Categories
May 2021 News Perspective Online Top Story

A Message from Associate Dean Hugo Magallanes

Hugo Magallanes, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Director of the Houston-Galveston Extension Program

As we conclude this academic year, I’ve been thinking and reflecting on the experiences and challenges our students have encountered during their journey here at Perkins School of Theology. Without a doubt their journey has been unprecedented—a word we now use almost daily. And they have encountered these unprecedented circumstances not only here at Perkins but also around the world. The world they knew when they first enrolled at Perkins has changed dramatically in the last year. Now they are formally (and theologically) qualified; and ready to go back “into the world,” to proclaim the good news of the gospel with words and deeds. I wonder how these unprecedented challenges might have shaped the way they see and embrace Christian ministry. Perhaps, an initial reaction would be to name and highlight aspects that were absent and missed because we could not gather in person for classes, worship, and meals. Perhaps we could compare graduates pre and post Covid-19 to examine and analyze the differences, or perhaps another approach would be to describe and mourn the losses many of us experienced—including the loss of loved ones, lost income and jobs, and losing a sense of well-being altogether. Although all these aspects are extremely important, in this short reflection, I want to focus on an aspect that I hope would be a determining characteristic not only for our current graduates, but also for all our future graduates. This one aspect is adaptability. One dictionary defines this word as: “an ability or willingness to change in order to suit different conditions.”[1] Our graduating students had no choice. They had to adapt and learn to suit different conditions—taking classes remotely, adjusting their schedule to manage family, work, ministry, and technology to name a few.

And in an optimistic and constructive way, I hope these challenging and difficult experiences from the past year were able to prepare our students to become adaptable to expected and unexpected changes, prepare them to adapt to their particular ministerial settings. I hope that our students will be prepared to serve all of God’s people in rural and urban settings, in progressive and conservative communities, in academic and ecclesial contexts, in traditional churches and unconventional ministries. I hope our students will become adaptable to a changing social context, while preserving the integrity of the Christian message and demonstrating Christian virtues.

Facing unprecedented situations will not be new to these students, but how does one respond to these situations that will test their faith, knowledge, and character, as well as ours? Again, many aspects/responses might be highlighted here, but I hope that our students in responding to adverse and quick changing circumstances will have the confidence that their theological journey at Perkins prepared them for the unknown challenges ahead, provided them with the tools to think theologically, to respond contextually, and to serve God’s people with humility.[2] In my opinion, these responses represent the integrity of the Christian message and demonstrate vital Christian virtues. I hope that our current and future graduates will have the capacity to see that mind, heart, and hands go together. That thinking theologically, requires responding contextually, and that the ultimate goal is to serve others with humility. May they learn and teach us new ways to extend Christian hospitality, to welcome “the stranger” in their midst, to serve as gracious and exuberant hosts, but also become humble guests to these strangers, and learn from them, sometimes remaining quiet, knowing that true adaptability is grounded in honest and reciprocal friendships/relationships, and in doing so, may God help us to see, God’s adaptability in Emmanuel, God with us. God who became like us and learned to adapt to human limitations and proclaimed the good news with integrity and unapologetically. May this model of adaptability be our model during and after this unprecedented pandemic.

“[God], give us courage to change what must be altered, serenity to accept what cannot be helped, and the insight to know the one from the other.”[3]

 

Hugo Magallanes is Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Director of the Houston-Galveston Extension Program.

 

[1] “Adaptability,” Cambridge Dictionary, accessed April 14, 2020, https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/adaptability

[2] These phrases were points made in a recent Curriculum Review Committee small group conversation regarding desire student outcomes and goals at the completion of our MAM and MDiv. degree programs. I am indebted to my colleagues for these insights:  T. Campbell, J. Clark-Soles, Á. Gallardo, R. Heller, J. Martin, C. Nelson, and T. Walker.

[3] Prayer attributed to Reinhold Niebuhr, which it is believed he composed in 1932-33.

Categories
April 2021 News Perspective Online Top Story

A Message from the Dean: A Great Moment for Methodism

Over the years, I’ve visited the World Methodist Museum in North Carolina multiple times. I enjoyed perusing the artifacts of early Methodism and seeing documents that John Wesley penned and items that he might have touched.  For a fan of Methodist history, this wonderful museum made history come alive.

I was saddened to hear the announcement, several week ago, that the Museum would close. My sadness turned to hope, however, when I learned that the World Methodist Council (which operated the Museum) was looking for a location for their extraordinary collection. I could only dare to imagine that Bridwell Library and Perkins School of Theology would be its new home. Last week, we received the wonderful news that Bridwell Library will be the recipient of the Museum’s collection in its entirety.

We are thrilled by this marvelous opportunity but also humbled by the great trust it evidences. We take the stewardship of these remarkable materials very seriously.

I have often said that Perkins is “An Academy for the Whole Church in the Whole World.” The holding of this collection puts us in a unique position and gives us a unique responsibility to be of particular service to pan-Methodist, pan-Wesleyan churches throughout the world. Wesley Studies has always been a strong point of Perkins, and this gift creates new and undreamed-of prospects for its future. I can scarcely contain my enthusiasm as I brainstorm with others about the possibilities for making Wesley Studies even more central to our mission. I am also delighted to make this resource available to all, as Wesley himself surely would have wanted.

Read the news release about this exciting news, here.  To quote the CEO of the World Methodist Council, this is a great moment in Methodism. I’m proud to witness this moment, and thrilled that the Perkins community is part of this incredible effort to keep Methodist history alive.

Categories
March 2021 News Perspective Online Top Story

Letter from the Dean: March 2021

At the Bolin Family Scholarship Evening program on February 16, many members of the Perkins community heard New York Times columnist David Brooks offer his thoughts on the past year. He started with the question, “How can we repair a society that’s become pretty broken?” He explored the question through the concept of Bildung – a German word for “the complete moral, intellectual, and civic formation of a person.”

Many factors contribute to a person’s formation – such as one’s geographic origins, faith upbringing, and educational background. Historically, many universities have viewed this kind of character formation as their first and foremost priority. Brooks believes that focus has been lost as educational institutions become more and more vocationally oriented.

At the end of his talk, I had the opportunity to ask Brooks a few questions. He earlier stated that he had been a “bookish” youth, so I asked, “What are you reading now?”  His off-the-cuff choices offered a revealing glimpse into his wide-ranging interests that have made him a prominent national thought leader.

I love to read widely, too. It expands my thinking beyond my own professional niche and even beyond the walls of the academy. Reading exposes me to people, experiences, history, and ideas that I might not otherwise encounter. It is one of the most enriching practices I know.

So, in the spirit of that evening, here are half a dozen books I’ve read in the recent past and strongly recommend:

Frederick Douglass: Prophet of Freedom
David Blight, Simon and Schuster: 2018

This Pulitzer Prize winning biography is, simply put, one of the best books I have ever read. I am from Springfield, Illinois, home of Abraham Lincoln, and as a consequence have worked my way through dozens of books on 19th-century American history. Nevertheless, there is a great deal in Blight’s masterful account of which I was unaware, not only concerning Douglass, who deservedly ranks as one of the greatest Americans, but also about his times. The book is by turns informative, challenging, and inspiring. I can’t imagine anyone not benefitting from it.

Grant
Ron Chernow, Penguin: 2018

Speaking of outstanding recent biographies of 19th-century American leaders written by Pulitzer Prize winning authors… Ron Chernow, author of the acclaimed Alexander Hamilton (which inspired the musical), has written the definitive biography of one of the America’s most accomplished, under-appreciated, and unlikely generals and presidents. I confess to having a personal interest in Grant. My great grandfather came from Canada to fight under Grant in the American Civil War. The only memento I have of him is a copy of the newspaper from Vicksburg on July 4, 1863, which he picked up that day and handed down through the family. Reading Grant, I felt that I was also getting to know a bit more of my own ancestor’s story. Grant, by the way, was the basis for the recent History Channel miniseries produced by Leonardo DiCaprio.

Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010
Charles Murray, Crown Forum, 2013

I have been fascinated with studies of changing American culture since reading Robert Putnam’s seminal Bowling Alone. Murray’s analysis of the increasing class and social divide in the U.S. overlaps a great deal with points made in the recent David Brooks talk. Indeed, Brooks himself wrote in the New York Times concerning Coming Apart, “I’ll be shocked if there’s another book that so compellingly describes the most important trends in American society.”  The core thesis is sobering if not surprising:  the U.S. is increasingly looking like two separate countries split along lines demarcated by education and wealth. One of the important takeaways from each of these studies concerns the vital role of the local church as one of the few remaining “middle institutions” that can bridge this gap—but only if it works to do so.

Barking to the Choir: The Power of Radical Kinship
Father Gregory Boyle, Simon & Schuster: 2018

Barking is the follow up to Boyle’s incredible first book Tattoos on the Heart. If you haven’t read Tattoos, start there. If you have, you will want to read Barking, which offers more of what makes that first book so wonderful. For those who don’t know, Boyle is a Jesuit priest and founder of Homeboy Industries in Los Angeles, the largest gang rehabilitation program in the world. One reviewer called Boyle’s books both “incandescent” and “humorous.” Another describes this as “A spiritual masterpiece touching the innermost sanctum of the human soul.” I couldn’t agree more.

Falling Upward: A Spirituality for the Two Halves of Life
Father Richard Rohr, Jossey-Bass: 2011

My favorite book by the prolific Roman Catholic author Richard Rohr, Falling Upward is similar in many ways to David Brooks’s own The Second Mountain, about which Brooks spoke at last year’s Bolin Family Lecture. Both books deal with the fact that most of us spend much of our life striving to establish a career and an identity. Often as not, that quest leaves us dissatisfied or even broken. What comes after that, the upward or “second mountain” portion of one’s life, is what matters most. Brooks elsewhere describes it as the difference between creating resume virtues and obituary virtues. Or, as Rohr put it in an interview on Amazon.com, “First half of life preoccupations won’t get you into the great picture, the big picture, which Jesus would call the Reign of God.” As one well into life’s second half, I found both books greatly thought provoking.

The Boys in the Boat: Nine Americans and Their Epic Quest for Gold at the 1936 Berlin Olympics
Daniel James Brown, Penguin: 2014

Knowing I had rowed while a student at Christ Church College, Oxford, several people have recommended this book to me over the years, but I only got around to reading it recently. I am an easy mark for an underdog true-life story, and this is one of the best. I have participated in a number of sports over the years (and have the surgeries to prove it), but none comes close to rowing for its physical difficulty and – during those magical moments when everything clicks –its Zen-like quality, both of which The Boys in the Boat captures beautifully. Whether you’ve ever sat in a scull or “caught a crab”[1] (which, I can say from experience, is absurdly easy to do!), if you’re looking for an enjoyable and inspirational read, you won’t be disappointed by Brown’s can-do masterpiece.

You can read more about David Brooks’ talk, and see his eclectic reading list, here.

[1] Having an oar caught in the water when moving the blade backwards. It costs the boat a great deal of its momentum, which likely also costs it the race.

Categories
February 2021 News Perspective Online Top Story

A Message from the Dean: Religion & Government – The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly

One of several images from the attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6th that I’ll never forget is that of a person entering the breached door holding aloft a Bible for the cameras. One did not have to look hard to find evidence that numerous other participants saw their actions that day as divinely sanctioned. Who could miss, for example, the “Jesus Saves,” “In God We Trust,” and “God and Guns” signs, not to mention the large wooden cross carried in the crowd? Parallel to and part of this phenomenon is the fact that a surprising number of Christians have warmly embraced the bizarre and ugly QAnon conspiracy theory.

The great irony of the online information explosion is the fact that it encourages us, not to broaden ourselves, but to isolate ourselves, shutting out anything or anyone that challenges our perspective and so makes us uncomfortable. This tectonic shift was abetted proactively in 1987 when the FCC eliminated the “Fairness Doctrine” that had required broadcasters to offer a range of viewpoints on controversial topics. Taken together, these phenomena have created the conditions in which white supremacy, among other cancers on the American body politic, metastasizes freely.

Religion is a lot like government. There is good government, and there is bad government. The things that promote good religion are much the same as those that promote good government: respect for differing opinions, the ability to listen, honesty, empathy, the search for and acknowledgement of common ground, the ability to hold in tension competing ideals, a sense of duty and a commitment to service, widespread engagement, and concern for the larger whole. Governments that do not model these attributes have been the source of profound human misery. The same can be said for religion. Churches and other religious groups that are self-certain, incapable of correction, unwilling to engage others, and concerned only with themselves have the same potential for inflicting damage as bad governments. Indeed, all too often bad government finds its closest ally in bad religion.

High-quality theological education is an antidote to distorted and dangerous religion. A school like Perkins brings students into contact with others who, like them, profess Christ, but who bring to their shared conversation a world of experience and a range of perspectives they might never have encountered before. Questions are asked in class that force students to think through difficulties they might well have preferred to avoid addressing. Seminarians are therefore not so much taught what to think as how to think, how to ask critical questions, how to weigh evidence, how to determine what is core and what is periphery, and how to separate theological wheat from ideological chaff.

It goes without saying that we are a highly polarized nation, and many of our denominations are following suit. In such a situation, it is all the more essential that there be places where passions can be steered by reason. The easy, comforting caricatures of others emanating from across the spectrum must be challenged at the very place where the next generation of church leaders is formed. I would caution students not to attend a seminary in which they know before they set foot in the doorway what they are expected to think when they graduate.  God and the world just aren’t that simple.

Whatever your political and religious persuasion, I hope you will agree that we can do better. Surely, the times in which we live amply demonstrate that none of us is faultless, that all of us act out of some measure of self-interest and self-protection, and that all of us possess a limited perspective. We can be part of a glorious whole, but we are not whole in ourselves.

When I was interviewing to be dean, I was asked about the importance of diversity. Among other things, I said, “It is possible to be diverse without being great, but it is not possible to be great without being diverse.”  The world needs both good government and good religion, and we are the ones who decide whether the good or the bad prevails.

Categories
Perspective Online Top Story

A Message from the Dean: Jesus and the Power of Humility

Perhaps because of the unusually bellicose and exceptionally polarized political and cultural environment of 2020, a particular word struck me with force this Christmas season: humility. Nearly every sermon I heard in recent weeks referred to the humble situation of Christ’s birth, as do some favorite Christmas carols, such as “Go, Tell It on the Mountain”:

Down in a lowly manger
Our humble Christ was born
And God sent us salvation
That blessed Christmas morn

The same theme appears in retellings of the Christmas story in film. In Franco Zeffirelli’s Jesus of Nazareth, the “wise men” comment on the surprising situation in which they find Mary, Joseph, and Jesus. Says one, “Now I see the justice of it,” to which another nods and replies, “Not in glory, but in humility.” This is in keeping with Mary’s canticle of praise, the Magnificat, in Luke 1, in which she extols God, who “has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant.” It also aligns with a great many characterizations of Jesus in the New Testament, such as the Christ Hymn in Philippians 2, in which Jesus was said to have “humbled himself.” Indeed, in Matthew 11:28, Jesus says of himself, “I am gentle and humble in heart”.

So, what does it do to our understanding of humility if Jesus is the standard? Humility is often associated with states such as passivity, weakness, guilt, self-deprecation, and a lack of conviction. But Jesus evidenced none of these things. He acted deliberately, exhibited extraordinary strength of character, and possessed obvious conviction. Recall, for example, the people’s response to him in Matthew 7:29: “Now when Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were astounded at his teaching, for he taught them as one having authority, and not as their scribes.” How, then, might we describe the humility of Jesus?

First, it came from strength, not weakness. Unlike his opponents and even his own disciples, Jesus possessed a secure identity, which is a powerful source of freedom. For one thing, it is freedom from enslavement to the opinions of others. This in turn made Jesus free to serve. He spent his ministry associating with the very people—tax collectors, lepers, the poor, and Samaritans among them—who could do nothing to advance him, all the while alienating those who could. Moreover, his secure identity gave him the power to do what he believed to be right, irrespective of the opinions of others and even irrespective of the consequences to himself. The author of Hebrews put it this way: “Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of our faith, who for the sake of the joy that was set before him endured the cross, disregarding its shame” (12:2).

As demonstrated by Jesus, humility is not egocentric. It has no need to be. Instead, it is outwardly directed, focused on others. All of us know what it is like to love in such a way that, at least momentarily, we forget about ourselves, our own priorities and ego needs. Those are among the most joy-filled moments of our lives, times when, according to the apostle Paul, we “have the mind of Christ” (Philippians 2:3-5):

Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility reckon others as though better than yourselves. Let each of you look not to your own interests, but to the interests of others. Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus…

Much the same conception was famously characterized by the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber as a relationship between “I and Thou,” that is, between myself and another individual whom I recognize as being a person of value. This is opposed to an “I and it” relationship, which is essentially transactional. Others are treated as objects I manipulate to achieve my own purposes. For the truly humble, the self is not on the line, so it is free to recognize the significance and needs of others. This also means that it is able to have an honest and realistic view both of itself and of others. Humility is not false modesty, pretending, for example, not to possess the gifts it obviously does. Instead, it recognizes that they are gifts, that others possess gifts of equal value, and that any such gifts are given for the benefit of all. In one sense, humility is nothing more than simple honesty. It is realistic about itself and therefore also about others.

Contrast all of this with the state of non-humility, which is evidence of fundamental weakness and an insecure identity—ironically, often manifesting itself as arrogance, boastfulness, and conceit. This self is fragile, under constant threat, and therefore anxious. Because of the need to justify itself, it has great difficulty seeing either itself or anyone else realistically. It is in bondage to the opinions of others, whom it must use as objects to affirm and advance itself. The need to prop itself up makes self-forgetful and joyous service difficult if not impossible. Similarly, the need to be seen and affirmed elevates expedience far above moral conviction. Indeed, morality becomes a disposable expedient, sometimes useful to the self, but often not.

Jesus himself repeatedly warned that the practice of religion was subject to these very pitfalls. This is memorably expressed in a series of verses in Matthew 6:

“Beware of practicing your piety before others in order to be seen by them; for then you have no reward from your Father in heaven. So whenever you give alms, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be praised by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward.”

“And whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward.”

“And whenever you fast, do not look dismal, like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces so as to show others that they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward.” (Verses 1-2, 5, 16)

A number of other examples could be cited, but perhaps the best single statement is found in Matthew 23:5-7: “They do all their deeds to be seen by others…They love to have the place of honor at banquets and the best seats in the synagogues, and to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces…” Notably, these words were addressed to religious leaders, and they are just as challenging to us today who are clergy. Chances are, we entered ministry in part because others recognized and praised certain qualities in us. That is not wrong. Indeed, it is likely necessary. But there is a persistent danger that we, like those whom Jesus challenged, will come to define ourselves by that praise and so will use religion as a seemingly-sanctified means to an ultimately hypocritical end. I imagine all religious leaders are guilty of that to some extent, myself included.

Of course, parallel temptations exist in nearly every profession. A few years ago, The Chronicle of Higher Education ran a series of articles decrying the mean-spirited culture of many universities (not SMU, by the way!). University faculties are largely composed of people who grew up being told how intelligent they are, and who thus came to hold themselves to the standard of being right at least, say, 97.5% of the time. Imagine a community of dozens or even hundreds of such well-educated individuals, some significant percentage of whom have constructed a self-imagine that requires them to be seen as the smartest person in the room. The wonder is not that one-upmanship, professional jealousy, and backstabbing occur among faculty, but that the problem is not worse than it actually is.

Jesus’ own disciples fell into this trap, jostling with each other for position in the expectation that they would participate in their master’s glory once he established his reign in Jerusalem. Similarly, a great many of the problems experienced in Paul’s congregations were not doctrinal in nature but had at their heart this same dynamic. This is seen most dramatically in the apostle’s correspondence with the church of Corinth, whose members were masters of self-glorification, whether, for example, by claiming allegiance to the superior apostle or by possession of a superior spiritual endowment. Paul responds plainly and forcefully:

[N]one of you should be puffed up in favor of one against another. For who sees anything different in you? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you received it, why do you boast as if it were not a gift?  (1 Corinthians 4:6-7)

The New Testament’s perspective on humility is to varying extents paralleled in other religious and philosophical texts. More recently, it is also echoed in books on psychology and even business leadership.  (Think of the “Level-Five Leader” in the well-known Jim Collins book Good to Great, whose distinctive characteristic is humility.)  Just last week, I came across an article in Scientific American titled The Pressing Need for Everyone to Quiet Their Egos: Why quieting the ego strengthens your best self. The author, Scott Barry Kaufman, asserts that “A noisy ego spends so much time defending the self as if it were a real thing, and then doing whatever it takes to assert itself, that it often inhibits the very goals it is most striving for.” In other words, our human need to justify ourselves keeps us from being the very people we might most want to be and might most enjoy being.

A nearly identical point is made in the Arbinger Institute’s two popular books Leadership and Self-Deception and The Anatomy of Peace. Both books locate human strife (not to mention business inefficiency!) explicitly in the need for self-justification. Whenever we fail to do something we know intuitively we ought to have done, we place ourself “in the box,” where we are self-justifying, amplifying our own virtue and innocence, and unfairly undermining and even demonizing others.

While I have great appreciation for these (and very many similar) analyses, the problem would seem to require both a fuller explanation and solution. We are social animals—indeed, by far and away the most sophisticated of social animals, possessing the ultimate social adaptation, language. As I have written elsewhere[1], the need to be “somebody” is in our DNA. A major part of our brain is constantly at work, most often subconsciously, to position us socially. Put another way, we are wired to be meaning-seeking creatures. To use biblical language, we need to be justified.

Jesus’ response to the disciples is revealing:

Then they came to Capernaum; and when he was in the house he asked them, “What were you arguing about on the way?” But they were silent, for on the way they had argued with one another who was the greatest. He sat down, called the twelve, and said to them, “Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all.”  (Mark 9:33-35)

Note what Jesus did not say: “You fools! Don’t you realize you have no significance, that you are nothing?” Instead, he challenged their view of both the source and the nature of true significance. As Paul put it in Romans 8:33, “It is God who justifies.” Indeed, in any ultimate sense, it is only God who can justify.

And herein lies the paradox. To the extent that we find ourselves in God, to know in God that we are wholly loved, we are able to let go of the need to establish some other self with some other center of significance. The paradigm is, again, Jesus. I often refer to the foot-washing story in John 13 because it so beautifully captures this reality and so completely challenges us by its example. Jesus was the only one in the room who knew who he was, and thus the only one free to serve.

God came to us in a manger. That is a profound lesson of Christmas whose meaning we can work to realize throughout the new year. To the extent we do, we will be empowered to serve freely, to act justly, and to live in joy and at peace—that is, to experience the true power of humility. Most of us are aware how difficult this can be, how tempting it is to fall back on long-established, hard-won patterns of self-justification. So, let us find hope in the words of the angel Gabriel to Mary nine months prior to that first Christmas: “For with God, nothing shall be impossible” (Luke 1:37).

[1] See Chapter Two, “It’s Only Natural,” in Servant of All: Status, Ambition, and the Way of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016).

Categories
Perspective Online Top Story

A Message from the Dean: The Visitation

The Visitation

Luke 1:39-49

In those days Mary set out and went with haste to a Judean town in the hill country, where she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the child leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit and exclaimed with a loud cry, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. And why has this happened to me, that the mother of my Lord comes to me? For as soon as I heard the sound of your greeting, the child in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her by the Lord.”

And Mary said,

“My soul magnifies the Lord,
      and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
for he has looked with favor on the lowliness of his servant.
    Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed;
 for the Mighty One has done great things for me,
    and holy is his name.

During this time of expectant waiting and preparation, as told in the visitation narrative of Elizabeth and Mary, may you experience anew the fulfillment of God’s promise of hope and new birth. From all of us at Perkins, wishing you and yours a blessed Advent and Christmas season.

Yours,

Craig C. Hill

 


Artwork Courtesy Bridwell Library Special Collections and Archives
[Book of Hours. Sarum Use, in Latin]
Illuminated manuscript on vellum
[Flanders, c. 1420]

Categories
News November 2020 Top Story

A Message from the Dean: Meditation on “The Life Everlasting”

“And they lived happily ever after.” That is the fairytale ending we read to our children before switching off the light at bedtime. We reassure them that dragons and witches and bullies do not finally triumph, that virtue is rewarded and that love endures. We reinforce their belief in a moral universe in which happiness is the offspring of goodness and not its chance acquaintance or certain competitor.

But life soon confronts our children with other narratives, stories in which every wrong is not righted nor every injustice overturned. They discover danger, witness prejudice, and experience failure. They learn that things do not always work out as they hope and that they cannot always get what they want. Eventually, they encounter death and with it loss that is not reversed by a wizard’s spell or a heroine’s kiss.

Life thus schools us in doubt. We cannot believe everything we hear. It is right to doubt that we can “lose twenty pounds while eating whatever we want,” or “look ten years younger overnight,” or “get rich working only a day a week from home.” It is right for us to question such extravagant claims, lest we be swindled, lest we be injured, lest we be disappointed. Prudence demands that we become wary of strangers and suspicious of even our own motives. On one level, this is no more than an awareness of sin, in others and in ourselves. More deeply, it is a recognition of the mystery of evil, whose embassy is to thwart and cheapen and diminish human life.

“If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.” For many people today, that advice applies preeminently to religion, whose hopes are dismissed outright as wishful thinking. The real world consists only of what is accessible to scientific verification. Therefore, meaning itself is an illusion. The universe has no creator, no purpose, and, ultimately, no future. According to today’s most popular cosmology, in the end there will be only a burned-out and dissipated universe: not noise and fury, but silence and futility, signifying nothing. In this scenario, there can be no “happily ever after.” According to microbiologist Jacques Monod,

[T]he choice of scientific practice, an unconscious choice in the beginning, has launched the evolution of culture on a one-way path: onto a track which nineteenth-century scientism saw leading infallibly upward to an empyrean noon hour for mankind, whereas what we see opening before us today is an abyss of darkness.2

To me, the wishful-thinking argument is a nonstarter. Retrospectively, I might regard as wishful thinking a material universe whose physical characteristics, such as electromagnetism and gravity, are so finely balanced as to make possible the emergence of life and, even more extraordinary, sentience. Who could have predicted a cosmos whose rock would birth Pythagorus’s theorem, Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony, Chartres’s cathedral, and Shakespeare’s Hamlet? Nevertheless, such a universe exists. Not every desirable object is an illusion.

Our desire for purpose, order, and meaning is fundamental to our existence. Many of the earliest cultural artifacts are religious in nature, and belief in life after death is nearly universal. This does not prove the validity of religion, but it certainly weighs in its favor. As C. S. Lewis put it, “If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world.”3 Or, to use Huston Smith’s analogy, wings do not prove the existence of air, but they surely count as evidence. We know instinctively that we are something more than the sum of our parts and part of something more than ourselves. Consider the final chorus of Joni Mitchell’s Woodstock,

We are stardust, million-year old carbon
We are golden, caught in the devil’s bargain
And we’ve got to get ourselves back to the garden

On the one hand, we are, quite literally, stardust, assemblies of primordial carbon. On the other hand, we are something more, something “golden.” Yet, we are not now fully ourselves; we are “caught in the devil’s bargain.” To get “back to the garden” is to go to the place of wholeness and innocence for which we long.

Christianity is grounded in the hope that we shall indeed arrive at such a place–not the garden but that for which the garden is the prefiguring image, the Reign of God. The core affirmation of Christian faith is that God–not evil, futility, and death–is the final reality in the cosmos. This belief encompasses not only the hope of eternal life but also the expectation that creation itself will be redeemed (Rom. 8:18-25). Why believe in the happy ending? For the first Christians the answer was obvious: because of Jesus’ resurrection.

Many years ago, my wife, Robin, became increasingly ill over a period of weeks. She was tested for numerous ailments, nearly all of which would have proved fatal. After two months, she could scarcely get out of bed, and I began to take seriously the possibility that she would die. My faith was hard pressed. Did I truly believe with Paul that “in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us,” that “neither death…nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 8:37-39)? It was not easy.

As I meditated on Scripture, I came to value particularly 1 Corinthians 9:1, in which Paul declares, “Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?” This is one of only a handful of places where Paul refers back to his experience of seeing the resurrected Jesus. Moreover, Paul’s letters provide the only undisputed primary-source testimony composed by an eyewitness of the resurrection. His writings would be invaluable for this reason if for no other.

In the course of my wife’s illness, I learned to borrow from the faith of Paul and other early Christians who paid with their lives for their unyielding conviction that God in Christ had triumphed over death, in whose victory they believed they would one day share. Fortunately, Robin eventually recovered, but I have never forgotten what it was like to pass so near to death.

Concerning death the Bible is remarkably unsentimental. Paul and other New Testament authors do not tell us that deceased believers will become angels or stars, nor do they say that we shall be melded with some divine force. There is no greeting-card sentiment about God needing more company in heaven. Instead, death is seen as that great enemy which, apart from God’s ultimate and undeserved act of re-creation, would unmake us all. In short, death is real.

According to Paul, “The wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom. 6:23). The hope is for the resurrection of the body, not the immortality of the soul. Eternal life is not a given; it is a gift bestowed only by God. The One who created conscious beings is able to recreate such beings by resurrection. Hence 1 Cor. 15:50: “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.” Christians are not required to believe in an immortal soul that exists independent of the body. Instead, Paul writes, “we will be changed” (v. 52), given bodies like that of the resurrected Jesus himself. On this point the New Testament is clear and yet sensibly reserved. Compare 1 John 3:2:

Beloved, we are God’s children now; what we will be has not yet been revealed. What we do know is this: when he is revealed, we will be like him, for we will see him as he is.

Most theologians today reject the notion that heavenly existence will be static, represented at its silliest by the sitting-on-clouds-playing-harps stereotype. They see heaven not only as a place of endless praise, joy and fellowship, but also as a realm of ceaseless fascination and development. I am in no position to evaluate these claims, nor, beyond a certain point, do I find such speculations helpful. More concrete and much more useful is Paul’s advice about the present-day implications of our future hope:

But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my beloved, be steadfast, immovable, always excelling in the work of the Lord, because you know that in the Lord your labor is not in vain. (1 Cor. 15:57-58)

The Gospel places demands upon us that conflict at many points with our worldly self interest. To love our enemies is not necessarily going to make us happy. To serve the poor is unlikely to advance us socially or economically. It is no accident that the radical ethic of Jesus is situated within an equally radical proclamation of the coming Reign of God. That is the only context within which it makes sense. To attempt to follow Jesus’ teaching while denying its core affirmation is an exercise in futility. “Eschatological demands require eschatological commitments and eschatological resources.”4

Paul urged the Corinthians to be steadfast and immovable, “always excelling in the work of the Lord.” But being “steadfast and immovable” implies meeting opposition, and “the work of the Lord” is endlessly sacrificial. Is it worth it? Yes, “because you know that in the Lord your labor is not in vain.” Good deeds may be undone, faithful choices may be frustrated, and loving acts may be rejected; nevertheless, they are not wasted. The Christian philosopher Jerry Walls put it this way:

To recover heaven as a positive moral source is to recover our very humanity….It allows us to hope that the worst things that happen can yet come to a good end rather than to dread the prospect that the best things will come to a bad end. And if it is indeed the Holy Spirit who inspires this hope, it is a hope that will not be disappointed.5

“Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?” Is death the end, the final page in the story of our lives? Or can we believe in a happy ending? “Thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.” (I Cor. 15:55, 57).


*This is an edited version of a longer sermon that appeared in the book Exploring and Proclaiming the Apostles’ Creed, ed. Roger E. Van Harn (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), pp. 292-97.

2 Cited in Huston Smith, Why Religion Matters: The Fate of the Human Spirit in an Age of Disbelief (New York: Harper Collins, 2001), p. 41.

3 C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: Macmillan, 1960), p. 119.

4 Craig C. Hill, In God’s Time: The Bible and the Future (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), p. 198.

5 Jerry Walls, Heaven: The Logic of Eternal Joy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), p. 200.