(8) What I Believe The Nicene Creed is a corporate confession of faith. It begins with a “We” not an “I.” Even though this series is titled “What I Believe” it is the way I understand what “we” believe. For me, leaving the institutional church and leaving the Christian faith are two entirely separate things. Some would do both at once and I understand why they would do so. I have preferred rather, to try and remain within the institutional church, that is, to be part of a local congregation. I don’t want you to think this is easy for me. It is a weekly struggle for me to attend an anemic worship service or listen to (yet) another boring sermon on the same old thing I have heard ad nauseum. There are many folks I have come to love in my congregation but there are just as many if not more that seem to me to be intellectually lazy, spiritually empty or emotionally bound to their Christian ethnic sub-culture. Believe me when I say that I completely understand why people leave the institutional church. On the other hand, deep inside of me there is a faith that will not stop bubbling up, a faith nurtured by the Spirit, reading the Scriptures and meeting with friends who share the same passion for Jesus that I share. Even though FB is a virtual community I am also nurtured by relationships with many of my FB friends, a few of whom I have met in person, others who message me or I speak with by phone or Skype. I am grateful for all those who quest after the Living God and who realize that their quest has been fulfilled in Jesus, the One who has first quested for them. All of us are this “we” of the creed. “We” indicates that faith occurs in relationships. I know there is a growing movement of folks who want to live up to the Kantian ideal to “Think for Yourself” and try to go it alone. I don’t believe you can. It takes two for real faith; no one is a Robinson Crusoe believer. We are relational creatures, not autonomous individuals. For those who have been following these posts, you are aware that I accept the work of modern researchers in the human brain regarding our neural networks, particularly when seen in the light of Rene Girard’s mimetic theory. There is no such thing as the autonomous individual, we are interdividual, and we are relational. One problem with post-modernity is the illusion that we can work things out for ourselves, alone, somehow in the company of the Holy Sprit, as though we don’t need each other. If as Girard, says, the notion of the autonomous individual is the “romantic lie” of modernism, then the notion that I can sit here typing away, just me and the holy ghost, is also a lie. While it is true that I can have a “personal” relationship with God through Jesus, it is nevertheless even truer that his reconciling work on the cross makes possible and real, genuine relationships with others so that my faith journey will always be part of another’s faith journey, and theirs mine. The problem of the “We” of the creed is that some have perceived this “We” in an exclusive fashion and justified all sorts of heresy hunting. “We” believe this, you don’t therefore you cannot call yourself Christian. I am not saying this at all. What I am saying is that the “We” of the creed is an invitation to consider what the faith of the church has always been, an epistemological revolution! This faith has been, at times, made into static statements that many have given assent to but they have not allowed it to change their perception of God. Perhaps we should fault the priests, pastors and theologians for this. Or we might just ask ourselves how we might reclaim the faith of the Christian tradition on behalf of the Christian tradition for the benefit of the Christian tradition. Unless we are content to just wander in a miasma “whatever you believe is cool” and thereby cut off all hope for relational sharing and learning, it is important not just to recite the creed but to engage it, not as an end point but as a beginning. We may find statements in the creed that are bothersome. We may find statements in need of radical revisiting and reinterpretation. But throwing the faith of the church out with the institutional dysfunction of the churches is no solution. We live in a time where “we” are being radically challenged as Christians. Not by outsiders, but by those who would have us submit to positions that have long needed reformulation. We have seen the ill effects of people who confess this creed and then go to war or lynch another. We have seen the effects of those who say “We” and mean “my group” and discriminate or exhibit hostility against those they disdain and believe God disdains as well. We ought to challenge them, not by throwing out the creed by asking them how inclusive is this “We.” “I” am not the body of Christ, “we” are the body of Christ. “We” may be only two or three; “we” do not need thousands or millions to shine our light. In fact, thousands or millions may just be a mimetic effect of wanting to be socially included, whereas two or three may well be the place where Jesus does his best work. “We” needs to be rethought. “We” is an invitation not a boundary. “We” is a start not an end. “We” is an affirmation that there would be no “we” were it not for the reconciling work of God in Jesus. “We” is not the mob, “we” is not the majority, “we” is not the top of the hierarchy. “We” are those called to live in the same love we see acted out in Jesus, “we” are those who have known the pain of separation, loneliness, anxiety, fear, heartache and loss and who confess that our God also knows these realities (“he was crucified under Pontius Pilate”). “We” are those who hope beyond history, and yet who hope in space and time. “We” are those who recognize that faith is not knowledge; knowledge doesn’t save, if it does then I am lost! “We” are those who “believe”, that is who trust a God who has shown clearly in the life of Jesus and demonstrated even more clearly in his forgiving death that we are worth an infinite amount to God. “We” are those who hold hands, who reach out hands to others, who clasp hands in prayer and clap hands in joy together. “We” is you and me, reconciled by God. So even where we disagree (and thankfully we do otherwise the whole point of these posts would be dull and boring), we learn from one another. “We” are on a journey. “We” shall overcome…some day.” In the meantime “we” must learn to let go of the tendrils of the lie of individual autonomy and recover the joy of relationships, and for me, this also means relating to those who have gone before, from the first disciples to you. “I” am grateful for “We.”
Posted on: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 12:21:00 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015