|
|
SERMONS Sean Gilbert – 11 June 2006 It’s not often that at a party someone would enquire of me about issues of theology, far less likely that they would seek clarification regarding the first Ecumenical Council of Nicea held way back in 325 AD! Yet such has the been the interest and impact of the Da Vinci Code of late, even such seemingly obscure events in the history of Christianity are now rating importance alongside the more common party parlances of one’s health, the weather and the inevitable [depressing] football scores. Of course, those who have the read the book or seen what I think is a lamentable film, might remember Dan Brown’s simplistic spin on the Council – echoing, I might add, many other current commentators. That being, in order to unite the socially imploding Roman Empire, the Emperor Constantine cynically imposed a theological solution, which by formally elevating Jesus to divine status (being of the one substance with God the Father), he conveniently and pragmatically gave the Christian Church, the needed power to help bring about a social and religious stability most beneficial to the Empire itself. And whilst politics is never fully absent from theological argument and decision making, it is a viewpoint that when taken to logical conclusions, renders any faith confession of Trinity or Incarnation as at best fanciful, and at worst, downright deceitful. In other words, a sham or a lie; the stuff of heady conspiracy theories which readily tap into our prior misgivings and consolidate prejudices even further. Now, Nicea was certainly a Council convened and encouraged by a politically astute Emperor, and indeed its membership was made up of regional Bishops, all of whom were summoned from very different, if not conflicting faith communities across Asia Minor and North Africa. However, what is important to note and even to hold out against the political and conspiracy theories, is that these were essentially pastors, not professional or cloistered theologians, whose primary concern when it came to issues of doctrine or belief, was not technical correctness or fancy word formulations for their own sake, but rather, would this foundational teaching about the nature of God serve the spiritual well being of their people and would it – and here’s the rub – safe guard and increase their experience of saving grace; that is, their growing sense of spiritual union with God and with one another. For as I suggested earlier in relation to our own Basis of Union, at the heart of any good doctrine is not a ‘rightness’ that serves its own narrow end, but a theological foundation which then enables a truly communal, creative and confessional life. And surely underneath it all, this is what the Christian Creeds are really all about; launching pads or fertile seed beds that seek to encourage the Christian life in all its potential fullness. I guess this is a long handed way of saying that the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, hinted at in the scriptures (today’s Old and New Testament readings being no exception), yet only fully developed over a period of 3-400 years within the worshipping context of Christian communities, is deeply attune to this life and most significantly, wonderfully inspirational as to how we relate to the world around us. And if you missed all that, one word might still stay with you. That being, ‘relate’ or better still, ‘relationality’. For what this strange confession of ‘one in three, three in one’ seeks to affirm and promote, is a working understanding of God who is both for us and with us, and who is therefore both a powerful model and symbol of open and hospitable community, of warm mutual respect and of selfless and compassionate love; a circle or dance of love to make our very own; one to participate in with great energy and joy. And so whilst on one level the language and imagery of ‘one substance with the Father’, ‘truly human, truly God’, or ‘seated at the right hand side of God’, is nonsensical to the modern mind, the vision of an essentially relational God in communion with humanity for the sake of its ongoing healing and wholeness, is as pressing and pertinent as ever, particularly in a world notable for its high fences, fragmentation and major hostilities. For as the writer in spirituality Iris Murdoch once said, “Love is the difficult realization that something other than oneself is real.” And so the theological and highly experiential symbol of the Trinity, would, if we allow it to, move us out and beyond to the reality and difference of others, helping, if not inspiring us, to take the path of genuine interactive love; encountering the real person over there and not seeking to possess or determine – however politely – the person or persons we ideally would like them to be. So friends please don’t tell me that this vital and converting confession of the Christian faith – a confession on which I believe the Church either stands or falls – is no longer of any account or is of no practical use. The reductionists who champion such a view, or who suggest that theological reflection is but a secondary pursuit so far as the church’s real work is concerned, take us, in my considered opinion, and indeed have taken us, into shallow and tepid waters indeed. For in an era of growing interest in spirituality and the symbolic, the church is often the last place people think they might find spiritual wisdom and insight, such has been our haste to dispense with mystery, ascetics and poetics in order to try and remain relevant within a secular society. As a result, the ability or better still, the art of extrapolating the great Christian confessions and finding ready links between them and common, human realities has sadly waned. Consequently, a foundational confession such as the Holy Trinity then becomes a wooden dogma in the imposing hands of the conservatives, or in more liberal circles we tend to greet it with a somewhat embarrassed silence, quickly moving on to the surer ground of social ethics. Either way, such a liberating vision of life and God is severely blurred, if not lost on us altogether via our negligence and, I sense, to our lasting spiritual impoverishment. Deep calls to deep. That is, the Mysterium Tremendum calls for imaginative and soulful responses to the realities of faith and life. The vision of a God of pure relationality, of inclusive and respectful love and of reconciliation and healing, is not something the Christian Church can walk away from without first abandoning its own unique self identity and calling. That is not to say we don’t labour long and hard (a labour of love, no less) to unpack and intelligently express such a strange design and faith confession. Because it is only in the expression and in the praise that this reality of God becomes most real and most transformative; When we lay to one side the god of rationality and open our hearts to a simple yet profound, drawing beauty. In the old English words of John Donne, and with these I’ll conclude: O Blessed glorious Trinity, |