During a break in the conference I overheard some clergy colleagues talking and one said, "They have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid him." He was, of course, quoting from the Gospel of John, chapter 20, verse 13, which is part of John's story of the resurrection of Jesus.
The conference took place at Bethany College in West Virginia, and my esteemed colleague was reacting to the lectures presented there by John Dominic Crossan. Crossan and others spent a lot of time and worked very hard at trying to uncover as much authenticity as possible regarding Jesus, what he actually said (as opposed to everything attributed to him in the New Testament), what he actually did, and the true focus and meaning of his work, mission, and ministry.
Now, wouldn't one think all of that has merit? Would it not be important to folks who say they want to follow Jesus?
Not so fast.
How many translations and paraphrases exist of the Bible itself? I couldn't begin to count. All I know is when I have heard some church people defend the King James Version a few actually have said of the archaic language, English, of course, "If Jesus spoke it, that's good enough for me."
Once, a fellow at a church I was attending at the time (not as its pastor) approached me with this idea: "Let's get together and write a new version of the Bible." As I recall, he knew nothing of the original languages in which the Bible was written. He just wanted something that was "easier to read." That may be the second most inane thing said to me in a church. (The winner of that contest was a member of my congregation who stated in an adult Sunday morning class, "God invented war so man (!) could settle his differences." I actually was struck dumb by that one -- although not so much as the originator of the statement, it seemed to me.)
Crossan, Marcus Borg, Reza Aslan, and others are worth reading if one is not afraid to step outside of conventional "wisdom" and orthodoxy, and is interested in some thought-provoking discussion of how Jesus, his message, and actions fit into the historical/cultural context of his time, and how they might be germane to people of faith today.
(Just do it.)
This issue was aroused within me today as I learned from watching worship live-streamed on YouTube that this, the Fourth Sunday of Easter, is called something like "Jesus the Good Shepherd Sunday." I'm a little rusty on my Liturgical Holy Days, so this was news to me.
In any case, the Gospel text for the day comes from chapter 10 of John, the first ten verses. Within these verses are a few references to sheep knowing the voice of the shepherd. Of course, the lesson hopped onto by preachers the world over is that Jesus is the shepherd of Christians. We know his voice, and we do well to listen to it.
Methinks some of us are hearing voices, I'm just not so sure Jesus is the speaker.
When I worked on Capitol Hill I sometimes saw a woman holding forth in front of the east side of the U.S Capitol, at the base of the steps leading into the rotunda. Standing beside her on the first or second step was a mannequin made up to look like Jesus as a shepherd holding a baby lamb. Next to Jesus was a boom box blaring out Gospel music. I believe the lady had pamphlets to hand out, but I always managed to side-step her as I went about my business.
Across the street, circling the Supreme Court building there usually was a guy carrying a sign with an anti-abortion message. He wasn't just there on the day in January when the Roe v. Wade anniversary draws fanatics from both sides of the issue to engage in their annual screaming match proving the ignorance and evil intents of the others. He was there practically every day.
Recently, pastors in various places defied stay-at-home orders and encouraged their "flocks" to show up in person for church services, disregarding social distancing protocols. Some declared God to be stronger than Covid-19. Some called the pandemic a hoax. Some died from exposure to the virus.
Were any or all of these people listening to Jesus's voice?
On those same Capitol steps during Reagan's Iran-Contra fiasco, faith leaders and adherents gathered weekly to protest official policy. It was all very peaceful - and legal - until one week the executive ministers of three or four denominations proceeded into the Capitol rotunda and began reciting the Lord's Prayer. This, in the eyes of the beefy guys with the badges and the revolvers on their hips, constituted holding a worship service in the public spaces of the Capitol. That, my friends, is agin' the Law.
After several warnings to cease and desist, the Lord's Prayer reached its climax, and the perps were hauled off to the slammer. Among them was The Rev. Dr. John O. Humbert, General Minister and President of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), my denomination at the time. (I subsequently sent him a letter, having observed first-hand his criminal behavior, and thanked him for his witness for peace. His response was grateful, but indicated that perhaps others within our church family were not amused.)
Were those of us who gathered on the steps, and those who ventured into the rotunda for a quick prayer, hearing the voice of Jesus?
As I have noted previously, when unprogrammed Friends, the Quakers, gather for worship it is a silent meeting. Friends come together at the appointed hour, sit facing one another, usually on benches, and settle into silence. The idea is that they, as individuals and as a group, await the Spirit, open to receiving insight and wisdom from beyond themselves. It is permissible for worshipers to speak if they feel moved by the Spirit to share a message they sense they have received. (From personal experience, I can report that not all the "messages" seem to have originated with the Spirit, but then, who am I to say?)
On it goes. People express their faith in varieties of ways, and outside observers wonder how there can be such difference in emphasis, tone, and content, one from another.
Is the voice of Jesus heard by any or all of those who say they follow him?
Well, we're only human, and that would explain, it seems to me, why so much of Christian expression is self-centered, narrow, hateful, and just plain ignorant.
My sense is that if one truly listened to Jesus there would be much more concern for the other: the poor, the immigrant, the racial/ethnic minority, the oppressed, and...(gulp)...the enemy.
The question arises, perhaps: "Why would Jesus tell his followers to have such concern and to act upon that concern?"
Maybe Jesus was less interested in people "going to heaven (or hell)" and more interested in the unity of humanity under a loving Creator whose dream is abundant life for all.
One actually might be able to discern that from reading the Bible, even without the assistance of Dom Crossan, Marcus Borg, Reza Aslan, and the others trying to help us.
