism, 1998.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
David Tracy
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Ecumenical
Karl Barth
Meaning
Mircea Eliade
Nature of God
Nature of Religion
Pluralism
Religious Tradition
Sacred
Theology
Truth
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/2e77299cfd9d97c25c0133fb43b0b169.pdf
fb2dd89eada85e918d593461a9395bdd
PDF Text
Text
Jesus and the Other Names:
Christian Mission and Global Responsibility
By Paul F. Knitter
(Orbis Books, 1996)
Review By
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Publication of Review Unknown
In his foreword to Jesus and the Other Names, Harvey Cox speaks of “two urgent
movements” in Christian theology which “shook him to his roots”, requiring him
to completely rethink his theology. The first, impacting him in the 60’s, was
liberation theology. The second, a decade later, was the persistent question of a
Christian response to other faiths. For too long he felt that those two movements
were like two separate conversations. Those interested in the one concern, had
little interest in the other. Paul Knitter, he suggests, has found a way to blend the
two conversations – conversations concerning the religious other and the
suffering other.
Jesus and the Other Names focuses Christian theology on the issue of “globally
responsible, correlational dialogue among religions”. His discussion bears the
hall marks of the classic liberal persuasion, as do the discussions of John Hick in
The Metaphor of God Incarnate and S. Wesley Ariarajah in The Bible and People
of Other Faiths. And like them, he draws heavily upon his own human
experience. This I believe has always been the strength of the liberal position.
Paul Knitter knows the discussion of Christian mission in a pluralistic society
from both ends of a spectrum. In the late 50’s after four years of Catholic
seminary high school, he officially joined the ranks of the Divine Word
Missionaries (“SVD” or Societas Vergi Divini). Those were the years of
missionary “adaptation” and “accommodation” in Catholic circles. Missionaries
on furlough were often invited to speak to the novitiates. Knitter was struck by
the time spent in speaking appreciatively of the other faiths and other ways
encountered on the mission field. Such appreciation and accommodation
disturbed the ardent young Knitter. Yet by the time of his college graduation in
1962 it was becoming clearer, “that the old exclusivist model of Christianity as
light and other religions as darkness didn’t fit the facts” (p. 5).
What to do with that dawning realization became clearer to Knitter at the
Pontifical Gregorian University. He arrived just two weeks before the opening of
© Grand Valley State University
�Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
the Second Vatican Council. There Knitter took a course from Catholic theologian
Karl Rahner, who was a visiting professor at the time. He was deeply impressed
by Rahner’s concept that even those individuals who did not know or profess
Christ, even those followers of another religious persuasion, were nonetheless
saved by Christ’s sacrificial death. Thus they were, without at times even being
aware of it, “anonymous Christians”.
Knitter chose to write his doctorate under Rahner on the theme of Catholic
attitudes towards other religions. A year and a half later, to his “devastating
surprise” he discovered that someone else had not only chosen the same
dissertation topic, but had published it that year in Rome. It was this which
prompted Knitter to apply to Marburg University (and was the first Roman
Catholic ever admitted to the Protestant Marburg), in order to pursue the topic of
a Protestant theology or religions. Though he must admit to a biased Rahnerian
Catholic perspective, Knitter does not deny the validity of his conclusion:
In their efforts to recognize the value of other religions, Protestant
theologians, I claimed, were stymied by the Reformational insistence on
“faith alone” through “Christ alone” (see Knitter 1975). Protestants such as
Paul Althaus, Emil Brunner, and even Wolhart Pannenberg, could
recognize “revelation” in other faiths, but never “salvation.” This was, I
concluded, to go only halfway in their efforts to reach out to other religious
believers (p. 7).
This move towards an “inclusive” understanding would ultimately be but a bridge
to “the other side” - where lay a more pluralistic understanding of world
religions. To move across this bridge he found he must sublate a christocentric
approach with one that was theocentric. Thus in his book No Other Name (1985)
he would claim “the possibility (and nothing more) that other religions may have
their own valid views of and responses to” (p. 9) the Divine Mystery we call Theos
or God. Now in Jesus and the Other Names he attempts to correct some of his
earlier conclusions (seeing a need to emphasize the soteriological issues rather
than theocentric), as he continues to move in the direction of pluralism.
In the midst of his wrestling with “the religious other”, Knitter, like Cox, was
impacted by the issues of “the suffering other”. Becoming involved with the
Sanctuary Movement, he entered into discussion with those for whom suffering
takes precedence over doctrinal disputes. He found himself increasingly aware,
along with friend and colleague Hans Küng, that as religious persons we bear
responsibility for a global ethic. Inter-religious dialogue becomes not simply a
question of how to discern God, but even more urgently the question of how to
bring about God’s reign.
...the avalanche of dangers forming on the slopes of economic injustice,
environmental devastation, and military build-up will not be stayed unless
the nations of the world come together to formulate and endorse some
kind of shared ethical convictions and guidelines. But such a task will not
© Grand Valley State University
�Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
be accomplished unless the religions of the world, in dialogue, make their
contribution. In other words, inter religious conversations must make
their most pressing agenda the ethical issues behind the mounting
suffering of humans and Earth (p. 12).
Having described the autobiographical journey which led him to a pluralistic (he
prefers the word correlational to pluralistic) perspective, Knitter turns to the
theological underpinnings which support such a view. He suggests that all of our
theological understandings must be defined and shaped both by human
experience and Christian tradition.
Human experience has some common aspects Knitter believes, at least in
Western cultures. Whether interacting with co-workers, gathered socially around
a dinner table, attending our children’s school programs, or sharing a marriage
bed, we are becoming more intimately and acutely aware that there are others for
whom another faith persuasion has enriched and transformed their lives. To
suggest that ours is the only possibility for grasping religious truth is no longer
possible. Pluralism, whether we advocate it or not, is a cognitive reality for most
of the Western world. Thus awareness of “others” is one aspect of our human
experience.
A second is a historical consciousness that recognizes the limitations of
knowledge. Says Knitter, “There is no such thing, we know today, as factual
knowledge; it is always interpreted knowledge” (p. 29). He quotes Langdon
Gilkey:
...in order to preserve their integrity, they must accept theologically what
they have long accepted culturally. Given the context-conditioned,
“theory-laden”, socially constructed interpretative limitations of every
grasp and statement of truth, and given also the ever-changing, always
confining flow of history, Christians (and all religious persons) have to
admit honestly that, within our human condition, there can be no final
word, no one way of knowing truth that is valid for all times and all
peoples (pp. 29-30).
George Lindbeck (The Nature of Doctrine, 1984) and David Tracy (The
Analogical Imagination, 1981 and Plurality and Ambiguity, 1987) are also cited:
(They) remind their fellow Christians that to think that they have a fixed
source of truth, an unchanging criterion they can apply in all cultural
situations in order to decide what is true or good, a foundation that
transcends the process and pluralism of history, is to fly in the face of
reality, to lust after the unreal. There is no fixed place of truth outside the
fray of historical process and continuous dialogue...which means that
Christianity is one of the many, limited religions of the world (p. 30).
© Grand Valley State University
�Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
A third component which supports a pluralistic or correlational theology is the
moral imperative. Knitter insists that we cannot know our own truth except in
dialogue with others. To know only one religion is to risk that it will tend toward
a “barbarous or self-indulgent abuse of our own truth” (p. 32). Humorously,
Knitter suggests that, just as we need someone to tell us when we have bad breath
(!), we need the dialogue partner, the other perspective, to open our eyes - to
enable us to see not only how others see our “truth” and also how it affects them,
which is perhaps even more important.
And finally, human experience recognizes our responsibility for the welfare of
the world. Knitter believes that we have a moral obligation, bequeathed to us by
God, to participate in the coming of the reign of God. We are God’s physical
hands and heart in this world and thus are obligated to aide in the Divine work of
Shalom.
Aspects of the Christian tradition which support a correlational dialogue are
again four in Knitters listing. First, says Knitter, the traditional understanding of
the nature of God requires such a pluralistic posture. God is beyond our
comprehension. Hence, to say that we have a final or exclusive understanding of
the Mystery that is Theos is idolatrous. Moreover, Knitter contends that our
understanding of God as Trinitarian implies plurality. Christian ethical incentives
provide a basis as well, he claims. Here he relies almost exclusively on the
commandment which calls us to love our neighbor as God loves us. To exclude
our neighbor from salvation seems to Knitter the epitome of inhospitableness
and lack of love.
Whenever we hold up a truth or a revelation and insist that according to
the will of God it is the only or the absolutely final norm in which all others
have to be included, then we cannot treat them as our brothers and sisters
in God. Such a norm does enable us to confront them, as love sometimes
requires, but it does not allow us to be confronted by them, as love also
requires. Whenever we are not disposed to learn as much from our
neighbors as they can from us, we cannot love them. We may help them,
we may build hospitals and schools for them, we may lift them from their
poverty - but we are not loving them (p. 39).
Pastoral concerns must be honored in conjunction with supports of the Christian
tradition. We do a disservice to those who struggle with these questions if we
simply cite doctrine and creed as final answers. We must wrestle along with them
in order to give satisfaction to their “cry from the heart”.
And then there are the scriptural incentives for correlational dialogue. Along
with Krister Stendhal and John Hick, Knitter suggests that we must understand
much of the biblical language as metaphor. The grand and divine appellations are
really “love talk” (Stendahl). And while he wants to honor and respect texts such
as Acts 4:12 – “There is no other name given to human kind by which we can be
saved than the name of Jesus Christ”, he begs we remember the context (these
© Grand Valley State University
�Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
words for example are spoken in connection with a specific healing), as well as
the polemic nature of other passages such as “I am the way the truth and the
life...”.
We must always distinguish between the universal and the particular, says
Knitter, citing Schubert Ogden’s understanding that we must locate “the
particularity of Jesus within the universality of God’s self-revelation, rather than
locating God’s universality within the particularity of the historical Jesus”(p. 42).
It is that understanding of universality that drives us towards correlational
dialogue.
Why the term “correlational”? Here Knitter honestly admits that inter-faith
dialogue is not easy. He takes issue with those who suggest that we come together
easily around issues of “common essence” or “common experience”. Such
suggestions are “gossamer theories spun out by academicians who most likely
have never felt the hard, obstructing reality of otherness” (p. 13). And yet, his
actual inter-faith dialogue experience has convinced him that, despite what are
often chasms of perspective, there remains a relatedness. This, he trusts, is a sign
from God to persistently pursue areas of “correlation”, and those ways in which
we can go forward together in the global work of peace and justice.
In the face of his critics’ real and valid concerns ( 1 - that the ambiguity of
pluralism jeopardizes a firm foundation of meaning and purpose, 2 - the
difficulties of prophetically resisting evil in Christ’s name, 3 - the corrosion and
possible destruction of missionary outreach), Knitter maintains that he is still
able to conceive of Jesus as unique for Christians and for the world. Stressing
ortho-praxis (doing as he did) rather than orthodoxy, Knitter claims that Jesus is
truly & fully all that the Newer Testament witnesses profess that he was. Yet this
does not require that he was the only one, who solely embodied the selfrevelation of God.
Whatever it is that brings a person to be a Christian and follower of Jesus,
by its very nature it must enable the person to say that Jesus is truly and
effectively the vehicle of the Divine Presence in his or her life. For this
person Jesus is truly the Son of God, the savior, mediator, word of God,
messiah, the living one. Without the feeling - without an experiential
awareness - that inspires the “truly,” one cannot be, one would not want to
be, a Christian.
But I don’t think that is true of “solely.” When one knows that Jesus is
truly savior, one does not know that he is the only savior. One’s experience
is limited and has not been able to take in the experiences and messages of
all other so-called saviors or religious figures.
But if Christians do not or cannot know that Jesus is the only savior
neither do they have to know this in order to be committed to this Jesus.
The experience of Jesus that has enabled them to say “truly” enables them
© Grand Valley State University
�Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
to keep following him. That there may be others is not an impediment to
faithful following. Discipleship requires “truly”; it does not seem to require
“solely” (p. 73).
With similar logic he concludes that Jesus need be neither fully definitive nor
unsurpassable. Rather he proposes that Jesus is universal (not limited to one
people), decisive (in that he challenges us) and indispensable (which flows
naturally from acceptance that he is universal and decisive).
Christians bring to the table the uniqueness of Jesus’ interest in inclusivity and
relationship. In representing that Christ-like uniqueness they will share with
others the Christian value of contemplatives in action, says Knitter. Prompted by
love of neighbor (which is, according to the first commandment, the
manifestation of their love for God), Christians believe in the value of “historical
involvement”. Believing that the God whom Jesus served has a preference for the
poor and oppressed, Christians are concerned for those who suffer due to
injustice, engaging in work to alleviate that injustice as they are able. And to the
dialogue Christians bring a deep and abiding hope, a hope that enables them to
believe that the world can be saved. Says Knitter, a “distinguishing mark of the
disciples of Jesus and co-workers in God’s reign is that they don’t give up” (p.
97).
To enter into dialogue with other faiths does not require that we abandon our
understanding of Jesus’ uniqueness, or abandon a conviction that his way is an
ethically important way.
Insofar as Christians proclaim the “pure, unbounded love of God” at work
in the world and therefore do not insist that Jesus is God’s full, final, or
unsurpassable Word, they expect that for the most part their relationships
with sincere believers of other paths will indeed be complementary. But
insofar as Christians also experience God’s presence in Jesus to include
universal, decisive, and indispensable claims, they will also be ready to
take strong stands, sometimes in opposition, to the claims of others. (p.
82).
But what of missions? This is perhaps the most critical issue for those who fear
the goals of correlational or pluralistic dialogue. Throughout the centuries the
Christian church has been motivated and animated by a sense of having been
“sent” with good news of salvation. It believed it had a necessary role to play in
God’s unfolding drama. But if the content of that good news is not for all people
in all times, then is the missionary focus of the church still necessary or vital?
Knitter claims that it is. And he contends that a pluralistic or correlational
posture is still able to beckon disciples who will be sent out to speak good news
that they believe is for everyone. It will however require a revision of the
missionary mandate.
© Grand Valley State University
�Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
Knitter contends that pluralistic missionary disciples will still continue to affirm
Jesus’ divinity. But by this he means (along with Karl Rahner, Paul Tillich,
Edward Schillebeeckx, Hans Küng and Monika Hellwig) that
To feel and proclaim that Jesus is divine is to encounter him as God’s
sacrament, as the embodiment, the historical reality, the symbol, the story
that makes God real and effective for me (p. 105).
The message of salvation that they bring will encourage others to join in bringing
about God’s reign (as opposed to desiring that they join the Christian church).
The wellbeing of all creatures must be the mission’s foremost goal. More than
Christological missiology, they will be concerned with pneumatological
missiology which, Knitter believes, allows one to grasp the universality of God’s
saving purpose, without dissolving the distinctive uniqueness of Jesus for
Christians. Pneumatology allows for the moving of God’s spirit into realms and
through mediums that doctrinal Christology disallows.
Though it is a revisioned understanding of missions, Knitter believes that his
missionary passion is as ardent today as it was in his earliest years of missionary
work. The urgency of its goals can indeed beckon future generations to bear
witness to the way of salvation and the good news that God is still engaged with
us in saving work, albeit through a multiplicity of religious mediums. Missions as
dialogue then, is Knitter’s image of missiology into the third millennium.
Perhaps Knitter’s most intriguing and practical suggestion is his call for a
dialogical model of theological education. Seminary students need opportunities
to learn about traditions other than their own. In as much as dialogue with those
of other faiths will become more and more the norm, there should be required
courses in Islam, Asian religions and indigenous spiritualities. These courses
should be taught not in an abstract informational way, but by professors and
guest speakers who can present material experientially. Students must be called
to enter “the other’s world of experience” (p. 162). There should be personal
encounters fostered by “experimenting with the truth of - or at least observing the spiritual practices of other religions” (p. 162). Another way of engaging the
“other’s” voice might be to engage certain issues from a variety of faith
perspectives - “Courses on ‘Religions and Peace’ or ‘Buddhism, Christianity and
Ecology’, or ‘Feminist Voices in Muslim- Christian Dialogue’ (p. 163).
Such perspectives should be mainlined into all courses of Christian history,
doctrinal, ethical and social issues. By this, Knitter means...that in teaching a
standard course on evil or redemption or church or the question of God, teachers
will inject into the discussions what other religious perspectives hold, how they
sometimes radically differ, and how they provoke Christian tradition to further
reflection. Naturally, given the expertise and general background of most
theological faculties, such dreams of mainlining an interreligious conversation
into the general curriculum cannot be realized overnight. But they will never be
realized at all unless the ideal is affirmed (p. 163).
© Grand Valley State University
�Paul F. Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
To this end, he would propose that all seminaries should include one or more
faculty members trained in a non-Christian tradition. And students should be
encouraged or required to sub-specialize in the “history, beliefs, and spirituality
of another non- Christian religious path” (pp. 163-164).
Paul Knitter envisions a new world of missions, one where the ultimate goal is no
longer salvation through Christ to eternal life. Rather, the focus is on the reign of
God emerging in our here and now. “The Kingdom of God is among you,” Jesus is
purported to have said. Paul Knitter is eager, as a Christian, to join hands with
those of other faiths in order to realize that very possibility.
© 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
Paul Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, 1996
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19960101
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1996-01-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Jesus and the Other Names, Christian Mission and Global Responsibility
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on January 1, 1996 entitled "Jesus and the Other Names, Christian Mission and Global Responsibility", on the book Jesus and the Other Names, Christian Mission and Global Responsibility, written by Paul F. Knitter. Tags: Theology, Interfaith, Pluralism, Non-exclusive, Love, . Scripture references: Paul Knitter, Jesus and the Other Names, 1996.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Interfaith
Love
Non-exclusive
Pluralism
Theology
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/4258e32ac42487d3f89d949f71c2ea32.pdf
a7eddff54faf48f1e26febdc07ee419e
PDF Text
Text
Interreligious Dialogue:
What Is Required of 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
May 1995, pp. 10-15
Pilate’s question, “Then what should I do with Jesus who is called the Messiah?”
demands an answer as urgently today as two thousand years ago. By travel and
the ubiquitous beams of communications satellites the world has shrunk to a
neighborhood, and the devotees of the great religions of the world no longer live
in isolation. Increasingly they practice their respective faith traditions in close
proximity to each other.
Not only the interweaving of the world’s religions within the fabric of the global
community but the rise of militant fundamentalisms, fueling ethnic conflict and
spawning terrorism, make it imperative that interreligious dialogue take place for
the sake of the peace of the world. Political leaders and parties will always
attempt to Co-opt the respective religious traditions for their own purposes, but
at least the religions in their authentic expression need not condone such misuse,
and, with genuine dialogue, a deeper understanding of other faith traditions
would be a force for the creation of a more secure world—and a movement
toward a reign of peace, surely the intention of the Creator God.
For the Christian religion, interreligious dialogue calls for a serious engagement
with Pilate’s question. Until we come to a new appraisal of the place of Jesus in
the purpose of God and the revelation of that purpose, we will not be able to enter
into real dialogue. Beginning with the absoluteness of Christianity based on the
finality of God’s revelation in Jesus and a salvation constituted exclusively
through his atoning death, we may enter discussion and evidence a civil tolerance
but without the openness to new insight that alone makes for serious and honest
dialogue. Tolerance may be present in people who are convinced that they
possess the final truth but are unwilling to impose it on another. But such an
attitude also precludes that such people will learn something from the other since
they begin with the assumption that theirs is the exclusive truth.
© Grand Valley State University
�Interreligious Dialogue
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
Whatever revisioning interreligious dialogue may demand from other faith
traditions, for the Christian tradition, a rethinking of its core creedal
Christological formulations and their salvific implications is of first importance.
The Quest of the Historical Jesus
As I look across my desk at the shelf of books, the name of Jesus is prominent.
Book after book published in the last few years seeks to uncover the mystery and
meaning of this one who “comes to us as One unknown...,” to use Schweitzer’s
familiar designation. Studies emanate from the Jesus Seminar people, as well as
many beyond their ranks, such as the Catholic scholar Raymond Brown and the
highly respected Jewish scholar E. P. Sanders. My eye catches the title of an older
bundle of essays by Marinus de Jonge, Jesus: Inspiring and Disturbing Presence.
Indeed.
I move to the shelf and pull down the classic study by Albert Schweitzer, The
Quest of the Historical Jesus. In his preface to the English translation, F. C.
Burkitt refers to the sharp controversy that had been raging on the continent in
the late nineteenth century over the attempt to discover the historical Jesus
behind the Christ figure that appears in the writings, particularly of Paul. Such
sharp battle, he notes, is somewhat foreign to the more genteel English, but even
those whose lives of Jesus were “written with hate” have performed a great
service in bringing to light an understanding “of the greatest historical problem
in the history of our race.” The new understanding, Burkitt claims, makes clear
that the object of attack was not the historical Jesus after all, but a
temporary idea of Him, inadequate because it did not truly represent him
or the world in which he lived, (vi)
Schweitzer’s work brought the first quest to an end by pointing out the
eschatological center of Jesus’ message in contrast to the portrait that portrayed
Jesus as the ideal person of nineteenth-century, European society. With the rise
of historical thinking, it was being recognized that historical research must seek
to uncover the context of the first and second centuries if it would discover Jesus
of Nazareth.
Burkitt was confident that such an understanding would be taken for granted in
the ongoing research into Christian origins. He cites a contemporary, Father
Tyrrell, who claimed that Christianity was at a crossroads, but Burkitt little
doubts that the church would come to terms with the results of historical
research and bring the significance of Jesus Christ to fresh expression. That the
eschatological prophet of Schweitzer’s description would need to be translated
into another image if he were to be meaningfully appropriated in the twentieth
century went without saying. The dawning historical consciousness was leading
to the recognition, in Burkitt’s words,
© Grand Valley State University
�Interreligious Dialogue
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
that absolute truth cannot be embodied in human thought and that its
expression must always be clothed in symbols. It may be that we have to
translate the hopes and fears of our spiritual ancestors into the language of
our new world. (vii)
That the Absolute can be expressed only in symbol, in metaphor, has been widely
recognized through linguistic studies in the last half of the present century.
Metaphor in its common understanding is a figure of speech in which there is a
transfer of meaning—one term is illuminated by attaching to it some of the
associations of another, so that metaphor is “that trope, or figure of speech, in
which we speak of one thing in terms suggestive of another” (Soskice, 1985, 54).
In this sense, all religious language and speech about God is metaphoric. That
does not take away from the truthfulness of what is communicated; indeed,
picture language often conveys a truth far better than a formula or abstract
definition. It does, however, mean that the truth being conveyed and the
linguistic form, the particular figure of speech, are not necessarily tied to each
other. The same truth may be able to be conveyed by a different figure of speech,
and in another culture or time a figure of speech that communicates the truth at
issue may fail to bring that truth to expression with clarity.
In other words, the symbols used to express the truth of the Absolute must not
themselves be absolutized. The symbolic form of expression points beyond itself;
one must “see through” the symbol to the reality symbolized. The form of
expression, the specific figure of speech chosen to disclose the reality may be
adequate or inadequate; it may disclose or it may mislead. Only those metaphoric
forms that prove themselves in usage will last. But even those that prove valuable
over the ages and generations must not be understood as identical with the truth
or reality signified. There may arise in evolving cultural experience reason to
cease using a metaphor or to modify its use if it becomes evident that it has
conveyed not only aspects of truth but also misunderstanding that has proven
detrimental – for example, the metaphor of God as Father in current feminist
critique of patriarchy.
When a metaphor for the Absolute is challenged, it must be recognized that it is
not the Absolute that is challenged, but only the symbolic form used to disclose
the truth of the Absolute.
The Rise of Historical Thinking
As he wrote the preface to Schweitzer’s The Quest of the Historical Jesus in 1910,
Burkitt pointed to the growing recognition of the symbolic character of religious
language in the wake of the rise of historical thinking in the nineteenth century.
It was in that cultural context that the first quest of the historical Jesus took
place, which Schweitzer showed to be naive. Further historical-critical research
revealed the inadequacy of the historical methods employed and of the
understanding of the nature of the biblical documents examined. Nevertheless,
© Grand Valley State University
�Interreligious Dialogue
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
thinking historically is the mark of modernity and remains so in post-modernism
which, in general, denies the possibility of formulating principles or doctrines
identical with foundational reality, along with rejecting the Enlightenment claim
that there are universal truths of reason.
We can see the implications of this new way of thinking—thinking with historical
consciousness—if we examine the work of Ernst Troeltsch. He is best identified as
an exponent of historicism, a term used here to define the interpretation of the
totality of cultural development (including the Christian tradition) as phenomena
of the historical process. Troeltsch recognized that the advent of the historicalcritical method signified more than just a new means by which to gain knowledge
of the past. Far more, it symbolized a revolution in the consciousness of the
person of the West. He was convinced that the employment of this method was
incompatible with the traditional Christian faith based on a supernaturalistic
metaphysics. This clash was most evident, as we have noted above, in the area of
biblical criticism.
Troeltsch did not point to particular results of scholarly research that was
troubling to believers; rather, he pointed to the method that yielded the
disturbing data. The assumptions of the method, he claimed, were irreconcilable
with the traditional dogmatic method. Traditional dogmatic formulation
regarded the Scriptures as supernaturally inspired; the historian assumed they
must be understood in terms of the historical context in which they arose, subject
to the same principles of interpretation and criticism applied to any ancient
literature. The historian, following this method, according to Troeltsch, could not
assume events recorded in Scripture were supernatural interventions by God;
rather, the historian must treat them in the causal nexus of their times. And
rather than granting uniqueness to the central redemptive events to which the
Bible pointed, the historian must treat them as analogous to all other historical
events past and present. Further, the historian’s research can yield only probable
results, an inadequate ground for faith.
Troeltsch’s ability to recognize the revolutionary nature of the employment of the
historical-critical method revealed to him what remained hidden for many
theological thinkers, namely, that one has to make a choice to accept the method
and its consequences or to reject the method as inappropriate. What could not be
done was to use the method as long as the consequences were compatible with
one’s theological presuppositions and reject it when they went counter to one’s
prior belief.
The church must choose, Troeltsch was certain, to employ the method and accept
the consequences, letting burn what must burn and then building again a truer, if
more humble, foundation. It was his conviction that historical thinking had
penetrated the mind of the Western person so deeply that it was no longer
possible to think in any other vein. Either the Christian tradition would
© Grand Valley State University
�Interreligious Dialogue
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
accommodate itself to the spirit of the times or it would become a relic of the
past.
In his discussion of the significance of the historicity of Jesus for Christian faith,
Troeltsch included Schleiermacher, Ritschl, and Herrmann in his criticism, for
while the liberal Protestant tradition recognized the validity of the historicalcritical method for the investigation of Christian origins, it failed to recognize the
relativity of all historical phenomena including Jesus of Nazareth. Consequently
Troeltsch could but condemn their view that Jesus is the absolute Savior for all
people of all times and places (cf. Die Bedeutung der Geschichtlichkeit Jesu für
den Glauben p. 51).
In Troeltsch’s view the very historical-critical approach to Christian origins,
especially to Jesus himself, undercut any attempt to salvage from the uniformity
of history a final and absolute revelation of God. Thus Troeltsch was convinced
that the theology of the future would have to purge away the last vestiges of the
old dogmatic approach and carry through more rigorously the requirements of
the historical-critical method that draws all historical phenomena, Jesus of
Nazareth not excepted, into the movement of historical process, allowing for no
absolute uniqueness in the midst of the relative.
Paradoxical as it may appear, Karl Barth quite agreed with Troeltsch—agreed,
that is, that to subject Jesus to historical-critical research behind the witness of
the New Testament is to level him down to one historical person among others, in
whom there cannot possibly be found the final and definitive revelation of God.
Of course, agreement with Troeltsch that having followed the path it did, there
was no stopping halfway, does not imply that Barth advocates with Troeltsch that
their successors should draw the logical conclusion as Troeltsch advocated. On
the contrary, Barth discovers their fatal error in the course they chose to follow in
the first place. It was not their decision to grant recognition to the use of the
historical-critical method and then fail to draw the conclusions to which it led.
Rather, it was their understanding of religion as an innate potential of the human
spirit and their failure to see that, defined in such terms, the Christian faith was
not being spoken of at all. If Christianity were a phenomenon of the religious
capacity of the human person, then it would be one religion among others and
could be understood only, as Troeltsch maintained, by a comparative historical
study. In such an instance there could be no talk of an absolute and definitive
revelatory significance or meaning in history. If one started where Troeltsch
started, Barth maintained, one would end where Troeltsch ended. But then,
according to Barth, we have to do not with the religion of revelation but with the
revelation of religion (Church Dogmatics I, 2, 284), and the application of the
historical-critical method will discover in Jesus no more than a man among other
men and in Christianity no more than a religion among other religions. The
History of Religions school is only the logical outcome of a theology that speaks
of the believing person rather than of the revealing God. Theology that takes itself
© Grand Valley State University
�Interreligious Dialogue
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
seriously can speak only from the revelation of God that has grasped it, paying
homage to no worldview, be it ancient or modern, to no philosophical system,
and to no anthropological analysis of the human religious capacity. Theology
must speak from out of the revelation of God in Jesus Christ.
Thus Barth completely repudiated the method of Troeltsch, and, to the dismay of
the academic world, pursued the traditional dogmatic method, reducing
historical-critical research to a secondary, helping role in the explication of the
biblical witness to Jesus Christ.
Barth’s repudiation of Troeltsch and the whole project of nineteenth-century
liberalism prevailed. A whole generation of theologians was shaped by the
theology of the Word that, while not a uniform movement, was at one in removing the truth of Christian faith from the results of historical investigation.
But as the twentieth century nears its end, Troeltsch is being studied anew.
Garrett E. Paul in a 1993 Christian Century article asks and answers in his title,
“Why Troeltsch? Why Today? Theology for the 21st Century.” Dietrich
Bonhoeffer had exposed the Achilles’ heel of Barth’s dogmatic method with his
recognition of Barth’s “positivism of revelation.” Writing from prison to his friend
Eberhard Bethge, Bonhoeffer pointed out that Barth was the first theologian to
begin the criticism of religion but that he replaced it with a positivist doctrine of
revelation that says in effect, “Take it or leave it.” In a later letter he affirmed
Barth’s ethical observations as well as his dogmatic views, but went on to write:
it was that he gave no concrete guidance, either in dogmatics or in ethics,
on the non-religious interpretation of theological concepts. There lies his
limitation, and because of it his theology of revelation becomes positivist, a
“positivism of revelation,” as I put it.
Bultmann, who joined Barth in the removal of Christian origins from historical
investigation, claiming the necessity only of the “dass” of the historical Jesus for
faith, also saw his disciples move away from this view as they engaged in “the new
quest of the historical Jesus.”
Presently the flood of studies being published, including the work of the Jesus
Seminar scholars, indicates that the implications of historical thinking recognized
and applied by Troeltsch will not go away. Karl Barth, arguably the greatest
theological thinker of the century and among the greats of all time, was able by
the power of his thought and the circumstances of his historical moment to stem
the tide of historical thinking applied to theological formulation for a generation,
but the kerygma sheltered in a safe haven denying investigation of historical
foundations cannot finally be maintained no matter how brilliantly and powerfully proclaimed.
Hans Küng in Great Christian Thinkers (1994) identifies Barth as one of a line of
theologians—Paul, Origen, Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, and Schleiermacher—
© Grand Valley State University
�Interreligious Dialogue
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
who effected a paradigm shift in theological understanding. But in his analysis of
Barth, Küng claims that he initiated the paradigm shift to postmodernity but did
not complete it. With great regard for Barth’s accomplishments, Küng nevertheless confirms Bonhoeffer’s claim made a half century ago.
Recognizing that the later Barth was reevaluating the knowledge of God available
from the world of creation, natural theology, and world religions, Kung maintains
that in the end this dogmatic edifice conceived on such a large scale,
stringently constructed and carefully built, had at least in principle
(though most Barthians hardly noticed) been blown up!
It is Küng’s contention that if Barth could start over, “he would attempt to work
out a Christian theology in the context of the world religions and the world
regions.” How would Barth go about this, according to Küng?
He would have attempted to work out a responsible historical-critical
dogmatics in the light of an exegesis with a historical-critical foundation,
in order in this way co translate the original Christian message... for the
future that had dawned in such a way that it was again understood as a
liberating address from God. (120)
And, Küng contends, the “historical Jesus,” apart from whom the “Christ of
dogma” becomes a myth to be manipulated at will, might “again become of the
utmost importance and urgency.”
We have come, it would appear, full circle during the course of this century. The
current reconsideration of Ernst Troeltsch stems from his early grasp of the
implications of historical thinking for theological formulation. He was an
interdisciplinary thinker at home in various realms of inquiry. He faced up to the
demise of Eurocentricism and the relativity of all historical events and human
knowledge – religious, philosophical, and scientific. Thus he acknowledged that
Christian faith was relative to its largely Western orientation and environment.
At the beginning of this century Troeltsch foresaw the global pluralism with
which we are finally beginning to come to terms. In 1910, Burkitt was expressing
the implication of a new way of thinking, thinking historically, thinking in terms
of development, the evolving conception of truth. Such a way of thinking is widely
accepted in our world, but it has been resisted in the conservative sectors of the
church because it can lead to the morass of relativism and the denial of the
Absolute and of absolute truth.
But such a result is not the necessary consequence of historical thinking. Rather,
it can simply lead to the recognition expressed by Burkitt—that every human
attempt to express absolute truth is only a relative expression—relative to one’s
cultural context—a partial grasp of the absolute that will always transcend any
historically conditional expression. Further, that expression is possible only in
symbolic form, by use of metaphor.
© Grand Valley State University
�Interreligious Dialogue
Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
My purpose in introducing the limits and possibilities of historical thinking is in
order to point the way to authentic and fruitful interreligious dialogue. Such
dialogue is imperative for our world. The frightening prospect of a world in the
throes of religious conflict makes it incumbent upon us to find a way to effect
communication and mutual respect among the world religions. That will not be
possible unless we are willing to apply the insights of historical thinking to the
core credal development of Christology, including the various theories of the
atonement that have been formulated throughout the centuries.
The Development of Doctrine
Burkitt was too confident in 1910. The twentieth century has not seen a fresh
expression of the meaning of Jesus Christ in the church. Rather there has been
strenuous resistance to any revisioning of core Christological formulations.
This resistance to revisioning has been pointed out by the Anglican priest John
Bowden in Jesus: The Unanswered Questions (1988). He is troubled by the
church’s refusal to engage in serious discussion of the unavoidable questions
surrounding Jesus that have arisen as our knowledge of the cultural context of his
life and the checkered history of credal development have become apparent.
Bowden writes from the perspective of faith, from within the tradition of the
Christian church, and for love of the faith and the church. But he raises the
unanswered and disturbing questions that must be addressed if the church is to
engage the spiritual quest of those for whom responsible, intelligent inquiry must
accompany the commitment of faith. Thus, his purpose in writing is pastoral and
positive. From a broad spectrum of research he has distilled the critical questions
that demand a hearing.
Reflecting on his own theological training, he finds it remarkable that, after a
thorough immersion in the historical-critical study of Scripture, he found quite a
different approach to the history of Christian doctrine up to the year 451, the year
of the Council of Chalcedon and the formulation of the classical statement about
the natures of Jesus Christ. The theological reasoning and philosophical argument of those early centuries used the Bible in quite another fashion than he had
learned to use it in his biblical studies. While the different cultural patterns of the
early centuries of Christian dogmatic formulation were recognized, the
conclusions of the church fathers were not to be questioned after Chalcedon; they
were a given.
But, Bowden contends, the conclusions of those early centuries need to be
questioned as seriously as the gospel record has been. Biblical criticism must be
joined by doctrinal criticism that will examine the historical development in those
early centuries that culminated in the classic credal definitions of Incarnation
and Trinity, an historical development about which we have data enough to trace
the interplay of cultural forces involving not only concern for the truth but
political power plays and ecclesiastical intrigue. We really know the story. We
© Grand Valley State University
�Interreligious Dialogue
Richard A. Rhem
Page 9
have simply refused to draw out the implications for this core credal affirmation.
But until we do, we will not be able to engage in honest interreligious discussion.
Doctrinal formulation is a human enterprise. Human thought forms and human
language are the tools of such formulation. To acknowledge that as fundamental
for historical thinking is not a denial of absolute truth, as previously stated. It is
only to recognize that any particular articulation of the truth cannot be
absolutized and be raised to a status beyond further reflection and possible
reformulation. It is simply to acknowledge that it is a given of our human
historical condition that we are limited to relative apprehensions, partial
understandings that need always to be adjusted in light of new information
gathered from research and ongoing historical experience.
John Hick is a Christian thinker who has utilized the distinction between the
Absolute and the respective relative apprehensions of the Absolute in the great
world religions. Being a Christian, he has applied that insight to the development
of the Christological formulations of the early centuries in the interest of
developing a Christology in a pluralistic age.
Christology Revisited
John Hick has a ready grasp of the development of the Christian theological
tradition as well as a deep knowledge of other religious traditions. For him, the
window to the Real, to God, is Jesus and the Christian tradition. But he believes
that the Real is apprehended through other traditions as well. Thus he believes
there is a pluralism of ways of salvation. He argues his case in The Metaphor of
God Incarnate (1993), in which he contends that the necessary revision of
Christological understanding that alone can make way for genuine interreligious
dialogue will involve “liberation from the network of theories—about Incarnation,
Trinity and Atonement….”
Hick contends that
divine incarnation in its standard Christian form, in which both genuine
humanity and genuine deity are insisted upon, has never been given a
satisfactory literal sense; but that on the other hand it makes excellent
metaphorical sense….We see in Jesus a human being extraordinarily open
to God’s influence and thus living to an extraordinary extent as God’s
agent on earth, “incarnating” the divine purpose for human life. He thus
embodied within the circumstances of his time and place the ideal of
humanity living in openness and response to God, and in doing so he
“incarnated” a love that reflects the divine love. (12)
Hick, in a sense, is attempting to fulfill the task that in 1910 Burkitt foresaw as
necessary if the church were going to face the consequences of the historical
study of Christian origins and translate the figure of Jesus into an understanding
meaningful to the twentieth century.
© Grand Valley State University
�Interreligious Dialogue
Richard A. Rhem
Page10
Yet, the work of translation does not proceed without resistance, as Bowden
points out. In his opening chapter, Hick himself reviews the explosion that
erupted following the publication in 1977 of The Myth of God Incarnate, a
volume of essays by leading New Testament scholars and theologians, of which
he was one. “Thundering sermons and clerical pronouncements,” along with
articles in the British press called for the Anglicans among the authors to resign
their orders, and publication of a flurry of conservative retorts erected a wall of
opposition to the insights and implications as they were articulated in The Myth
of God Incarnate. From the tenor of the responses, one would have thought
nothing in the church’s understanding had been affected in spite of two hundred
years of intensive research and discussion. While the results of the historicalcritical study of the Bible had gained some acceptance, there obviously remained
a formidable barrier to the same kind of investigation of the historical process
that transformed Jesus of Nazareth into the ontological Son of God, second
person of the Trinity, in the credal development of the fourth and fifth centuries.
Hick addresses the third element of the doctrinal triad he contends needs
revisioning, the understanding of the death of Jesus as an atoning sacrifice. He
traces the history of the development of the doctrine, pointing out the cultural
contexts that influenced the respective theories over the centuries. Then he asks,
as in the case with other doctrines, what was the original experience out of which
atonement theory arose, for it is that same gracious, liberating experience that we
seek in our day.
Rejecting the idea of an objective justice requiring punishment for wrongdoing, a
moral law that God can and must satisfy by punishing the innocent in place of the
guilty, Hick searches for a way to express the idea of atonement in the broad
sense, in the etymological meaning of at-one-ment becoming one with God—not
ontologically but, rather, being in right relationship with God, being in a state of
salvation. He points to Eastern Orthodoxy as a valuable source for understanding
with its idea of restoration to the divine image, salvation as a process of
transformation.
In such a view, “Jesus’ death was a piece with his life, expressing a total integrity
in his self-giving to God; and his cross continues to inspire and challenge on a
level that does not involve the atonement theories developed by the Churches.”
With such an understanding of the death of Jesus, Hick is able to find similar
meanings of salvation in other religious faiths. Thus he contends,
these different conceptions of salvation are specifications of what, in a
generic formula, is the transformation of human existence from selfcenteredness to a new orientation centered in the divine Reality....
The great world religions, then, are ways of salvation. Each claims to
constitute an effective context within which the transformation of human
existence can and does take place from self-centeredness to Realitycenteredness. (136)
© Grand Valley State University
�Interreligious Dialogue
Richard A. Rhem
Page11
With such a perspective, genuine interreligious dialogue can begin. It will become
an empirical process of seeking to discover the fruits of the respective religions in
human life. The alternative to such a stance is to bring to the discussion an
understanding of atonement that necessitates a Christian absolutism of the
exclusivist variety—that outside of the knowledge of and faith in Jesus Christ, his
death and resurrection, salvation is not possible, or, an inclusivist view that
salvation is only through Christ but explicit knowledge and trust are not
necessary to receive the benefits of his death and resurrection.
The ranks of the exclusivists are thinning. Evangelicals are increasingly trying to
find a broader arena for God’s saving embrace. Clark Pinnock’s A Wideness in
God’s Mercy: The Finality of Jesus Christ in a World of Religions and John
Sanders’s No Other Name: An Investigation into the Destiny of the
Unevangelized attempt this, although they thread a tortuous way because they
have not yet shed an earlier view of biblical authority nor questioned the core
Christological formulation.
Schubert Ogden suggests an alternative to Hick. In a 1993 address at the Divinity
School in Chicago, he argued against the pluralists’ claim as well as rejecting the
claims of exclusivists and inclusivists alike. But in his approach there is also a revisioning of the classical Christological formulations in which salvation is
constituted through Jesus Christ alone. Rather than a constitutive Christology,
Ogden argues for a representative Christology. In this view, the Christ event
represents the claim that “salvation has always already been constituted by what
Christians are wont to think and speak of as the primordial and everlasting love
of God.” Whether and where that love of God might elsewhere be represented is
to be determined in the discussion without prior commitment to exclusivism,
inclusivism, or pluralism. One simply enters the dialogue open to the truth claim
of the other.
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 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
© Grand Valley State University
�Interreligious Dialogue
Richard A. Rhem
Page12
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.
References:
John Stephen Bowden. Jesus: The Unanswered Questions. Abingdon Press,
1989.
F.C. Burkitt, Preface to The Quest of the Historical Jesus by Albert Schweitzer.
Dover Publications, Dover Ed edition, 2005.
John Hick. The Metaphor of God Incarnate: Christology in a Pluralistic Age
(Second edition). Westminster John Knox Press, 2nd edition, 2006.
Ernst Troeltsch. Die Bedeutung der Geschichtlichkeit Jesu für den Glauben.
© 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
John S. Bowden, Jesus: The Unanswered Questions, 1989, John Hick, The Metaphor of God Incarnate, 2006, Albert Schweitzer, Quest of the Historical Jesus, 2005, Ernst Troeltsch, Die Bedeutung der Geschichtlichkeit Jesu fur den Glauben.
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-4-19950501
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1995-05-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Interreligious Dialogue: What is Required of 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 May 1, 1995 entitled "Interreligious Dialogue: What is Required of Us?", it appeared in Perspectives, pp. 10-15. Tags: Global Community, Pluralism, Interfaith, Historical Jesus, Metaphor, Grace, Mystery,
Incarnation. Scripture references: John S. Bowden, Jesus: The Unanswered Questions, 1989, John Hick, The Metaphor of God Incarnate, 2006, Albert Schweitzer, Quest of the Historical Jesus, 2005, Ernst Troeltsch, Die Bedeutung der Geschichtlichkeit Jesu fur den Glauben..
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Global Community
Grace
Historical Jesus
Incarnation
Interfaith
Metaphor
Mystery
Pluralism
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/d0fefc8cea4a1c2b52a7d9c2b3887261.pdf
52fd738b8e0a7d864f0a9c216a51f7ed
PDF Text
Text
Pluralism’s Theological Challenge
Editorial by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
Perspectives
A Journal of Reformed Thought
February 1990
The narrative in Acts of the spread of the gospel has long fascinated me. Peter’s
response to his noontime vision with its command, “Rise, Peter, kill and eat,” was
“No, Lord” (Acts 10). His subsequent experience at the home of Cornelius
confounded some of his most deeply held convictions.
The experience of the Spirit’s baptism on those assembled proved to be
demonstration enough for Peter. Subsequently, in Jerusalem before the apostles
and elders, Peter persisted with the lesson of his experience in spite of its
fundamentally revolutionary character. Relating his encounter with Cornelius, he
concluded rhetorically, “If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us
when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand
God?” (Acts 11:17).
The early church, emerging from the womb of Judaism, had no handy catechism
or systematic theology to which it could refer. The experience of the life, death,
and resurrection of Jesus and the baptism of God’s Spirit fit none of its
categories. These dramatic events had to be assimilated and brought into
relationship with the old covenant, with Abraham and Moses and David, with the
promises of Isaiah and all the prophets. The Scriptures which came to their
minds had to be searched anew because the tradition simply could not
accommodate their new experience.
The theologies of the New Testament are the consequence of the apostles’
wrestling jointly with their experience and with Israel’s faith tradition. The
Christian understanding as it evolved in the early church and as it emerges in the
New Testament is the result of that process of interpreting anew the historic
faith.
The New Testament already reflects the process of translation going on in regard,
for example, to the question of Jesus’ identity. From the eschatological prophet of
© Grand Valley State University
�Pluralism’s Theological Challenge
Editorial by Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
the early chapters of Acts to the incarnational Christology of the Fourth Gospel
there is a whole range of interpretations of who Jesus is, not mutually exclusive,
but rather reflecting the unfathomable richness of this One in whom dwelt the
fullness of God.
The sixteenth century, during which John Calvin wrestled with tradition and
reformed theology and practice according to the Word of God, was a period of
cultural crisis and upheaval. William Bouwsma writes in his study of John Calvin,
“The century was tense, driven, fundamentally incoherent, and riven by insoluble
conflicts that were all the more serious because they were as much within as
between individuals and parties” (p. 4). Bouwsma’s study presents Calvin as a
person very much of his own time with the tensions of society at large to be found
within his own person. And, precisely for that reason, the tradition found new
translation and expression, a retrieval of the tradition’s essential meaning.
Such a translation process is the ongoing task of theology, for theology is not an
external norm demanding obedience but, rather, reflection on the present
experience of God within the context of the cumulative tradition of faith. In The
Analogical Imagination, David Tracy points out that when the notion of
authority shifts from a truth disclosed to the mind and heart to an external norm
for the obedient will, the theological task withers to an exercise of repeating
shopworn conclusions of the tradition. He writes, “Eventually, the central,
classical symbols and doctrines of the tradition become mere ‘fundamentals’ to
be externally accepted and endlessly repeated.” (p. 99)
Then we have not a theology as hermeneutic but rather fundamentalism.
Fundamentalism does not interpret and translate the tradition in dialogue with
the present horizon of human experience, but is reduced to repetition and
reiteration. Such repetition and reiteration eventually hollow because they are
spoken into a vacuum devoid of present, living human experience.
I am convinced that we need to rethink our own theological tradition as radically
as did Peter when confronted with the experience of God’s grace in the home of
the Gentile Cornelius. The dramatic shifts in our cultural situation, the ferment in
the world-become-a-neighborhood, the knowledge of other cultures and faiths,
and the existential experience of persons in whom they are embodied, make it
incumbent upon us to search again our own faith tradition to see if the experience
of our contemporary world may elicit new insights to which we have up to the
present been blinded. Otherwise, increasingly we will have experience for which
we have no theology, and our theology will be the reiteration of an external
ideology unrelated to present experience, lacking passion and compelling appeal.
As heirs of Reformation theology we are being challenged to practice what we
have proudly claimed but poorly lived out—that we are a people re-formed
according to the Word of God and always being re-formed. That is to live with
one’s faith formulations always at risk because one begins with the
© Grand Valley State University
�Pluralism’s Theological Challenge
Editorial by Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
acknowledgement of their only relative adequacy. But in the process one’s faith
experience will deepen with a new sense of freedom and a growing sense of awe
before the mystery of the gracious God whose work of creation and redemption
we have come to know through Jesus Christ our Lord.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
References
David Tracy. The Analogical Imagination, 1981.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19900201
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1990-02-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Pluralism's Theological Challenge
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
Editorial created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on February 1, 1990 entitled "Pluralism's Theological Challenge", it appeared in Perspectives, Feb. 1990, p. 3. Tags: Pluralism, Inclusive, Reimagining the Faith. Scripture references: David Tracy. The Analogical Imagination, 1981..
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Inclusive
Pluralism
Reimagining the Faith
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/a43c31c5c10a81787a95d4bdb209c65c.pdf
829061ce4613b83c2d29a96e9e07b1c8
PDF Text
Text
Plurality and Ambiguity: Hermeneutics, Religion, Hope
By David Tracy
(San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1987)
Book Review by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Publication of Review Unknown
“At times, interpretations matter. On the whole, such times are times of
cultural crisis. The old ways of understanding and practice, even
experience itself, no longer seem to work.” (p. 7)
We live in such a time, according to David Tracy, a crisis of tradition, culture, and
language so that we can no longer simply move forward by means of the usual
ways of experiencing, understanding, acting or interpreting. Tracy names our
time “post-modern” - a vague and ambiguous expression he admits; yet “there we
are,” he avers.
This being Tracy’s conviction, he continues to pour his energy into the
interpretation of interpretation theory.
“A crisis of interpretation within any tradition eventually becomes a
demand to interpret this very process of interpretation.”
Tracy stands within the crisis of Western culture.
“... shaped by the seventeenth-century scientific revolution, the
eighteenth-century Enlightenment, and the nineteenth-century industrial
revolution and explosion of historical consciousness. We late twentiethcentury Westerners find ourselves in a century where human-made mass
death has been practiced, where yet another technological revolution is
occurring, where global catastrophe or even extinction could occur. We
find ourselves unable to proceed as if all that had not happened, is not
happening, or could not happen.” (p. 8)
In such a time, the question of interpretation itself becomes central. Although the
discussion of interpretation theory becomes extremely technical and one runs
into the technical jargon in Tracy causing the uninitiated to despair; nevertheless
the technical discussion is not simply an academic game without practical
relevance or application, for, Tracy contends,
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, Plurality and Ambiguity, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
“Every time we act, deliberate, judge, understand, or even experience, we
are interpreting. To understand at all is to interpret. To act well is to
interpret a situation demanding some action and to interpret a correct
strategy for that action ... To be human is to act reflectively, to decide
deliberately, to understand intelligently, to experience fully. Whether we
know it or not, to be human is to be a skilled interpreter.” (p. 9)
The theme of the present work is conversation. Tracy offers conversation as a
model for all interpretation. He calls it a “game.”
The movement in conversation is questioning itself. Neither my present
opinions on the question nor the texts’ original response to the question,
but the question itself, must control every conversation. A conversation ...
is not a confrontation. It is not a debate. It is not an exam. It is questioning
itself. It is a willingness to follow the question wherever it may go. It is dialogue. (p. 18)
Understanding will move forward only where conversation exists; where one says
what one means as accurately as possible; where one listens to and respects what
the other (person, text, or event) says however different or other; where one is
willing to correct or defend one’s opinion if challenged by a conversation partner,
willing to argue if necessary, to confront if necessary, and to change one’s mind if
evidence suggests it.
Any act of interpretation involves at least three realities: a phenomenon to be
interpreted, someone interpreting the phenomenon, and the interaction between
the first two realities. Understanding these three realities is the problem of
interpretation. Tracy suggests it is best to begin with the phenomenon to be
interpreted (a law, an action, a ritual, a symbol, a text, a person, an event). For
purposes of his discussion, Tracy suggests the classic texts, “Those texts that bear
an excess and permanence of meaning, yet always resist definitive
interpretation.” Tracy contends,
The classic is important hermeneutically because it represents the best
examples of what we seek: an example of both radical stability become
permanence and radical instability become excess of meaning through
ever-changing receptions. (p. 14)
To understand is to interpret and conversation with a classic text is to find
oneself caught up in the questions and answers worthy of a free mind.
Conversation is thus an exploration of possibilities in the search for truth. One
who enters upon such a conversation does so with the understanding that what is
other from one’s pre-understanding may be possible. A good interpreter
possesses an “analogical imagination” (a concept developed by Tracy in his book
by that title) by which the interpreter is able to move from otherness, to
possibility, to similarity-in-difference. Persons willing to risk conversation in
interpretation are at a disadvantage from those who will not take the risk because
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, Plurality and Ambiguity, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
such a person begins with the possibility they may be wrong. But only such
openness can advance understanding in the cultural crisis in which we find
ourselves, a crisis which has revealed the poverty of both the Enlightenment and
the Romantic Movement which was its reaction. As the Enlightenment unfolded,
having freed us from the weight of certain oppressive traditions allowing us to
dare to think for ourselves, it became trapped in ever-narrower models of what
could count as truth until it retreated into a formal and technical rationality.
But we cannot follow the reaction of romanticism thus becoming the latest
expressions of the “unhappy consciousness” of the romantic. The
“remystification of all reality” is not an option.
It cannot be a pretense that the imagined joys of first naiveté can be ours.
It cannot be the disparagement of science and the retreat into privacy. (p.
31)
How do we move forward? Tracy suggests that two contemporary methods offer
hope: historical critical methods and literary critical methods. Both affirm the
necessity of method and the necessity of rejecting methologism. Tracy discusses
the effects of historical critical and literary critical methods on our understanding
of the classics of Western culture so that there is no longer such a thing as an
unambiguous tradition - no innocent readings of the classics. And where does
that leave us? Tracy contends,
The historicity of every text, interpreter, and conversation has been
clarified by historical consciousness. Certainty is no more. But relative
adequacy for all interpretations remains an ideal worth striving for. (p. 39)
Tracy grounds this contention in the third chapter: “Radical Plurality: The
Question of Language,” a discussion of the relationships among language,
knowledge and reality and an assertion of the results of critical methods – the
radical plurality in language, knowledge and reality alike.
“‘Reality’ is the one word that should always appear within quotation
marks.”
That claim of Nabokov, says Tracy, best expresses one major strand of postmodern reflection on language. Both positivism and romanticism held language
to be secondary, derivative, coming after the fact of discovery and cognition,
peripheral to the real thing. But language analysis has demonstrated its social
and historical character. Our understanding comes through particular and public
languages and language “shapes” reality - even constitutes reality. The result of
this insight has been the dethroning of the autonomous ego from its false
pretensions to mastery and certainty. We are inevitably shaped by the history we
are born into. We are left with plurality and ambiguity.
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, Plurality and Ambiguity, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
Plurality seems an adequate word to suggest the extraordinary variety that
any study of language shows, and any study of the variety of receptions of
any classic documents. Ambiguity may be too mild a word to describe the
strange mixture of great good and frightening evil that our history reveals.
Historical ambiguity means a once seemingly clear historical narrative or
progressive Western enlightenment and emancipation has now become a
montage of classics and new-speak, of startling beauty and revolting
cruelty, of partial emancipation and ever-subtler forms of entrapment. (p.
69F)
Neither optimism nor pessimism will prove fruitful in understanding the
plurality and ambiguity of our history. Rather resistance, attention and hope
must be exercised. Without resignation or cynicism, Tracy advocates
conversation as limited, fragile and necessary exercises in reaching relatively
adequate knowledge of language and history.
In the final chapter, “Resistance and Hope: The Question of Religion,” Tracy
declares that the purely autonomous ego has been mortally wounded, yet not
erased; rather there appears a more fragile self - open to epiphanies.
Postmodern coherence, at best, will be a rough coherence: interrupted,
obscure, often confused, self-conscious of its own language use and, above
all, aware of the ambiguities of all histories and traditions. (p. 83)
Theological interpretation is one way to allow genuine conversation with the
religious classics (for example, the Scriptures). A highly tentative, relative
adequacy is all that can be hoped for as the same plurality and ambiguity that
affects all discourse affects theology. Religions are even more intensely pluralistic
and ambiguous than art, morality, philosophy and politics because religions do
claim
that Ultimate Reality has revealed itself and that there is a way of
liberation for any human being. (p. 86)
Pluralism is the attitude Tracy fundamentally trusts, but such an affirmation is
the beginning, not the end for the interpreter of religion.
The great pluralists of religion are those who so affirm plurality that they
fundamentally trust it, yet do not shirk their responsibility to develop
criteria of assessment for each judgment of relative adequacy. (p. 91)
Reductionism is a real temptation in the interpretation of religion. The problem
is one of totalization: only this method or this hermeneutic or this critique can
interpret what religion really is.
© Grand Valley State University
�David Tracy, Plurality and Ambiguity, Book Review by Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
All methods of reductionism, whether by believers or nonbelievers, are
grounded in an unacknowledged confession of their own: the belief that so
secure is their present knowledge of truth and possibility that the religious
classics can at best be peculiar expressions of more of the same. Anything
different, other, alien must clearly be untrue and impossible - that ‘goes
without saying.’(p. 100)
Thus, declares Tracy, the difference between fundamentalist and secular readings
only appear startling; the differences are on the surface, not in fundamental
hermeneutical approaches. They are reverse sides of the same coin of certainty,
mastery and control. But, writes Tracy,
When it is believable, religious faith manifests a sense of the radical
mystery of all reality: the mystery we are to ourselves; the mystery of
history, nature, and the cosmos; the mystery, above all, of Ultimate
Reality. ... When it is active, religious love frees us from the illusion that to
be a human being means to become an ego attempting mastery and
control of all others. (p. 107)
Tracy witnesses to his personal belief in belief.
I believe that faith in Ultimate Reality can make all the difference for a life
of resistance, hope, and action. I believe in God. It is, I confess, that belief
which gives me hope. (p. 110)
In a profile of David Tracy in The New York Times Magazine (11-9-86), Tracy is
quoted as saying,
The religious event described in the First Letter of John asks the question:
What is the nature of the ultimate reality? And the answer is: God. And
more explicitly, God is love. That is an extraordinary thought, that
ultimate reality is love.
All of his strenuous attention to interpretation theory is in the service of bringing
that truth to expression, not just in the Church, but in the public arena. To follow
his argument is not easy; it is rewarding. Tracy is a pioneer venturing into the
new situation arising out of the cultural crisis of the present in order that the
truth claim of God as it comes to manifestation might be understood and acted
upon.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
References
David Tracy, Plurality and Ambiguity, 1987
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19870901
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1987-09-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Plurality and Ambiguity: Hermeneutics, Religion, Hope
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Book Review created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on September 1, 1987 entitled "Plurality and Ambiguity: Hermeneutics, Religion, Hope", on the book Plurality and Ambiguity: Hermeneutics, Religion, Hope, written by David Tracy. Tags: Postmodern, Pluralism, Religion, Mystery, Love at Core of Reality. Scripture references: David Tracy, Plurality and Ambiguity, 1987.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Love at Core of Reality
Mystery
Pluralism
PostModern
Religion
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/4fa6a435f09e1814c4fa10de5a650117.pdf
0ee6ec047ba31a3f574ca1b011efdd5f
PDF Text
Text
Theological Method:
The Search For a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Article by
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Published in
Reformed Review
A Theological Journal of Western Theological Seminary
101 East 13th Street, Holland, Michigan
Spring, 1986
Leafing through a manila folder labeled “Theological Methodology” was an
exercise in nostalgia. A few of us requested a reading course with Dr. Osterhaven
in which we would examine various models of theological method and write a
paper for presentation to the group. Perhaps it was there that my interest in
theological method was stimulated or, perhaps, the desire to study the subject
with Dr. Osterhaven arose from a distinction made by one of his esteemed
teachers, Dr. Albertus Pieters, whose Facts and Mysteries of the Christian Faith
fascinated me as a youth. Dr. Pieters distinguished systematic and biblical
theology and gave clear preference to the latter. It was a moment of awakening; I
was faced with the fact that the systematician's logical formulations might not
always faithfully reflect the biblical witness; indeed, at times they might actually
distort biblical truth.
No task places one in the tension between the richness and diversity of the
biblical witness and the systematization of the faith more than the task of
preaching each Lord's Day. Thus I have continued to be challenged with the need
to do theology in such a way that what comes to expression in the sermon is a
faithful witness to biblical faith evidencing sensitivity to the contemporary
situation. The sermon is the end product of the significant encounter of the Word
and the world in the mind and heart of the preacher, and the theological task
must be pursued to that end that the truth may find expression within the present
horizon. It will be my purpose here to reflect on the substratum on which the
sermon rests in the conviction that preaching with integrity demands not only
theological understanding, but also self-consciousness of one's theological
method.
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
It is a great privilege to offer the following discussion of theological method in
honor of a highly esteemed teacher in whose person the authenticity and integrity
of the Christian thinker is modeled out.
A NEW BASIC MODEL OF THEOLOGY?
In May of 1983, seventy professors of theology from around the world gathered at
the University of Tubingen in Germany. The international ecumenical
symposium was organized by the Institute for the Advanced Study of Religion at
the University of Chicago, the International Magazine for Theology, Concilium,
and the Institute for Ecumenical Research in Tubingen. The leading spirit in
organizing the event was Professor Dr. Hans Küng, head of the Tubingen
Institute. The key question was, “Is a base consensus in Christian theology
possible today despite all differences?” In his introductory remarks, Hans Küng
set the stage for the discussion. He said,
The natural sciences, humanities, democratic plural societies and freedom
movements of all kinds all have radical consequences, specifically also for
theology, whose outgrowths have not yet even been conceptualized, much
less dealt with. But is theology dependent on such multifaceted tensions,
such divergent systems, or even fads? Or is a new, changed basic model of
theology recognizable? Is there, then, a new “paradigm of theology,” which
might adequately react to the present changed experience? Are there
universal constants despite all the differing theories, methods, and
structures in such a “new paradigm” which every Christian theology must
advance because, scientifically, they are held accountable by the Christian
faith?
The key word in understanding the task of this symposium is “paradigm” which
was introduced into this theological discussion from a discussion in the natural
sciences by Thomas Kuhn whose book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,
became the catalyst for reflection on the history of theological development.
Kuhn defined paradigm as,
an entire constellation of beliefs, values, technics, and so on shared by the
members of a given community.1
On the basis of that understanding of paradigm, Hans Küng charted the history
of theology, attempting to locate those points of significant ferment in the Church
which led to the evolving of a new model or paradigm. He set forth a tentative
periodization beginning with the primitive Christian theology that was shaped by
apocalypticism followed by the Greek and Latin Fathers of the Patristic period,
the East-West schism of the Eleventh Century, the Reformation of the Sixteenth
Century, including the Counter-Reformation of the Roman Church, the
development of modern philosophy and the natural sciences of the Seventeenth
and Eighteenth Centuries, including the Enlightenment, the French and
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
American Revolutions and the Twentieth Century theological movements
beginning with Barth's Dialectical Theology and including Existentialist,
Hermeneutical and the various Liberation Theologies of the present.
From these major shifts in the history of the Church and in theological posture,
Küng finds five models or paradigms operational in the present whose roots lie in
the major shifts of the past. Stemming from the Ancient Church is the model of
Eastern Orthodoxy; from the Medieval period there remains a Roman Catholic
traditionalism; from the Reformation era there developed a Protestant orthodoxy
which is still embraced; from the Enlightenment classical Liberalism developed
and in strong reaction to that Nineteenth Century Liberalism, the revolution
whose catalyst was Karl Barth in the early decades of this Century, Dialectical
Theology with several variants in the present.
His schematization gives credence to the contention that eruptive events in
Church and society often result in new insights, new angles of vision which are
the catalyst for the conception of a new paradigm, a new model of theology. The
Symposium held at Tübingen in 1983 had as its purpose the endeavor to find a
new paradigm that could gather the best insights of the biblical studies of the
modern period along with the understanding of the world, history and human
existence available to us through all of the academic disciplines. Such a paradigm,
Kiting contends, must be truthful, not conformist or opportunist; free, not
authoritarian; critical, not fundamentalist or traditionalist; ecumenical, not
denominationalist or confessionalist. A theology in the horizon of the present
world of experience and critically rooted in the biblical tradition would be a
theology at the same time both Catholic and evangelical, both traditional and
contemporary, both Christocentric and universalist, both theoretical-scholarly
and practical-pastoral.
In sum: the quest is for a critical, ecumenical theology.
In a paper read to the Symposium, Küng discussed the process by which these
major shifts took place in the history of the Christian tradition. As indicated
above, the study by the historian of science, Thomas Kuhn, was the catalyst for
surveying shifts in theological understanding. Kuhn's book was a major challenge
to the traditional self-understanding of natural science. According to Kuhn,
progress in the natural sciences has not come through an orderly acquisition of
knowledge which has cumulatively issued in our present body of scientific data.
Much rather, progress has come in spurts, through major breakthroughs in
understanding which have forced the replacement of a former model of
understanding with a new model or paradigm. Küng writes,
Kuhn's heretical main thesis is that radically new theories arise neither by
verification nor by falsification but by the replacement - in individual
cases, highly complex and protracted - of a hitherto accepted explanatory
model (paradigm) by a new one. 2
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
As an example of this process, Küng cites the shift from a Ptolemaic astronomy to
the Copernican view.
... The more the movements of the stars were studied and corrected in the
light of the Ptolemaic system, the more material was produced to refute
that system. And the same thing happened not only with the Copernican
revolution but also with the Newtonian, the chemical and the Einsteinian
revolutions.
... The process may be tedious, protracted and complex. And these are
transitional periods in which at first only the stereotypes of the old model
begin to break up. But the critical state of the traditional theory
increasingly comes to light. A period of pronounced insecurity generally
precedes the emergence of new theories, which in the end leads to the
destruction of the paradigm. In a word, crisis is the usual condition for the
rejection of a hitherto accepted paradigm. 3
Scientific progress according to Kuhn comes not through an evolutionary,
cumulative process, but through scientific revolution.
Confirming and developing the thesis of Thomas Kuhn in regard to
systemological analysis is Stephen Toulmin, who in the preface to his basic work
entitled, Human Understanding, states his central thesis as follows:
... in science and philosophy alike, an exclusive preoccupation with logical
systematicity has been destructive of both historical understanding and
rational criticism. Men demonstrate their rationality, not by ordering their
concepts and beliefs in tidy formal structures, but by their preparedness to
respond to novel situations with open minds - acknowledging the
shortcomings of their formal procedures and moving beyond them.4
From Kuhn’s work in the history of science and Toulmin's study of human
understanding we come to the surprising recognition that the respective scientific
disciplines and philosophical movements do their model building and
systematization in the wake of new insight - some breakthrough in understanding
or some intuitive grasp of truth which shatters the prevailing model or paradigm,
forcing upon the community (academic or social or ecclesiastical) a new way of
looking at Reality.
This development has been especially fruitful in the theological discussions being
carried on by the Universities of Tubingen and Chicago, highlighted at the
Symposium to which I referred above. Hans Küng's attempt at a periodization of
theological development is an attempt to demonstrate that there are fascinating
parallels between that development and development in the natural sciences. He
lists five parallels:
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
A.
As in natural sciences, so also in the theological community, there is
a “normal science” with its classical authors, textbooks and teachers,
which is characterized by a cumulative growth of knowledge, by a solution
of remaining problems (“puzzles”) and by resistance to everything that
might result in a changing as replacement of the established paradigm.
B.
As in natural science, so also in the theological community,
awareness of a growing crisis is the starting position for the advent of a
drastic change in certain hitherto prevailing basic assumptions and
eventually causes the breakthrough of a new paradigm or model of
understanding. When the available rules and methods break down, they
lead to a search for new ones.
C.
As in natural science, so also in the theological community, an older
paradigm or model of understanding is replaced when a new one is
available,
D.
As in natural science, so too in the theological community, in the
acceptance or rejection of a new paradigm, not only scientific, but also
extra-scientific factors are involved, so that the transition to a new model
cannot be purely rationally extorted, but may be described as a conversion.
E.
In the theological community as in natural science, it can be
predicted only with difficulty, in the midst of great controversies, whether
a new paradigm is absorbed into the old, replaces the old or is shelved for
a long period. But if it is accepted, innovation is consolidated as tradition.
5
Küng adds a word from Albert Einstein at this point, who said on one occasion,
“Smashing prejudices is more difficult than smashing atoms.” But Küng adds,
“Once they are smashed, they release forces that can perhaps move mountains.”
These theses set forth by Küng he calls only provisional. They are offered for
discussion and he is well aware where the critical question arises. After stating
these parallels, he continues,
And yet the question is thrust upon us: Does not theology, even Christian
truth itself, faced by nothing but paradigm changes and new conceptions,
become a victim of historical relativism which makes it impossible any
longer to perceive the Christian reality and makes every paradigm equally
true, equally valid? Perhaps the natural scientist is not very much
concerned with this problem, but it is of the greatest consequence for the
Christian theologian ... Let us therefore pose the question: Does a
paradigm change involve a total break? 6
Küng's conviction is that in both science and theology there is preserved a
continuity when there is a shift in paradigm. In theology he insists,
We have to avoid the choice not only between an absolutist and a relativist
view, but also between a radical continuity and a radical discontinuity.
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
Every paradigm change shows at the same time continuity and
discontinuity, rationality and irrationality, conceptual stability and
conceptual change, evolutionary and revolutionary elements. 7
Further, in theology and the historical sciences much more than in the basically
un-historical natural sciences, “ ... it is therefore not a question of a new
invention of a tradition. It is a question of a new formulation of tradition,
admittedly in the light of a new paradigm.” The problem of continuity is a more
serious problem for theology because theology deals with “truth.” Kuhn as a
scientist must leave alone the ultimate questions of the “whence” and the
“whither” of the world process and the human drama. Theology addresses those
very ultimate questions. Thus there are not only parallels between the
development of natural science and theology but there are also some significant
differences.
Christian theology lives out of the primordial event which is its source, its norm
and to which it must continually return - the event of Israel and of Jesus Christ as
set forth in the Scriptures.
This primordial event which has found its preeminent expression in Jesus and is
attested to in Scripture is not simply a past datum to be analyzed and interpreted
but is a dynamic living force which time and again breaks out - for example, in
the personal crisis of a Martin Luther. As Küng expresses it,
The gospel itself then - obviously always in connection with a particular
development in contemporary world history - appears here as a direct
cause of the theological crisis, as ground of discontinuity in theology, as
impetus to the new paradigm. 8
Further, because theology is anchored to a past historical event, a new paradigm
may emerge and theological upheaval may occur, but there can never be the total
replacement or total suppression of the old paradigm. Thus Küng declares a
revolution in Christian theology
can never take place except on the basis of and ultimately because of the
gospel, and never against the gospel. 9
Another difference from a paradigm shift in the natural sciences is that in
theology, because of the existential nature of the “decision of faith,” the academic
decision for one paradigm or another is not always distinguished from the
“decision of faith;” the person for whom the Christian reality comes to clear
expression in a new paradigm causing him to abandon the old paradigm may be
seen as choosing against the gospel itself of which the paradigms are but
structures for understanding.
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
Finally, and closely connected to the foregoing observation, is the fact that when
the Church and theological community reject a paradigm,
... rejection easily leads to condemnation, discussion to excommunication;
gospel and theology, content of faith and outward form of faith, are
identified.10
Because this is such a powerful tendency in the Christian community, when a
new model of understanding is accepted, it is soon turned into tradition and
tradition in turn becomes a new traditionalism.
With the discussion of how knowledge has advanced in the history of science as
the catalyst, Küng has thus surveyed the development of theological
understanding to the present, observing both parallels and differences between
the history of science and the history of theology. But his purpose is not simply
information but, rather, the study is being engaged in in order to determine if
there is a base consensus in Christian theology today. Are all the elements of
ferment at work today in the Church pointing to a new paradigm in theology and,
if so, what would such a paradigm look like? We have noted some of the essential
characteristics that must be reflected in a new basic model for theology in our
day. Beyond the characteristics listed, the parameters of any new paradigm must
be set by two constants which provide the two poles in reference to which the
Christian message must come to expression:
The first constant: The present world as horizon.
The second constant: The Christian message as standard.
The “horizon” within which theological reflection must happen and theological
formulation must occur is “our own present world of human experience.” Küng
asserts:
One thing should now be clear: that the reality of world, humanity, myself,
is revealed in depth in its obvious ambivalence, its radical contingency
and its continual change: an ongoing history of success and suffering,
justice and injustice, happiness and unhappiness, salvation and disaster,
sense and nonsense. Nor does this mean making the world evil, so that
theologians can more easily get their God involved; it means taking stock
without prejudice of what is. Theology does not create any reality, but
interprets it. 11
The second constant has already been noted in our discussion of the differences
between theology and the natural sciences. Küng describes it this way:
If ecumenical theology wants to be Christian theology, its other pole must
be the Judeo-Christian tradition and its primary norm cannot be anything
except the Christian message on which this tradition is constructed as on
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
its ultimate ground. That is to say, the Christian primordial and basic
testimony, the gospel itself in the sense of the good news in its entirety, as
recorded in the Old and New Testament Scriptures, is the basic norm of
ecumenical theology. 12
These two poles or constants then form the context within which theological
formulation must come to expression. If we observe the history of theology after
the great awakening of the Sixteenth Century, we see how in both the Catholic
and Protestant traditions there was a hardening of theological positions. The
Seventeenth Century saw the development of an orthodoxy shaped by
Rationalism, which froze the new insights of the Reformers into carefully defined
doctrinal positions with little regard for the present horizon. In the wake of the
Enlightenment of the Eighteenth Century there was an attempt to come to terms
with the new understanding of both human reality and the natural world. The
classic Liberalism of the Nineteenth Century was an effort to proclaim the gospel
within the confines of a weltanschaung - that had no room for transcendent
Reality; the gospel, the second constant, was dissolved into the first, into the
horizon of this world.
In sharp reaction, Karl Barth reversed the whole tide of Nineteenth Century
Liberalism, loudly proclaiming a theology of the Word, pointing to the God Who
is the “Wholly Other.” Because he was in a posture of such sharp reaction, the
early Barth nearly obliterated the present horizon, the first constant, although he
was too deeply imbued with the culture of his day wholly to lose sight of it.
The present discussion comes at a time when we are able with historical distance
to gain some objectivity as we face the task before us. The theology of the future
must never again lose sight of either constant. Our task is to find an expression of
the Gospel which is faithful to the Word and honest with the world. If such an
understanding of theology's task meets with anything like a consensus, then we
may be poised for a fruitful period of theological activity.
SPEAKING THE TRUTH IN A PLURALISTIC AGE
Under the auspices of the Program for Studies in Religion at the University of
Michigan, Hans Küng led a seminar during the Fall Term of 1983 on the subject
of “Paradigm Change in Theology.” It was a cross-discipline seminar including
students and professors from the schools of the arts and literature, law, and
medicine. One of the papers studied was written by Professor David Tracy of the
university of Chicago Divinity School, a Catholic scholar who has been a major
participant in the discussion of paradigm shift in the symposium discussed
above.
Tracy has grappled with the matter of theological methodology. In his first book
Blessed Rage for Order, published in 1979, he identified five theological models:
Orthodox, Liberal, Neo-Orthodox, Radical, and a Revisionist model. These five
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page 9
models are the result of a different schematization than that followed by Küng,
cited above, but there is great similarity of view as to the models operative in the
present period. Tracy's Revisionist model, which he will endeavor to build, is his
attempt at finding a new paradigm. It is his contention that a Revisionist model
must be constructed which will enable the ecumenical Church to proclaim a
message that will make the claim of truth recognizable in a pluralistic age. The
Revisionist model is a critical correlation of the two principle sources for
theology, the two constants mentioned above, cited by Küng: Christian texts and
common human experience and language. Tracy sets forth the following theses:
The Principle Method of Investigation of the Source, “Common Human
Experience and Language,” Can Be Described as a Phenomenology of the
“Religious Dimension” Present in Everyday and Scientific Experience and
Language.” 13
The Principle Method of Investigation of the Source “The Christian
Tradition” Can Be Described as a Historical and Hermeneutical
Investigation of Classical Christian Texts. 14
Having set the agenda for his endeavor, Tracy moved on in his next work, The
Analogical Imagination, to set forth the method and execute it in terms of his
own commitment to the Catholic Christian Tradition. The Preface announces, “In
a culture of pluralism must each religious tradition finally either dissolve into
some lowest common denominator or accept a marginal existence as one
interesting but purely private option?” Tracy is not willing to accept either option.
A theological strategy must be found that can articulate the genuine claims of
religion to truth. This is the task he sets for himself: a responsible affirmation of
pluralism through the discovery of public criteria by which truth can be affirmed.
Theology must develop public criteria of truth and discourse because it deals with
the fundamental questions of existence and because it speaks of God.
Recognizing that the theologian addresses three arenas, Society, Academy and
Church, Tracy insists that the criteria of publicness applies in all three areas.
Theology is the generic name for three disciplines: fundamental, systematic and
practical theologies. Publicness is demanded of each. The primary focus of
fundamental theology is the Academy, of systematic theology, the Church and of
practical theology, Society. They differ not only in their primary reference group,
but also in terms of their modes of argument, ethical stance, religious stance and
in terms of expressing claims to meaning and truth.
On the way to a responsible pluralism all conversation partners must agree to
certain basic rules for the discussion. Two constants are present: the
interpretation of a religious tradition and the interpretation of the religious
dimension of the contemporary situation from which and to which the theologian
speaks. In regard to the first, it is incumbent upon the theologian to make explicit
her/his general method of interpretation, to develop “criteria of appropriateness”
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page10
whereby specific interpretations of the tradition may be judged by the wider
theological community. In regard to the interpretation of the contemporary
situation there must be an analysis of the “religious” questions, the question of
the meaning of human existence in the present situation.
There are major differences as well. Tracy addresses the question as to what
constitutes a public claim to truth in the three sub-disciplines of theology.
Fundamental theology's defining characteristic is
... a reasoned insistence on employing the approach and methods of some
established academic discipline to explicate and adjudicate the truth
claims of the interpreted religious tradition and the truth claims of the
contemporary situation. 15
Various models are available, but whichever model is chosen fundamental
questions and answers are articulated in such a way that any attentive,
intelligent, reasonable and responsible person can understand and judge them in
keeping with fully public criteria for argument. Personal faith may not enter the
argument for the truth claims in fundamental theology.
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY AS A HERMENEUTICAL TASK
The systematic theologian's major task is the reinterpretation of the tradition for
the present situation.
Where the fundamental theologian will relate the reality of God to our
fundamental trust in existence (our common faith), the confessional
systematic theologian will relate that reality to their arguments for a
distinctively Christian understanding of faith.
Christian theology ... consists in explicating in public terms and in
accordance with the demands of its own primary confessions, the full
meaning and truth of the original “illuminating event” ... which occasioned
and continues to inform its understanding of all reality. 16
Thus the task of the systematic theologian is a hermeneutical task. The
“illuminating event” Tracy calls a religious classic. As in a classic work of art, the
religious classic contains the possibility of ever-new “disclosures.” Classics Tracy
defines as texts, events, images, persons, rituals and symbols that are assumed to
disclose permanent possibilities of meaning and truth. The hermeneutical
theologian seeks to articulate the truth-disclosure of the reality of God embedded
in the tradition for the contemporary situation.
If the systematic theologian speaks out of a particular tradition, is systematic
theology public discourse? Can the claim of Truth be made for theological
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page11
statements arising out of a particular tradition? Tracy believes it can if systematic
theology is understood as a hermeneutical task.
It is Tracy's contention that systematic theology is hermeneutical. This means
that systematic theology's task is to interpret, mediate and translate the meaning
and truth of the tradition. Where this is not the case, where the notion of
authority shifts from a truth disclosed to mind and heart to an external norm for
the obedient will, theologians can no longer interpret and translate the tradition
but “only repeat the shop-worn conclusions of the tradition.”
Eventually, the central, classical symbols and doctrines of the tradition
become mere “fundamentals” to be externally accepted and endlessly
repeated.17
Tracy points to the contrast of a hermeneutical theology:
The heart of any hermeneutical position is the recognition that all
interpretation is a mediation of past and present, a translation carried on
within the effective history of a tradition to retrieve its sometimes strange,
sometimes familiar meanings. 18
How is this done? Recognizing that one begins within a tradition which has
shaped one, that one is socialized, acculturated and thus without the possibility of
finding some position “above” one's own historicity,
... the route to liberation from the negative realities of a tradition is not to
declare the existence of an autonomy that is literally unreal but to enter
into a disciplined and responsive conversation with the subject matter the responses and, above all, the fundamental questions, of the
traditions.19
Tracy refers to Hans-Georg Gadamer's model of conversation as a model for
understanding the dialogue with the tradition.
Real conversation occurs only when the participants allow the question,
the subject matter, to assume primacy. It occurs only when our usual fears
about our own self-image die. ... That fear (dies only because we are
carried along, and sometimes away, by the subject matter itself into the
rare event or happening named “thinking” and “understanding.” For
understanding happens; it occurs not as the pure result of personal
achievement but in the back-and-forth movement of the conversation
itself.
The word “hermeneutical” best describes this realized experience of
understanding in conversation. For every event of understanding, in order
to produce a new interpretation, mediates between our past experience
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page12
and the understanding embodied in our linguistic tradition and the
present event of understanding occasioned by a fidelity to the logic of the
question in the back-and-forth movement of the conversation.20
Using the model of conversation Tracy shows how one enters into the history of
the illuminating event. When interpreting a classic one recognizes its “excess of
meaning” demands constant interpretation and is at the same time timeless –
... a certain kind of timelessness - namely the timeliness of a classic
expression radically rooted in its own historical time and calling to my
own historicity. That is, the classical text is not in some timeless moment
which needs mere repetition. Rather its kind of timelessness as permanent
timeliness is the only one proper to any expression of the finite, temporal,
historical beings we are. ... The classic text's fate is that only its constant
reinterpretation by later finite, historical, temporal beings who will risk
asking its questions and listening, critically and tactfully, to its responses
can actualize the event of understanding beyond its present fixation in a
text.21
To be understood, a classic cannot be repeated; it must be interpreted. Thus
Tracy claims,
All contemporary systematic theology can be understood as fundamentally
hermeneutical. This position implies that systematic theologians, by
definition, will understand themselves as radically finite and historical
thinkers who have risked a trust in a particular religious tradition. They
seek, therefore, to retrieve, interpret, translate, mediate the resources ... of
the classic events of understanding of those fundamental religious
questions embedded in the classic events, images, persons, rituals, texts
and symbols of a tradition.22
At the heart of Tracy's argument is the conviction that “classics exist;” they exist
in all domains of human endeavor. He does not merely assert that they exist but
builds a carefully argued case for their existence and specifically for the existence
of the religious classic. The task of the systematic theologian is to interpret
religious classics.
Systematic theology intends to provide an interpretation, a retrieval
(including a retrieval through critique and suspicion) and always,
therefore, a new application of a particular religious tradition's selfunderstanding for the current horizon of the community. 23
Applying this understanding of systematic theology's task to the specific task of
the Christian thinker, Tracy declares,
In Christian systematics, that self-understanding is itself further
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page13
grounded in the particular events and persons of Jewish and Christian
history: decisively grounded, for the Christian, in God's own
self-manifestation as my God in this classic event and person, Jesus
Christ. 24
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY AS PUBLIC DISCOURSE
But now the crux of the matter is reached: how does the systematic theologian
address the wider public with discussion characterized by “publicness” thus
stopping the retreat of Christian faith into the sphere of privateness and yet
remain faithful to
... the radical particularity of the relationship of that gift's disclosure to the
particular events of God's action in ancient Israel, in Jesus of Nazareth, in
the history of the Christian Church? 25
Acknowledging the dilemma, Tracy believes it can be overcome. The means of
overcoming the dilemma is the recognition of the public nature of the classic:
... grounded in some realized experience of a claim to attention, unfolding
as cognitively disclosive of both meaning and truth and ethically
transformative of personal, social and historical life. 26
Tracy therefore contends,
Whenever any systematic theologian produces a classic interpretation of a
particular classic religious tradition (as both Barth and Rahner have,) then
that new expression should be accorded a public status in the culture.
Every classic ... is a text, event, image, person or symbol which unites
particularity of origin and expression with a disclosure of meaning and
truth available, in principle, to all human beings. 27
And again,
Any person's intensification of particularity via a struggle with the
fundamental questions of existence in a particular tradition, if that
struggle is somehow united to the logos of appropriate expression, will
yield a form of authentically sharable public discourse. 28
Thus Tracy argues, classics exist, religious classics exist, and classic status in any
field including the religious accords a text, work of art, symbol or other form of
expression public status. Religious classics are
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page14
... expressions from a particular tradition that have found the right mode
of expression to become public for all intelligent, reasonable and
responsible persons. 29
At the heart of the Christian tradition the classic expression is found in the event
of God's self-disclosure in Jesus Christ. Tracy claims,
One need not be a believer in Christianity to accord it (and thereby its
central, paradigmatic, classic event) authentically religious status: a
manifestation from the whole by the power of the whole. 30
Christology is the attempt to respond through some interpretation to the event of
Jesus Christ in one's own situation.
... The Christian interpreter of this classic event recognizes in some
present experience of the event - more precisely, in the claim disclosed in
that event (paradigmatically in experiencing that event in manifestation
and proclamation) as an event from God and by God's power. To speak
religiously and theologically of the Christ event is ultimately to speak of an
event from God. 31
The Jesus remembered by the tradition is experienced in the present mediated
through the word of proclamation and sacramental action. Jesus remembered as
the Christ is the experience of the presence of God's own self.
The second part of Tracy's work entails the actual execution of the method here
described. His is the attempt of a systematic theologian engaging in the
hermeneutical task of mediating past and present so that the event of Jesus
Christ remembered in the tradition comes to expression again in the present in a
manner that affords the possibility of public discussion with all persons of good
will who will engage in reasonable conversation.
In Tracy's Revisionist model we find the essential characteristics set forth by
Küng for a new paradigm in theology determined by a critical correlation of the
present horizon and the biblical texts.
Herein lies the present challenge to Reformed theology. Through the impact of
biblical studies and the explosion of knowledge across the whole spectrum of
human inquiry we have been alerted to the danger of confessionalism and the
imperative to take seriously the horizon of contemporary experience. The
opportunity is ours to realize the ideal of the Reformation. The Church of the
Sixteenth Century was re-formed according to the Word of God and at its best it
recognized that it must always be being re-formed. The Reformed branch of the
Protestant Reformation expressed itself in many Confessional statements and
refused to reduce them all to one credal formulation. The Lutheran branch
sought to bring the various strands of its confessional position into a unifying
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page15
statement with the Formula of Concord which then served as the norm of right
doctrine. The Reformed churches feared that such a statement of unity might
impede the continuing efforts to confess the faith in each new historical situation
and thus determined to continue to confess its faith in ever-new credal
formulations as the times demanded.
It goes without saying that the ideal was soon abandoned. The high Calvinism of
the Seventeenth Century with its rationalism and careful scholastic definitions
was a complete break with the best insights of the early Reformers. Not only in
the Reformed tradition but Protestantism generally has been plagued with the
fossilizing of doctrinal formulation, the absolutizing of historically conditioned
creeds and a defensive posture which has ill prepared it to meet the explosion of
knowledge in the sciences, natural and social. Failing to act on its own best
insight that the Church needs constant reformation of its understanding of the
Faith, Reformed Orthodoxy has been severely threatened by the rise of historical
thinking which is so characteristic of the modern period.
Of course, the Church can continue to close its mind to the knowledge and insight
that streams forth in a mighty torrent as we continue to unlock the secrets of the
cosmos and, with a mindset of an earlier Century and a defensive posture, it can
ward off the demands for reformation. In so doing it will lock the faithful into a
system of ideas and structure of belief that become increasingly out of touch with
their experience of the world, and it will continue to offend its brightest and most
sensitive spirits who will finally be forced out when they can no longer deny the
compelling truth that calls for a new understanding of the Faith.
This is not a new problem for the Church. It is new only in the rapidity of
breakthroughs on all frontiers of knowledge and in the rapid spread of that
knowledge that is now possible in the Electronic Age which is creating the
“Information Society.” But a Church confident of the Truth as it has come to
expression in Jesus Christ will find the present day an exciting day in which to
identify the questions and find the appropriate mode in which to witness to the
self-disclosure of the God in the face of Jesus Christ.
ENDNOTES
1 Thomas
Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (Chicago, Illinois:
University of Chicago Press, 1962), p. 175.
2 Hans Küng, Does God Exist? (New York: Doubleday and Company, 1980), p.
107.
3 Ibid., p. 108.
4 Stephen Toulmin, Human Understanding. (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton
University Press, 1972), p. vii.
5 Hans Küng, “Paradigm Change in Theology,” unpublished paper read at the
Symposium.
6 Ibid., p. 17.
© Grand Valley State University
�Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Richard A. Rhem
Page16
7 Ibid.,
p. 17.
p. 20.
9 Ibid., p. 21.
10Ibid., p. 21.
11 Ibid., p. 25.
12 Ibid., p. 26.
13 David Tracy, Blessed Rage For Order. (New York: Seabury Press, 1979),p. 47.
14 Ibid., p. 49.
15 David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination. (New York, New York: Crossroad,
1981), p. 62.
16Ibid., p. 65, 66.
17Ibid., p. 99.
18Ibid.
19 Ibid., p. 100.
20Ibid., p. 101.
21Ibid., p. 102.
22Ibid., p. 104.
23 Ibid., p. 131.
24 Ibid.
25 Ibid., p. 132.
26 Ibid.
27Ibid., p. 132F, 133.
28Ibid.,p. 134.
29Ibid.,p. 233.
30Ibid.,p. 234.
31Ibid.
8Ibid.,
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Kuhn, Thomas, The Structure of Scientific Revolution. Chicago, Illinois:
University of Chicago Press, 1962.
Küng, Hans, Does God Exist?. New York: Doubleday and Company, 1980.
Küng, Hans, “Paradigm Change in Theology,” unpublished paper at Symposium,
University of Michigan, 1983.
Toulmin, Stephen, Human Understanding. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton
University Press, 1972.
Tracy, David, Blessed Rage For Order. New York: Seabury Press, 1979,
Tracy, David, The Analogical Imagination. New York, New York: Crossroad,
1981.
© Grand Valley State University
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Richard A. Rhem Collection
Description
An account of the resource
Text and sound recordings of the sermons, prayers, services, and articles of Richard Rhem, pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Michigan, where he served for 37 years. Starting in the mid 1980's, Rhem began to question some of the traditional Christian dogma that he had been espousing from the pulpit. That questioning was a first step in a long and interesting spiritual journey, one that he openly shared with his congregation. His journey is important, in part because it is reflective of the questioning, the yearnings, and the gradual revision of beliefs that many persons in this part of the century have experienced and continue to experience. It is important also because of the affirming and inclusive way his questioning was done and his thinking evolved. His sermons and other written and spoken materials together document the steps in his journey as it took a turn in 1985, yet continued to revolve around the framework and liturgies of the Christian calendar.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Clergy--Michigan
Reformed Church in America
Christ Community Church (Spring Lake, Mich.)
Religion
Interfaith worship
Sermons
Sound Recordings
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Rhem, Richard A.
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/514">Richard A. Rhem papers (KII-01)</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kaufman Interfaith Institute
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Sound
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
KII-01
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
1981-2014
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/mp3
text/pdf
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
References
Hans Küng. Does God Exist?, 1980, "Paradigm Change in Theology,", 1983, David Tracy. Blessed Rage for Order, 1979, The Analogical Imagination, 1981.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-4-19860301
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1986-03-01
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Theological Method: The Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
The The Reformed Review
a journal of the seminaries of the Reformed Church in America
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Article created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on March 1, 1986 entitled "Theological Method: The Search for a New Paradigm in a Pluralistic Age", it appeared in The Reformed Review, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 242-254. Tags: Preaching, Theology, History of Christian Tradition, Pluralism, Ecumenical, Historical Thinking. Scripture references: Hans Küng. Does God Exist?, 1980, "Paradigm Change in Theology,", 1983, David Tracy. Blessed Rage for Order, 1979, The Analogical Imagination, 1981.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Ecumenical
Historical Thinking
History of Christian Tradition
Pluralism
Preaching
Theology
-
https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/c46aba8fa9763f10a6f1bc023ce08666.pdf
0a1a0fbe85a5115e186f2d5a1c04e5c7
PDF Text
Text
Regarding the Conflict About Christian Exclusivity
Richard A. Rhem
Minister of Preaching and Theological Inquiry
Christ Community Church
Spring Lake, Michigan
Edited Transcript of the Spoken Address followed by Questions and Answers at
The Synod of the Mid-Atlantic, Reformed Church in America
Ramapo, New Jersey
October 4, 1996
Editor’s Note: See “The Church in Conflict – Can Non-Believers Be Saved?” for
the prepared text of the address.
Thank you for the opportunity of being with you today (I think). I want to begin
by saying that I am not here on a crusade. I am here because I was invited to
come and, having taken the stand I have, I feel there is some responsibility to give
an account of myself.
I have all of my life been a part of the Reformed Church in America, and being
outside at this point in my life is the most surprising thing that has ever
happened to me. And yet, I don’t want simply to turn my back on that which has
been my whole life, but continue in a dialogue and conversation to the extent that
that is desired. And so, I am here today to do that very thing. But, I want to be
clear, I am not here because I am trying to win a battle or make a point. I’m not
on a crusade. I was not on a crusade in Michigan, either. I was simply ministering
in my own concrete community of faith, in my own congregation, and there was
no idea ever that what we had discovered at Christ Community to be an effective
embodiment of the grace of God should be exported anywhere, to our local
community or beyond. We simply were trying to be faithful as the people of God
in that place, and what has transpired over the last year has come to us from the
outside; it is not something that originated inside, and it is not something that
has happened because we were trying to move out. I want to be very clear about
that.
I am here to be in conversation with you and to be of whatever help I can be in
lifting up aspects of the question that is before us, namely, that the grace of God
is limited to those who come to God through faith in Jesus Christ; in other words,
Christian exclusivity. I think there is no one that would deny that we are dealing
with a very important question for the Christian church, but I begin with that
disclaimer, that I am here for conversation and not as a crusader, not moving out
now to convince the whole world, after all, that I was right or that I am right.
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page 2
The other thing I want to say is that I am a Christian minister of the Gospel. I
have for 36 years been involved in the ministry. Four of those years I was in
graduate study in The Netherlands. Other than that, I have been a pastor and
have preached every week, been involved in pastoral care, preaching, teaching,
just a garden variety pastor, committed to the local congregation – all of that
done as a Christian minister. I preach the grace of God as it has appeared in Jesus
Christ and no other message. We don’t get up on Sunday morning at Christ
Community and say, “Well, let’s look at the menu this morning. Shall we have a
pinch of Buddhism or a dimension of Islam, or whatever.” No, I preach every
week from the scriptures. I try to be faithful in my wrestling with scripture and its
interpretation, and to proclaim the God whom I have come to experience as the
one embodied in Jesus Christ. So, let me be clear on that, as well.
I suppose there will be some other things that will come out as the day
progresses, but I think I want to say those things by way of introduction. I am
here at your invitation, not at my initiative, and I’m here as one who continues to
be what he has always been and that is a minister of the Gospel of the grace of
God in Jesus Christ our Lord.
I’ve tried to think of how I could best get the story, the issue before us, and
sometimes to tell one’s own story is about as effective as anything. Obviously, in
the last weeks and months I have had good opportunity to try and track the
pilgrimage on which I have been engaged, and the way that I have come to where
I am presently in my understanding of Christian faith and other faiths. It seems
to me that, when I was in New Jersey in the middle 60s when my “little system”
was coming up short in terms of being able to deal with the experience of a pastor
in a congregation, and my ability to interpret life, understand human experience,
and to preach my theological system, my understanding of the faith, was limited.
I came out of a very conservative nurture and continued in that very conservative
track through my college and seminary education. I went into the ministry a very
conservative, evangelical pastor and I certainly would have been at the far right of
the theological spectrum. Human experience has a way of humbling us and
creating situations in which our tight little systems are not adequate. I was
beginning to run into that when I made the move from Spring Lake to New
Jersey.
My first four years were in Spring Lake, Michigan. At the time that I came to New
Jersey, the Reformed Church was engaged in some controversy over a Church
School curriculum, Covenant Life Curriculum, and this was the first time in
which the church at large was being introduced to some of the critical views of the
scripture. It was really very good stuff and very responsible and actually
conservative material. But, nonetheless, there were those who were threatened by
some of the things that were handled in the Covenant Life Curriculum. I began to
study that curriculum and it began to address some of the questions that I was
having in my own pastoral ministry. It was time for me to go to Europe in 1967
and find out if I really had anything to say, if I had a Gospel to preach.
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page 3
I went there wanting, for the first time in my life, to know the truth. I went
through my whole college and seminary education seeking to buttress the
presuppositions with which I came, those I had imbibed with my mother’s milk. I
did not want to be stretched and I was not aware of it, but I was very defensive
against those questions that put my faith understanding in question. But one
eventually has to deal with that and so I went to Europe and found a very
wonderful mentor in Hendrikus Berkhof who was at the University of Leiden. He
helped me identify what the real questions were. Berkhof would say, when I
would come with a question, “Ja, ja, ja. That’s the question.”
I said, “I know that’s the question. What’s the answer?”
He’d say, “Ja, ja, ja, ja. Just live with the question for a while.”
So I did and they were four wonderful years in which I imbibed as much as I
could. I read and read and read and wrote and read and wrote and thought, and
had, what was for me, my first real immersion in an educational experience.
I sat in his study one day and I said to him, “You know, in the Reformed Church,
we can’t really deal very effectively with any of the specific theological questions
that come up because we have never dealt with the issue of the authority of
scripture and how scripture is to be used. It seems as though with everything
we’re debating, we never debate the issue. We debate the issue in terms of what it
will do to our doctrine of scripture.”
I think at the time it may have been the ordination of women to the Elder-Deacon
office, and I could see that nobody was asking whether women could be spiritual,
whether women could be gifted, whether women could be effective leaders in the
church. It seemed to me that the issue always came down to, “Well, if we grant
that, what will happen to First Timothy, whatever, and what about this passage?,”
so that it was not the issue itself, but it was that authority which informs all of our
decisions. I said to Berkhof, “What I really should do is write a dissertation on the
place of scripture and the use of scripture in the church,” and he looked at me
and he said, “You go back to the Reformed Church in America and the United
States of America and do that, do you know what they will do to you?” And so, I
came back and I didn’t do that. But I was aware that that needed to be dealt with.
Then, after some years, having returned to Spring Lake where I had continued to
wrestle with the faith, I went to the University of Michigan in the fall of 1983
where Hans Küng was a guest, giving public lectures on Monday night. They were
held at Racham Auditorium, with overflow crowds. He gave the lectures, now
published, entitled Eternal Life? On Tuesday afternoon I was engaged in a crossdiscipline seminar with him for three hours. There were about 35 of us from the
various schools of the university, medical people, artists, a couple of pastors – a
marvelous experience. He was working from mimeographed material on
paradigm change in theology – wrestling with that whole shift in perspective that
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page 4
comes when current data put the present conception of things into question.
Then there seems to arise a new model that can include and embrace the fresh
data and there is a significant shift.
It happens, of course, in the sciences, and there was a significant book by Thomas
Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, in which he said this is actually
what happens in the natural sciences. Hans Küng and David Tracey of the
University of Chicago had gathered a consultation in Tübingen prior to 1983
about the application of paradigm shift through theological understanding. So I
really got into that paradigm shift dimension early on. Küng helped me to
understand that, in all of my training, I had come up with the scriptures as the
authoritative word of God and all of human experience, the ongoing human
experience, really had little impact on the faith understanding that came out of
the scriptures. I had one pole to which I was lashed, and yet life was going on “out
here.” Küng helped me to see that the theological task is to live between the two
poles – that which is given, the history of Israel and Jesus in our scripture, and
ongoing human experience, the present horizon. And that theology does not pass
along through history untouched by historical circumstance, some deposit of
faith as though it fell out of heaven, simply to be delivered to the next generation
as it is. Rather, theology is that hermeneutical task that constantly runs between
the given revelation that is in the scripture and the ongoing human experience, so
that from the scripture the present is illuminated and the present elicits new life
and new understanding from the scripture. There is a coordination between those
two poles.
And when I saw that, I realized that my whole experience prior to that had been
living out of this pole of the scripture without any significant regard as to what
was happening out in the world. I also realized that what had happened in the
liberalism of the 19th century, that had come on bad times, was that there was
such an earnest attempt to understand and accommodate what was going on in
the world that the pole of the scripture was not taken seriously. I began to realize
that the task really for us in the church is to live between that biblical story and
our ongoing story, and to understand our lives in the light that comes from the
story, the founding story, but that the founding story has spurred a tradition that
has resources that are rich, being enlarged through ongoing human experience,
that can continue to be reclaimed to bring the faith to fresh expression as we go
on in our pilgrimage. For me, I think that was a very significant moment.
On Monday night Küng spoke on heaven and hell and purgatory, judgment and
death to overflow crowds in this vast educational institution where only a
professor’s half time is given to a program in religious studies in this huge state
university. There is just a smidgeon of interest in the whole phenomena of
religion. This was a new experiment at the time, Küng being the first guest
lecturer in Religious Studies. The Vatican was putting the heat on him in
Germany; they wanted him put under censure for his views, and he came to the
University of Michigan almost on a lark in order to have some leverage back in
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page 5
Tübingen because Michigan did say to him, “If you want to stay here, you can stay
here.” He didn’t do that because, when you’re a professor at Tübingen in the
German system, you want to retire out of that system, which he has done.
So there I was, preaching every week, and now I see in this huge secular arena
sophisticated, educated, cultured, cultural despisers of religion sitting for two
hours to hear the rather difficult English of this Catholic theologian talk about
death, purgatory, hell, judgment, and I said to myself, ”Good grief, I don’t even
preach on those things in my own pulpit. In this secular setting I gathered with
people, fully human, listening to lectures on such issues. Maybe they know, too,
they’re going to die, and they must wonder, and maybe they’ve lost someone, and
they must wonder.”
And so it was like a revelation to me that there was this intense existential
interest in the human person, whether they were connected with the institutional
religion or had any particular faith profession. Those end questions engaged
them, and I came home and began my own search. That is what has gotten me
into trouble, because I discovered the expanse, the extent of the grace of God was
much broader than I had ever dreamed.
It was about that time that the Reformed Church founded a journal of theological
investigation whose purpose was to stimulate theological discussion in the
Reformed Church and, because I was a pastor at a rather safe pastorate, I seemed
to be the one that got the assignments to write on the issues that would address
the Reformed Church in terms of those questions that we felt needed to be talked
about. And so, an early article was on purgatory.
I never would have believed that I would have been concerned at all about
purgatory, but I began to see what was the wisdom of the ancient church and
what was behind that whole construction of things, and to recognize that, as a
child of the Reformation, I never got a fair shot at understanding what that was
all about because we were in such sharp reaction precisely at that point in the 16th
century. And then I began to investigate the extent of God’s grace and I found out
that, in the early church, there was a strong strain of universalism, that the grace
of God would finally be triumphant in regard to all. And I found some high
Calvinists who simply were more logical than some of the rest who also came to
that same position of the ultimate triumph of the grace of God And then, of
course, there was my own mentor, Hendrikus Berkhof and his reference to Karl
Barth and to the contemporary discussion of that issue. And so, again, I wrote in
Perspectives. The “Letters to the Editor” revealed that some people were upset.
There were also a few positive comments and there was engagement. However, it
was in black and white. Over the next decade I continued to address these issues
in the journal until 1995, when I published an article on interreligious dialogue
and my recognition that we had within the Christian church some serious
thinking to do before we could enter authentically into religious dialogue. That
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page 6
got me to where I am and there was never any question about it until the spring
of 1995.
The catalyst for the discussion on salvation was the fact that we allowed a group
from the Metropolitan Community Church ministering largely to gay and lesbian
people simply to use our chapel. When that was called in question, then one thing
led to another, and then my theological views were called in question and
eventually the Classis recognized, I think, there wasn’t much point in pursuing
the original issue, but they were deeply concerned, then, about this question of
salvation apart from Christ.
This has become a conversation within the Reformed Church and the question, as
it has been phrased, is “Can non-believers be saved?” I want to say that that is the
wrong question. I’m not interested in the question of whether non-believers can
be saved. I am interested in the question of whether those who have a yearning
for God and seek after God and who pursue that yearning and that seeking in
another faith tradition can be saved, because we are not talking about people who
are Christian and the rest of the world as non-believers. We are talking about a
world that is laced with believers of many stripes, and we are living in a context
today, a global context in which these people are our neighbors and our children
are bringing home people of other faiths and presenting them as their future
spouses. We meet them at work and down the street there is a temple or a
meditation place or a shrine of some sort that was not the case some years ago.
So, the question is not whether non-believers can be saved. The question is “Must
I insist that there is salvation through Jesus Christ alone?”
Now, let me be very clear again. Before the Classis of Muskegon I said, “If you will
scratch out one word, I’ll sign your document” that affirms that there is salvation
through Jesus Christ. I believe that and I would affirm that, and I have affirmed
that. But, when you tell me that I must say it is through Jesus Christ alone, then I
don’t know what to do with Jewish folks that I have come to know so well and
have become so fond of, working in the Jewish-Christian Committee for Dialogue
in the West Shore area of Michigan. Then, what do I do with all of those about me
in our world today who seem to manifest all of the fruits of the Spirit, whose
questions are my questions, and whose experience seems to be the same
experience as mine – what am I to do with them? The issue is not whether or not
there is salvation through Jesus Christ. It is whether or not I must be held to an
exclusivist position that says through Jesus Christ and through no other, and that
apart from Jesus Christ there is only condemnation, there is no salvation and
light, and no eternal life for any who come not through Jesus Christ our Lord.
That I will not say. And that is the issue upon which I have been put out.
Obviously you might expect me to argue my theological conclusion on the basis of
scripture. But that is not as simple as it sounds because, as has been claimed in
many arguments, anything can be “proven” by scripture. I learned from Professor
Berkhof the rich diversity of the biblical witness, for example, on the very
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page 7
question of the extent of God’s grace. In his Well-Founded Hope, he has a chapter
entitled “The Double Image of the Future.”
He deals seriously with the biblical witness but concludes that Scripture
leaves us with a double track. Countless attempts have been made to
subsume one track of texts under the other by ingenious “exegetical tricks”
but, Berkhof concludes, “we cannot smooth out this contradiction in the
New Testament.” All that we read abut the future, texts offering
consolation and texts of warning, do not “fit together like a jigsaw puzzle.”
In the case of the passages giving warning, these present the gospel in its
nature as a call to decision; the passages offering consolation give hope
and the promise of eventual salvation of all.
We must hear both witnesses; we must not reduce one to the other. But we
cannot simply allow them to stand with no link between them. Berkhof
suggests we pronounce them “one after the other,” for “only the person
who has learned to tremble at the possibility of rejection may speak about
universal salvation.”
When my article, “The Habit of God’s Heart” was published in 1988, I was the
Preaching Professor at Western Theological Seminary. The piece caused a stir. I
was called before the Executive Committee of the seminary board to give an
account of myself. I remember distinctly when I suggested that scripture spoke in
more than one voice on the matter of the extent of God’ s grace, I was
immediately “corrected.” Scripture interpreted by scripture leaves no ambiguity –
salvation comes through Jesus Christ alone.
I remember a conversation with the wonderful Lutheran bishop, the late Krister
Stendahl, who was a guest at our Jewish-Christian Dialogue. He spoke of the
brilliant apologist for Christianity, C. S. Lewis. He spoke of how much he loved
the Lewis of Shadowland and of A Grief Observed, the result of his grievous loss
of his wife to cancer. Lewis, in his grief expressing the loss of his love, spoke the
language of the heart. But, said Stendahl, when Lewis argues for the existence of
God, the incarnation, the atonement, I don’t take him seriously because he is so
brilliant he could be just as effective on the other side of the question.
So it is with the Bible. As Luther argued, scripture is a wax nose; one can be as
honest and responsible as possible and have someone on the other side of the
question come up with a contrary conclusion. And thus I have not really engaged
in the whole biblical debate.
That said, it does not imply that I do not believe there is a legitimate biblical
witness to God’s universal grace. In Luke’s Acts we read the story of the
movement of the Gospel beyond its community of origin – to the vast Gentile
world. The story of Peter and Cornelius is paradigmatic, showing the expansive
movement of the Gospel to the Gentile world. Luke records the story and then
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page 8
has Peter rehearse the whole experience before the Jerusalem Elders who called
him to account for going to the Gentiles. In light of his concrete experience of the
Spirit of God anointing the Gentiles, Peter says, according to Luke’s account,
“…who was I that I could hinder God?”
An even larger crisis was generated by Paul who brought the Gospel intentionally
to the Gentiles. Acts 15 records the story of the first “Church Council.” The Jesus
Movement was at a crisis point; a decision had to be made concerning the nonJews who were embracing the Gospel and becoming a growing part of the Jesus
Movement that, to begin with, was a Jewish movement.
Peter recounted his experience with Cornelius. In Luke’s recounting of the story,
he has Peter declare,
And God, who knows the human heart, testified to them by giving them
the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us; and in cleansing their hearts by faith
he has made no distinction between them and us…we believe that we will
be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will. (Acts 15:811)
Following Peter’s witness Barnabas and Paul told of “the signs and wonders God
had done through them among the Gentiles” (verse 12). And then the leader of
the Jerusalem Church, James, gave his “decision that we should not trouble those
Gentiles who were turning to God…” (verse 19).
Luke is recording the most momentous decision that early Jesus Movement was
called upon to make. Luke records the pivot point of the whole Jesus Movement.
Gentiles could become Jews. That was not new. What was new in Paul’s
argument is that Gentiles can become God’s children without first becoming
Jews.
Paul is arguing for Grace, the Grace of God embracing the Gentile apart from
those specifically Jewish rituals, circumcision, dietary laws, whatever, and Paul’s
experience is that God is embracing the Gentiles through faith as Israel had been
embraced through all the generations. Peter’s experience is that God is embracing
a Cornelius and his household, the Holy Spirit falls on them, the waters of
baptism are applied to them. In Jerusalem the leadership asks, what’s going on
here? That was a critical point because they could have said it would be necessary
for the Gentiles to come to faith in Jesus as the Messiah, but they would have to
do it by way of full participation in the Mosaic legislation following the Torah.
And they decided not. They decided that the grace of God could embrace the
Gentile without that Gentile becoming a Jew, and that was a paradigmatic shift.
Paul said God is doing a new thing; God is creating one new humanity. In
Romans 9, 10 and 11, Paul is struggling because he does not see how his Jewish
brothers and sisters can fail to see what he sees in Jesus. How they can fail to see
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page 9
what God is doing in history. He says, “My heart is deeply distressed. I, myself,
would be accursed for my brothers and sisters if only they could see.” He goes on
in those three chapters struggling with that issue, and he comes to the end of that
struggle in the 11th chapter in verse 32, where he says, “God has reckoned all in
disobedience, the Jew and the Gentile, Israel and the nations, in order that God
may have mercy on all.” And then he breaks out into the one great doxology that
has no reference to Jesus Christ, just praising the eternal God, the God of Israel,
for His unsearchable ways, His inscrutable judgment, and he says, “Source, Guide
and Goal of all there is, to God be glory forever.” He finally believes that a
mystery is at work here, that Israel finally will be saved, he knows not how, and,
in the meantime, the grace of God has come to the Gentiles.
Now we are talking about a hinge point in history. We are talking about the fact
that Peter had to do that which is contrary to the scripture by which he had lived.
He could quote scripture and verse, the ritual, the tradition that would have said
don’t enter the house of Cornelius, don’t do this, don’t do that. He was going
contrary to that which had been deeply inbred in him, and he did it because he
said who can fight God? He was so inwardly compelled and the evidence, what he
saw before his eyes, made him say, “I have to do this.” And it was confirmed in
the experience.
So I would say we are at another hinge point in human history. I don’t know
where we got into it and I don’t know when we’ll get out of it, but I think that we
are living through a time of global change. We live in that period of history in
which the whole human family is experiencing its history at the same time and
together. This is a time of global consciousness, of a global community, and it
does not seem reasonable to me that the whole world is going to be evangelized
and the Gospel is going to be brought to the whole world. That was a noble dream
and a noble vision, and it was an honest response to an apocalyptic vision, that
conviction that they were standing on the end of the age and that the whole
cosmic drama would be wrapped up rather soon.
But, can you imagine that the Christian church could hold its breath for 2000
years and still be talking about the imminent return of our Lord Jesus Christ? As
we approach the year 2000, are we not going to hear more and more about it?
And how can we honestly do that when we come to recognize that those New
Testament documents were written by those who believed they were at the End
and they were not at the End.
The Jewish scholar Paula Fredrikson of Boston University has written From
Jesus to Christ, and she says, “Why did the Jesus Jewish movement fade out first,
and why did the Christian movement become a Gentile movement?” She says,
first of all, because the one who was to come didn’t come. Nothing happened.
Three times in the Gospel of John it speaks about being put out of the synagogue.
Why? Well, if you were a Jew and if you had responded and believed that this
Jesus was the Messiah that you were expecting and according to the message,
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page10
history was all going to end very soon and this one would return, but nothing
happened. And now the Pharisaic, Rabbinic Judaism, the movement of Judaism
after the temple which became the ascendant group, the ongoing Jewish
community – that community now is saying, “If you say Jesus was the Messiah,
you’re going to be put out of the synagogue.” And now you have to say, “Am I
going to remain with my religious heritage of all of these centuries, or am I going
to be put out of the synagogue on the chance that this one really was the Messiah
and he’s going to come back very soon?” What would you do?
Paula Fredrikson said the reason that the earliest movement faded , first of all,
nothing happened; and secondly, there were just too many Gentiles. Paul was too
successful. And if Paul succeeded, if Judaism had stayed with the church, there
would not have been the question of assimilation of the Jewish people in the 20th
century. It would have happened in the first century. And I think our world would
have been diminished for lack of that ongoing Jewish community.
Now it seems to me that what was going on then is going on now. We are not
seeing the death of the great religious traditions; we have seen their renaissance
and their resurgence, and, not only that, we have found that they contain riches
and gifts that can enhance our own understanding and our own experience. I
believe that we are faced with a global reality that calls us, in light of the power of
religion and its volatility, to discourse together, to learn from each other, to live
in mutual respect and civility in order that all together we may work toward the
building of community and world understanding.
Karl Jaspers was a German philosopher who spoke about the first axial period.
The pre-axial period was when the human family was pretty much caught up in
the rhythms of nature and the cosmos. Then the first axial period, 800-200 BCE,
independently, in three places around the globe, India and China and the eastern
Mediterranean, the great religious traditions arose. They all arose in that period
of time effecting a transformation of human consciousness, a transformation that
shaped the first axial period to the present. Ewert Cousins, Fordham University,
suggests that we may be in the second axial period and that the image for us is
that view of the globe that the astronaut has seen, that beautiful, fragile, blue
globe hanging in space. For the first time our kind has been able to look back and
see it whole and to realize that all the borders and divisions and the lines that we
draw over which we fight and for which we kill, that all of that has no reality
because we are a part of one inner-connected whole. And, if we are part of one
cosmic whole and we are part of one human family, and if we are serious that
God in the beginning created the heavens and the earth, then I believe that it is
high time for us to deepen our particularity and to learn again from Jesus Christ
and all of that which has been revealed through him of the purpose and heart of
God and to recognize that God has a grander scheme and a broader purpose and
that there is so much enrichment, so much greater possibility as we live together
in the human community transcending those barriers and divisions that have
separated us.
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page11
As I said, Krister Stendahl was in Michigan. He was at the temple on Friday
night, a Sabbath service, and then Saturday lectures, and then he preached at
Christ Community Church on Sunday morning. My son came up to me
afterwards and said, “Dad, I’ve had a religious experience,” and I said, “I know.”
He said, “This feels so right,” and I said, “I know. If it feels so right, you don’t
need an argument, do you?”
He said, “No.”
I said, “Once you have had that sense that it’s so right, then you can simply be
there and invite others to share that same sense of shared humanity. You don’t
need to prove anything or demonstrate anything.”
But, I’ll tell you, my own experience is that I have never experienced such
openness from the other and desire to hear about my Jesus than since the time I
laid down my arms and did not feel that monkey on my back of world
evangelization, but rather speaking of the grace of God in Jesus Christ and
listening and receiving and giving and taking in a mutual enhancement that
builds toward world community that is so much better than anything I have ever
known.
Thank you.
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
Q.
The rise of fundamentalism in all world religions frightens me. How can
people engage with Christians and other fundamentalist groups when they are
willing to kill for their faith?
A.
Well, it scares me, too, and I do believe that that is part of the reason why it
is so imperative that we enter into dialogues in a broad scope. James Davison
Hunter, in his New Culture Wars, points out the fact that the breakdown in
civil discourse and in communication between people has created such a
threat throughout the world, and I think that the militant mind in the
respective traditions, there's a Jewish fundamentalism, an Islamic
fundamentalism, a Christian fundamentalism, you don't have to have a
particular badge in order to have that mentality and that mind set, and I do
believe that as the times become somewhat anxious and people become
somewhat unsteady and afraid, they tend to this kind of fanaticism and
absolutism, wanting to find security and wanting to find the answer that is
absolutely clear and simple. So to me, I don't know why, I just know that, in
such a world, at such a time it is critical that we dialogue together and open
up the channels of communication together. Now, for a lot of these things I
do not think that it is a question of being right or wrong. I mean, there's such
a broad spectrum of understanding, and there are various symbol systems
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page12
and it's not like one will work and the rest won't. I think that we need to find
that which communicates meaning and connects us to that sense of
transcendence, meets that hunger for God, and if that is in place, then I think
that, rather than enforcing that on everyone else, in that sense of
connectedness with the transcendent to find a freedom and a resting place in
which to open oneself up to the other and thus create the bridges of
communication. So, I don't know what the answer is, but I know it's a
serious problem.
Q.
Will you describe more fully your phrase “Monkey on your back?” You applied
that to world evangelization.
A.
Did I say that this morning? Well, if I didn't, I should have. I came into the
ministry, I grew up, feeling that I had to defend God. I had to defend the faith.
I felt such an urgency; I was insecure. I didn't know how insecure I was. I
didn't know how defensive I was. But I thought it was up to me to defend
God and to keep God enthroned, and it seemed to me that it was my
responsibility that you believed correctly, that you dotted the i's and crossed
the t's and that is a terrible, terrible burden. I can remember the experience of
believing finally that God could take care of God's self, whether or not I could
defend God. Now, that was Step One. And then to believe, as well, that God
had a marvelous embrace of people who had an experience quite other than
mine, and yet which seemed to be also very similar in terms of that which it
generated within the individual. And when I could simply affirm that and not
have to change someone to my image ... I had lived with a monkey on my
back. I had to get the world to Jesus. And I had no sense of letting that in
God's hands and simply being an instrument, and so that's what I meant.
Q.
We have just heard for over an hour about the love of God for everyone, but
10% of those God has created are homosexuals who cannot change their
identity and are ostracized by the church. These are people who are looking
for God's love. How can the church deny them?
A.
Well, I don't think the church can deny them, but the church does deny them.
I have to say that this was the catalytic event that got this whole conflict
started for us because, as I said to you, we gave a group ministry, largely
lesbian and gay people, the use of our chapel. For us it was an act of
hospitality. Again, I was not looking to take on a crusade. This was not my
issue. Subsequent to what has happened, I think it should have been my issue
a long time ago. It is an issue of justice; it is an issue of the love of God and
the grace of God. I had heard stories, people pouring their heart out to me,
beautiful human beings and I thought, "My God, where was I all these years?"
Just not even concerned about this thing with people who were suffering and
being ostracized and being shunned and so, when you say how can the church
deny them, I don't know how the church can deny them love, and I will now
speak anywhere, everywhere for... In fact, I’ve got a lot of stories.
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page13
Q.
Does God's grace extend to non-believers, too, in your theology? Could your
position be better supported by the teaching of Christ himself rather than
appealing to St. Paul? Who now holds your credentials? Will the Spring Lake
church align itself with another denomination?
A.
The congregation holds my credentials at present, and we have done some
very preliminary kind of investigation, but I have found that it's a little bit like
marriage, it's a lot easier to get in than to get out, and I'm – just scratch that
one – I'm at this advanced age, you know, and in the springtime of my
senility, and I don't know if I really want... I believe in the connectedness of
the church and I believe in mutual covenants of accountability, I believe in all
that, but I may just keep investigating long enough to where it won't be an
issue anymore, and in all that time no one will be able to criticize me for
living in splendid isolation and I'll say, "I'm working on it, I'm working on it,"
and one day they'll bury me. Sort of like Peter Paulson today, as Bob said, you
know, Paul Fries tells me that he suggested to Peter when he went into the
pastorate that he always keep a body at hand in case he needs a funeral.
Can my position better be supported by teachings of Christ? I do believe that.
Yes, I do believe that. But, you know, when you've got Dutch Calvinism in
your blood and your genes, you have to argue with Paul and I do believe, yes,
Jesus. Again, I'm hesitant to get into biblical discussions about this because
you can argue it all over the place. But, I would say that, apart from any
specific biblical reference, just the God I see in Jesus is a God that would make
me reach out and embrace my neighbor and listen to the other and live in
harmony with the other, and that's not by having a text, it is by the whole
context, the whole encounter with Jesus Christ which says to me God is
bigger than anything we've yet dreamed of, so I would agree with that.
Does God's grace extend to non-believers, too, in your theology? Yes.
Because ... I don't know. How do I know? This is what I think and that is that
God is not through with us at our death. This is what I began to wrestle with
Hans Küng and then I would never have thought that I would think twice
about purgatory and I go to these lectures and find, why did the ancient
church have this? What were they talking about? Then I read from C. S.
Lewis, his Letter to Malcolm, where he talks about purgatory as, you know,
being in the dentist's chair and when you're coming around the dentist says,
“Wash your mouth out with this." And he says, that's purgatory. I began to
read Lutheran and Reformed theologians as well as Catholic theologians who
speak about our encounter with God at our death, and so, what does it mean
to be a non-believer? What does it mean? Does it mean that I have been so
damaged by the institutional church? I'll tell you what -I could almost leave
the institutional church. This past year with that experience in the church –
I'll tell you what – if I wasn't a stubborn Hollander, I'd be out. I'm just too
ornery not to go. But then, how many people have not been damaged and hurt
by the attitudes, by the spirit, by the structures? So, non-believers - who are
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page14
they, anyway? I don't find as many non-believers out there as I used to. I
used to know how many there were; I used to know what percentage of the
population they were, and now I found out when I don't know so much,
they're really interested and they really want to talk and I think there's
something deep down in the human spirit that can be appealed to that makes
that category of non-believer somewhat fuzzy. One of the old, early American
preachers, Lyman Abbot, said if he were a Calvinist he would be a universalist,
but he said, because I respect the human will, I cannot be a universalist
because I believe that God will not finally crush my human Yes or No. I think
God respects our Yes or No to such an extent that... So, non-believers?
Someone wants to finally say, "Not thy will be done, but my will be done?"
will God say then, "Thy will be done?" I don't know. Of course, I don't know
those answers. But, I don't think there are as many non-believers out there
as I used to.
Q.
You said that you didn't want to get into scripture, but there are a few people
here who would like you to at least address some issues. One question:
please speak on the question of the necessity of the cross of which Jesus
speaks often, particularly consider the incident of Jesus in Gethsemane
saying, "If it is possible for the cup to be removed," but God demanded
Jesus to drink of it, nonetheless.
A.
Yes. I would say that one of the areas of revision as I reflect on Christian
faith and doctrine, as I have learned it and I have preached it and taught it, is
my understanding of atonement. I think that when Jesus said, "Let this cup
pass from me," that Jesus was saying, "Bring that kingdom about, effect your
purposes apart from my having to go through with tomorrow." I think
Gethsemane was just what it appears to be and that was the real existential
struggle of Jesus in the garden at the threshold of his own death, a horrible
death, in which he could have slipped out of town and gotten away with it. I
don't think that Jesus died to bear our sins; I think Jesus died because of our
sins. I think Jesus died the way he died because he lived the way he lived, and
his dying was the authentication of the life that he lived ,which was the
embodiment of the kingdom of God and the rule of God in the midst of
human society. And so, when he said, “Let this cup pass from me," I think he
wanted out, like I would want out. And I think when he said on the cross, "My
God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" that's not like my Calvinist
theology said, that in that time he was experiencing the torments of hell
because God turned God's face away from Jesus in those moments. I think he
was experiencing hell; he was experiencing forsakenness. That which he had
staked his life on and pointed to and embodied was not happening. He was
dying! He was being crucified. And I think anybody that lives the way he lives
is going to end up pretty much like he ended up, and that's why most of us
are smart enough, most of the time, not to do it. And to follow the Way of
Jesus is a most radical way to go, and I'll tell you what - I'm not ready for
it.
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page15
Q.
How do you respond to such scripture as "No one comes to the Father but by
me"?
A.
I refer people to Bishop Krister Stendahl's little paper on “From God's Point
of View, We're all Minorities.” Now, he's a New Testament scholar; I'm not.
And he says, you know, to take a text in the intimacy of conversation between
Jesus and his friends, and then to lift that up out of its context and absolutize
it as though it is the end all and the be all.... I wouldn't be in any trouble if it
weren't for John 14:6 and Acts 4:12. "No other name under heaven given
among men whereby we must be saved." In other words, save as healed, and
they're talking about the crippled man who was just healed. And they are
saying in Acts 4:12, in your name did you do this? And Peter says, "No, not in
our name. There isn't any other name. The only name is the one Jesus, that
name. That is the healer, that Jesus who was in our midst who was the
embodiment of God who brought the healing power of God to bear."
And in 14:6, “In my Father's house there are many resting places." Krister
Stendahl says that's in the world. In the world there are many places you can
be, and so, be there. And as I go to prepare a place for you and so forth. I do
not think that one ought to take John 14:6 and try to explain it as though it
had no nuances of exclusivism because there is a genuine biblical exclusivism,
there is that track in the scripture, and I think that it is most understandable
that there would be, because the Bible, New Testament documents, this is not
a book on interreligious dialogue; this is not a book on religious philosophy;
this is a book of proclamation. This is a book written by those who believed
they were at the end of the age, that God had appeared in Jesus Christ, that
the answer was in Christ, everything was in Christ, this was their message;
this was their preaching, so, I don't think I ought to try to whitewash that
thing and say there is no possibility of constructing that kind of exclusivist
view where there is salvation through Jesus alone and no other. The only
thing that I would argue is that that's not the only voice of the scripture, and
that if we look at it in its context and in its time and then, through the
tradition of 2000 years and our present situation, you put all of those things
together, then I think that's the basis on which I would say that if Jesus said
John 14:6, which Jesus Seminar says he didn't, of course, that's too easy, isn't
it, then I think that there's the possibility of nuanced interpretation, but
maybe that's exactly what John wanted to say.
Q.
Has human experience taken precedence over the authority of scripture?
A.
Yes, I hope so. And that's why I'm in trouble, because I say things like that.
You see, and now Dr. Fries can't be that foolish because he still holds an
institutional position. But, the reason I'm in the trouble I'm in is because I
think human experience and scripture need to be in dialogue and need to be
coordinated. I need to give human experience a lot of credence in order to
make up for the first fifty years of my life, when I didn't know that human
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page16
experience even existed. I had a text and I had a book and it didn't matter
whether human experience was being honored or regarded at all. So, I think
there is the scripture, there is the tradition, there is present human experience
and then there is the reflection of reasonable faith, and Krister Stendahl who
was with us some years ago in a dialogue with David Hartman, the Rabbi from
Jerusalem, spoke about tradition as an instrument for continuity and change.
Now, I know of tradition as an instrument for continuity. I didn't understand
it as an instrument for change. As Krister Stendahl spoke of it, I could see that
it is the living tradition that connects us with the founding story, and that
living tradition is a constant re-interpretation of the founding story in light of
ongoing human experience, so that at every point of the historical spectrum,
as you look back at this event, you see it from a bit of a different angle, you
see new wrinkles and new nuances because what goes on is also God's history
and the spirit of God is still active in the world. It’s not as though it all
happened back there and now it's just waiting for the applause at the end. We
have to constantly look at that story in light of our experience, in light of that
way we have traversed, and we do it, we use our heads, we think! And in that
mix we come to our present understanding of the faith which helps us to
interpret present human experience. So, I think that's a red herring. I think
that's a false dichotomy. I don't think you can understand the Bible apart from
human experience, and I don't think that human experience apart from the
critique of the founding story will ever connect you to the transcendent. I
think that both of them have to live in tension.
Q.
How do you view Buddha and Krishna?
A.
Hardly ever do. I don't know, and frankly, I am an incurable Christian
theologian and I have not really dipped with any breadth or depth into the
world of religious dialogue. The only specific relationship I've had is with the
Jewish community which has been a very enriching kind of relationship, but I
am not a scholar of world religions. However, when I hear someone like John
Hick who advocates a pluralist position, or when I hear someone like Huston
Smith, then I sense that perhaps if I am going to make sense of what they tell
me about the authenticity of that spiritual experience, then I would say that
the spirit of God can take up residence within Buddha, Krishna. I think that the
historical, concrete figure may be agent and instrument of the Spirit of God,
and that there have been those in whom that transcendence came to shining
expression to a degree far beyond that which is true of us ordinary mortals. So,
I think where there are great religious leaders, if there is truth there, I would
guess it is the truth of God.
Q.
Where or how do you fit in the 250,000 Jewish people who have come to
believe in Jesus as Messiah since 1967, and who believe that the Messiah is
still to be preached to their own people?
A.
I am aware that there is such a movement. I just got a letter from Isaac
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page17
Rottenberg who wrote to a Rabbi in New York City about the Jesus Jewish
movement and the fact that that ought to be a part of the agenda of the
discussion, the dialogue between Christianity and Judaism. I think in all of
the religious traditions there ought to be the possibility of crossing over. I
believe that one ought to deepen one's own tradition and one's own
particularity. In other words, don't hear me say that you ought to put all the
traditions into a blender and homogenize them and come out with some new
kind of mush. Let's be authentically what we are. Let's even deepen what we
are. Because I do believe that the universal is accessed only through the
particular. But, I think that there should always be the possibility for a Jewish
person to see Jesus and say, "Messiah!" And if that is the authentic
experience of that person, wonderful. Ironically, in the Muskegon Classis in
the last two years, I'm the one who has baptized two Jews, adult Jews! I
almost did it with a bad conscience. I said, "Are you sure you want to do
this? You know, you don't really have to do this," but they wanted to do that.
Okay. But, on the other hand, seriously, about myself, maybe I'll join the
synagogue. I could become a Jew because I see Jesus very much in his
Jewishness and to follow Jesus and practice Judaism, live out of the Torah, so
if I want to do that, I think the Rabbi should receive me. But, all I'm saying is
that you can cross over, pass over, if that is where you find that connects you,
God bless you. And if you are a Jew and you want to find in Jesus the
Messiah today and you want to tell your fellow Jewish people about that, I
think that's witness, that's fine, that's fine. I respect that.
Q.
If your views moved the Reformed Church closer to the Unitarian position, if
so, what would be gained for the church body, and what might be lost?
A.
The doctrine of the Trinity is a mystery and I can understand how the church,
seeking to come to terms with the raw material of its experience, its
Christological creedal formulas, I understand. I understand what those
doctrinal symbols are pointing to and seeking to communicate. Would my
views move the church more toward Unitarianism? Maybe, but not
necessarily, because I think that, even within the Jewish tradition, that which
comes to expression in the doctrine of the Trinity, there are echoes of that in
Judaism, as well. And so, I think that that is not necessarily the issue of
where I would go. I would say this: I understand the impetus to Unitarianism
when it happened. I can understand why there was such a movement and such
a development, and I'm not nearly as scandalized by it as once I was or
probably some of you would think I should be. But, I want to maintain the
embodiment of God in the flesh of Jesus. That's the God I know. That's the
God I see, and I am not as impressed with some of the contemporary
discussions of the Trinity where that's reflective of community within a
godhead which is modeled after community of humankind - frankly, it never
really grabbed me, but that's for esoteric theologians like Dr. Fries. I mean, you
know, we wouldn't need seminaries, we wouldn't need such brilliance if there
were not those kinds of questions to think about.
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page18
Q.
Will you please respond to the question once posed to Karl Barth –
“Professor, will there be a hell?”
A.
Hell, no. I think that Hell is the experience of separation from God and I do
believe that I believe in judgment. I believe that no one will get away with
anything. Thank God. True for all of us. So that there will be this authentic
encounter with God so that my life will be there and I will face my life, and
then, you know you have to talk in symbols and images. I love The Great
Divorce, where C.S. Lewis says on the other side of death you can sort of
float around in those misty grey flats as long as you want to, and then if you
want to get on board the bus a little farther in, a little farther up, okay. You get
up there and say, "Ooh, this is too bright. I think I like it down below," the
ambience of the misty flats. But, it is always the individual in authentic
encounter with God. God is not mocked and I will see myself consciously in
the presence of God. I believe in judgment. But, I believe that judgment is
redemptive. I think that in the scriptures that judgment is always for salvation.
So, Hell for as long as you want it, but it doesn't have as many folks in it as it
used to have, for me, and it doesn't last as long as it used to last.
Q.
Dick, it would have seemed that Joseph Campbell addressed this issue
without the controversy, why is it now considered controversial?
A.
Well, Joseph Campbell wasn't talking within the rather narrow limits of the
Reformed Church in America. I mean, Joseph Campbell had a world stage and
the whole mythology tradition of which, of course, he was expert. I cannot
believe that this issue is of such interest that it would get on the front page of
the New York Times. I can't believe it. Others have said it better; they've said
it years and decades and centuries ago more eloquently, more explicitly. I do
not know why now this issue is so big. I think it's reflective, perhaps, of the
church being afraid, being threatened. And rather than in faith saying, "What
in the world is going on?" and "Is there something bigger? Does God have a
grander scheme that is more than I ever, ever conceived of?” Rather, there's
this growing in, and why it is now, I don't know. I don't feel like I have said
anything new. I've not said anything very well. I am pretty much mainstream,
down the middle. In my context? No, but in the broader human context,
certainly, and even within the broader Reformed Church, I believe that I
would come somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. So, it baffles me.
Q.
As a seminary student that shares your views, should I consider a longer
engagement, both live together for a while, or break it off now?
A.
If I answered that in all honesty, I would be answering out of a deep
woundedness that would not be a fair answer. I am wounded. The church has
hurt me. And I should not be giving counsel to anybody for another year or
two.
Q.
Why is there no movement to change our creedal statements? Why are we
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page19
stuck in 15th and 16th century statements?
A.
I said to the Classis of Muskegon that I would be willing to sign the formula
for ordination which speaks of those statements as faithful, historical
witnesses to the Christian faith. I do believe that those statements were
authentic statements of faith. They were affirmations; they were
proclamations. In their context they addressed the questions and the issues
of that time. It's simply a human quality - we tend to say it, the
movement erupts, there is this prophetic flame, there is an eloquent
statement, and then we absolutize it and we perpetuate it through history
as though it no longer will be touched by ongoing historical experience. It
happens all the time. It happens in every tradition. You don't have to be
the Reformed Church in America, and I think that's the question. Until we
can honor our creedal tradition as being a faithful expression in a given
context, recognizing that that faith needs constant translation and fresh
expression - until we do that, we'll be going through the torment of this
past year in Michigan. Historical consciousness is a relatively late arrival
on the scene of the human disciplines. I think that science of history,
historiography, is an 18™ century phenomena, and it, when it really
soaked into the human psyche… I mean we all think historically today. It
is the very lens through which we see everything, but we have somehow
or other compartmentalized our faith and our theological expression, and
made out as though those expressions do not need to continue to bring
new light through translation in light of ongoing experience. I don't know.
I don't know why we can't learn that. I've learned it.
I said in New Brunswick Seminary when John Beardsley - John
Beardsley, where are you? What year did you go to New Brunswick?
Could it have been '64? I sat there on behalf of Western Theological
Seminary and stood in your procession and John Leese gave a lecture,
and John Leese's lecture pointed out the historical condition of every
creedal statement, and it was like a light went on, and I sat there and
thought, why didn't I understand that in my first 30 years? Why didn't I
know that? And then I could see. It happened. It's just amazing to me, but
I can remember it like it was yesterday. The historical conditionedness.
You want to read a great story? The Presbyterian Controversy by Bradley
Longfield, the fundamentalist controversy from 1920 to 1936 in the
Presbyterian Church, the one where _________came out and started
Westminster Seminary. Henry Sloane Coffin, I think, Robert McCartney,
William Jennings Bryant, anyway, six of these outstanding church leaders,
and the controversy of those, assembly after assembly, where the
fundamentalists in the decade of the 20s, it is an amazing story, and Jay
Gresham Machen said this is the deposit of faith and this thing goes down
through history and nothing touches it.
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page20
I can remember as a student reading Machen who said never go down on the
playing field. They'll slaughter you. Stay in the citadel of faith. Okay, you got it
here, stick there, just keep saying it. Fundamentalism is simply the reiteration
of yesterday's answers to today's questions, and so, you don't go down. He
said, don't get out of the citadel and go down there. In other words, you can't
reason with those people. Don't draw swords with those people. Don't dare
try to go mind to mind, thought to thought. No encounter, because they'll
slay you, because if you have the citadel of faith, and you have this pure
source of revelation, you just keep repeating it. Well, to think that that
deposit of faith can just sort of move through history with all of the... was it
Einstein who said after the explosion of the first atomic bomb? Everything is
changed, except our thinking. I would say that, on the threshold of the year
2000, if the church would open its eyes, it would have to say everything has
changed and it's time we think about it. And then it's a question of whether
one really believes in God, really has faith, you see. I believe in God. I trust
God for the future. I think it's going to be great. I'm going to keep preaching.
Q.
What can be done by a Reformed Church minister to engage in a serious
Christian-Jewish dialogue where the Consistory is opposed to this
dialogue?
A.
Take a call. I don't think you can do it without leadership in tune with it. The
only reason I've survived this past year is because my own congregation has
been wonderfully solid and supportive. If my congregation were torn up, I
would be torn up and I would be out of here because I am not a fighter. I
don't go around looking for confrontation and I couldn't stand it if my own
people were not together in this thing. So, I would be very hesitant to
recommend a minister or a church leader of any sort to get involved in that
which is not affirmed by his or her own leadership. It's a formula for disaster, I
think.
Q.
Of course, a lot of things can feel right, even demonic persecution which
takes the persecutor beyond need for argument. What are the critical criteria
for putting holds on affirming all kinds of behaviour, such as your ouster …?
A.
Well, you see, I think that if we operate with a biblical tradition, with the
biblical story, with the Christian tradition in a concrete community of faith,
and if we are in dialogue together and in conversation together, then I think
that we'll make some mistakes, but I think we'll correct ourselves, too. I trust,
basically, the people. I think that there's a terrible gap between the academy
and the congregation. Your pastors have known a lot of things they've never
told you about over many, many years, and my experience has been that I can
trust my people with anything I'm thinking about, anything I'm toying with,
and it's a community and the Spirit of God lives in that community. And so, I
have the biblical story, I have the tradition, I have the concrete community.
And then, I think we test the spirits, and sometimes we make mistakes, but
© Grand Valley State University
�Spoken Address to Mid-Atlantic Synod
Richard A. Rhem
Page21
we have the freedom to fail, and then we can turn around and say that didn't
work or the consequences of that were not foreseen. I'm going to back down
from that. I don't know any other magic, but I do think that the Christian
community can be trusted.
© 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
Address to The Synod of Mid-Atlantic, Reformed Church in America
Location
The location of the interview
Reformed Church Synod of Mid-Atlantics,
Ramapo, New Jersey
References
Karl Barth, The Humanity of God, 1960,1996, Hendrikus Berkhof, Christian Faith, 1979, 1986 C. S. Lewis, Letters to Malcolm, 1964, Richard A. Rhem, "The Habit of God's Heart," Perspectives, Sept., 1988.
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
RA-3-19961004
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1996-10-04
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Title
A name given to the resource
Regarding the Conflict About Christian Exclusivity
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Richard A. Rhem
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a>
Language
A language of the resource
eng
Description
An account of the resource
Talk created, delivered, or published by Richard A. Rhem (Dick) on October 4, 1996 entitled "Regarding the Conflict About Christian Exclusivity", as part of the series "Address to The Synod of Mid-Atlantic, Reformed Church in America", at Reformed Church Synod of Mid-Atlantics, Ramapo, New Jersey. Tags: Inclusive Grace, Nature of God, Pluralism, Universal Grace, Scripture, Authority. Scripture references: Karl Barth, The Humanity of God, 1960,1996, Hendrikus Berkhof, Christian Faith, 1979, 1986 C. S. Lewis, Letters to Malcolm, 1964, Richard A. Rhem, "The Habit of God's Heart," Perspectives, Sept., 1988.
.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Authority
Inclusive Grace
Nature of God
Pluralism
Scripture
Universal Grace