Persistent Problems

A God without wrath brought humans without sin into a kingdom 

without judgment through ministrations of a Christ without a cross.

-H. Richard Niebuhr

In the world of theology geeks, the above is a fairly well known statement (I suppose I should note it is a facetious statement that presents an exaggerated negative image of what he actually believes to be true) by Reinhold Niebuhr's little brother, himself a very influential theologian, perhaps without the broader cultural recognition that Reinhold achieved through his "Serenity Prayer."  I know what you're saying: "Broader recognition? What are you talking about?  Who the heck are these Niebuhrs?"

Well, since you asked, they are the great white buffaloes of American Theology.  They are both extraordinary thinkers, whose thought is often quoted by theological types like me, and described with obtuse terms like "post-liberal" and "neo-orthdox."  Those two terms are defined by the fact that they come after a great battle of ideas, in which there was much passionate argument and much general consternation.  The Niebuhrs did their work in the wake of a theological and ecclesiastical war.

The war in question was the "fundamentalist-modernist controversy," within my very own Presbyterian tradition which has been powerfully reflected in the culture ever since.  Then though "fundamentalist" meant something rather different than what we picture, and "modernist" actually had some sort of clear meaning.

To sum up a rather long story, the "fundamentals" were:

• The nature of Scripture as inspired by God and "inerrant."
• The Virgin Birth of Jesus.
• The idea that Christ's death was an atonement for sin.
• The Resurrection of the Body
• The historical reality of the Miracles attributed to Jesus.

Modernists essentially challenged those fundamentals in the following ways:

• Scripture is inspired by God, but written by human hands and therefore in need of interpretation by human readers, therefore it cannot be said to be "inerrant," because the communication chain involves human writers, readers and interpreters.
• The Virgin birth of Christ, the historicity of miracles and the resurrection of the body all sort of fit into a single argument: simply that they are mythological additions and not absolutely necessary to Christian faith, and as they were often the object of ridicule from the secular and scientific community, should be de-emphasized, if not totally disregarded as core doctrines of the church.
• Atonement was seen as a sort of draconian leftover from Roman Catholicism, without going into all the various theories of atonement, modernists tended towards an understanding of God's mercy as being greater than God's need to punish iniquity.  (This, in my opinion, was the greatest blind spot of modernism, because it tends to minimize the impact that sin has on our ability to relate to a Holy God, which I think Niebuhr pointed out rather well).

It cannot, and really should not be said that either side really "won," this debate, they simply separated and went their own way.  Even though this argument stared in the good old Presbyterian Church, it has spread like a fire into other denominations and is even raging in the Roman Catholic world.  The words have changed, because Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Islamic extremists have forever tainted the name of fundamentalism.  It is a word, I do not think we can get back, nor should we try.  And honestly, Modernist and even Liberal don't really have the same precision as perhaps they once did.

Here is something that has not really changed though: Sin.  Yes, sin, I am moved by my compassion for humanity to adopt many opinions that might rightly be called liberal or progressive, but let me tell you one way that I am still absolutely orthodox: I believe that sin is huge problem for all people.  The nature of sin prevents me from thoroughly embracing a progressive attitude that we will somehow grow or evolve out of our current troubles.  The nature of sin prevents me from holding to my former conservatism that truly felt we should just maintain the status quo until we were sure of the way forward.

Much of the theology one sees out and about these days fails to account for this little three letter word that everyone recognizes, but none of us fully understand or give its full account.  Sin is what turns our discussions of the truly crucial problems of our age into nasty sectarian sniping.  Sin is what prevents progressives from taking stock of the ways that human nature is going to derail their plans to do good.  Sin is what causes conservatives to fear the change that so dearly needs to happen.  Sin is what keeps us naming each other enemy, and refusing to hear and acknowledge what is good about the ideas and people that challenge our assumptions.  Sin is a perpetual motion machine which generates its own energy and power and can sustain its own cycle for as long as there are people afflicted by it, which will be always, until Jesus comes back.

Constantly harping on sin is a big drag to be sure, but if we ignore it and pretend it's not a big deal, we will continue to see what history has born out thus far: no end to suffering, no end to violence, no peace among humankind, no exit from the endless oppressive cycles of what could very honestly be called Hell.

There is only one answer to sin, Jesus Christ and him crucified, and even if you don't like the word atonement or any of the various "theories" of atonement, the fact remains that Jesus is the only way to deal with sin.  Rules make it stronger.  Quests for purity feed the fires of Hell as readily as the light of Heaven.  By the way, I didn't make this up, here is the Apostle Paul in Romans 3: 20 quoting Psalm 143:2: For "no human being will be justified in (God's) sight" by deeds prescribed by the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin. If you're not familiar, he goes on a bit about that.

The point is that the Grace of God is the only answer to sin, righteousness ain't gonna cut it, good works ain't gonna cut it, right belief ain't gonna cut it (yeah that's right, your purity of doctrine isn't getting you off the hook either, that's just more works righteousness, except the works happen between your ears).

So what do we do then?  We proclaim Jesus as Lord, and we seek to live that way, we trust in the mercy of God when we mess up, but never fail to repent. Our identity as the Body of Christ does not presuppose a "solution" to human sin, but rather an answer to the fact that it is persistent and inescapable.  We are the body of Christ, not because we're perfect and holy, we are perfect and holy because we are the body of Christ.  Here's a more in depth quote from H. Richard Niebuhr:

The way to the organic, active peace of brotherhood leads through the hearts of peacemakers who will knit together, with patience and self sacrifice, the shorn and tangled fibers of human aspirations faith and hopes, who will transcend the fear and dangers of an adventure of trust. The road to unity is the road of repentance.

That is all for now.