Reflections on Easter

As we enter Holy Week, I thought I would post something I wrote during Easter 2007. Some of my views have been clarified, a bit, since, but some I still struggle with. I think the reason I don't struggle quite as much is because I removed myself from the toxic church services I had attended, in the past, for Easter. Easter 2006 was the last time I stepped foot in a Nazarene church. This post was my anticipation of Easter, with the memory of the year prior still in my mind.

I hear people say "Happy Easter," and it bugs me. I asked my husband, "What's so happy about Easter?" Oh yeah...the resurrection. Yet, it seems that while Easter is all about the resurrection, we spend so much time dwelling on the crucifixion.

For those of you who have seen the Passion of the Christ, about an hour and a half or so were spent on the scourging of Jesus. Something like ten seconds were given to the resurrection. Church Easter plays (at least the ones I have seen) make the crucifixion the climax, and the resurrection is more of an addendum.

As a feminist theologian, I cannot help but deal with the meaning of the crucifixion. Was it an atoning sacrifice, foreordained from the beginning of time? Or was it the natural result of living a subversive lifestyle--questioning the powers that be? I am more drawn to the latter. A quote by Nancy Bedford, in one of my classes, was something to this effect: Jesus died the death of a terrorist. If you are on the side of the government, you are a solider. If you go against the government, you are a terrorist. I found this rather profound, particularly in light of the current U.S. situation.

Funny how churches spend so much time on Easter (particularly the crucifixion), but spend so little time looking at the life lived by Jesus--the people he hung out with, the sermons he preached, etc. How different would churches be if these things were given attention and taken seriously?

Last year, Easter was very painful for me. I had just studied atonement theories pretty extensively, and I saw validity in the critique of many feminist theologians. We are obsessed with the blood and violence of the cross; we are obsessed with sacrifice. All too often, these values of sacrifice, denial, and even violence are passed on as virtuous--particularly to women.

I expressed this concern--about how Easter is so bloody--to my mother. Her reply was, "Well, it's an historical event; it really happened." True. (or at least I believe it to be) Yet, I also reminded her that the way Jesus died was not special. It was the way they killed criminals during that day. (see above, as to why Jesus was viewed a criminal) Thus, it wasn't like they made the point to beat Jesus extra hard. It's just the way things were done. Seriously, if we think Jesus died an unjust death--died for doing nothing--isn't it likely that a lot of other people died unjust deaths, too? Isn't it possible that the men on the crosses next to Jesus were also unjustly killed?

So, what does this all mean? For me, the event of the cross cannot be singled out or be given more meaning than the other events in the life of Jesus. It doesn't make sense if you don't look at the entire life and ministry of Jesus to see why Jesus was such a threat to the governing structure. The life of Jesus has just as much (or more) meaning than the event of the cross.

Yet, it still remains that Jesus was crucified. However, Jesus was also resurrected--raised from the dead. Here, I side with the Christus Victor view of the atonement. This view stresses that in the death of Jesus, Jesus was sort of a trickster--making the powers of death and injustice think that they had won. Jesus did not retaliate--hurl insults, lash out violently, etc. However, in the resurrection, Jesus gives us hope that death and injustice will ultimately not prevail; they are not the final word.

I think one of the basic elements of human existence is suffering*. We all suffer, to varying degrees, no doubt. However, I find it strangely comforting that God, in the incarnation, chose to become human and therefore experienced suffering.

The message of the resurrection--one of hope, justice, and peace--is one that especially speaks to the situation the United States is in. It also speaks to those worldwide who are victims of governmental injustice (by the U.S. and others), economic injustice, and social injustice. May we not give undue attention to the cross this Easter, but rather embrace the hope of the resurrection.

(After writing this, it feels like an Easter sermon. Oddly, I'm not sure how this would be received at the churches in which I have been a part. But it's this message that gets me excited.)

*I should clarify that suffering seems to be an unavoidable part of human life, as a result of the sinful world in which we live. It should not, however, be a goal of life--something we seek out or feel makes life more virtuous.

Community and Communion

I have written, more than once, about how important community is to me. In spite of any criticism I have regarding my church congregation, I have tried to re-emphasize that it is my community. My small group is my community. For so long, my life lacked any sort of community, so I especially treasure the community I have now.

Another thing I appreciate about my congregation is the weekly observance of Communion. I'm not particularly sacramental, in that I don't find a mysterious, spiritual meaning in the "sacraments." However, I love taking Communion each week. Growing up, Communion was only observed, at most, once per quarter.

The way we take Communion at my current church is also special, to me. In the religious tradition in which I was raised, Communion was only observed, at most, once per quarter--four times per year. It was administered to us, as we sat in our pew and passed a silver tray of wafers and individual cups (that look oddly similar to mini shot glasses). It was such a passive process.

College was the first time I experienced Communion by intinction. I recall being moved as I watched nearly a thousand members of my university community stand up, walk to the servers, and partake of the elements. The visibility of the community was overwhelming, to me, at that time.

This is the same way we observe Communion at my local church, and I love it. I love witnessing each person going forward, holding out their hands to receive the bread, and dipping it into the wine. I love watching some make the sign of the cross. I love the active role of Communion, where people get up, move, and take the body and blood of Jesus.

I view Communion as the "common meal." As everyone gets up and goes forward, they are eating the meal, to which they have been invited. The invitation is open--no special rules. You must only come and eat.

There are images throughout the Bible where people are eating together. It was a social activity; it was an activity that showed friendship and hospitality as well. I appreciate how the congregation, the Body of Christ, gets up and moves as we all come to eat, together. I love the sense of community I feel when I see all off the people coming forward, and the inclusion I feel when I hold out my hands, and am given "the body of our Lord Jesus Christ" and then"the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ."

I am not a pro on eucharistic theology--whether or not, or how, Christ's real presence is in the Communion elements. However, what I do know is that the community is seen and strengthened when taking the common meal, the Lord's Supper, Communion.

Debriefing on Church

Church should not cause me more anxiety. I went to church today, since I hadn't been since before Christmas. And I left discouraged, frustrated, and sad.

Problems with the national church body?

I was impressed that our pastor actually mentioned what's going on in Haiti. He even fit in pictures of televangelists (including Pat Robertson) to show who is *not* necessarily a "super fan" of Jesus. (our sermon series is about being an "over the top fan.") Heck, I was even impressed that he gave information about Lutheran disaster relief, as sometimes we have been directed to some other Christian non-profit. Yet, when giving information about Lutheran disaster relief he said, "For as many problems as our national church body has, this is something they do really well." No denomination is perfect; I get that. But to publicly call out the denomination (when no praise is ever offered), rubbed me the wrong way. And at that point, it was hard for me to really engage what was going on. I just kind of checked out.

Is God's grace really enough?

We sang a worship song that said, "Remember your people, remember your children, remember your promise, oh God. Your grace is enough...your grace is enough for me." During the line of remember your people, remember your children, all I could think of was the pictures I have seen of Haiti and the faces behind the tragedy. I sang those words as a prayer for these people. But is God's grace really enough? That sounds like such a privileged theology. Grace doesn't feed people, heal their wounds, or provide them with clean drinking water. I don't have the whole theodicy question answered, but rather than celebrating God's grace, right now I am clinging to the hope that God is with the victims and is suffering with them.

Other thoughts

I am starting to wonder why my church is Lutheran. Why stay Lutheran when there is little involvement in the denomination, and the only sign of being Lutheran is the words Lutheran ELCA on the sign out front? I am not saying they should leave the denomination over some petty difference. If they left the ELCA, I would likely find a new church. But what are the reasons for their association with the ELCA? What are the benefits? As much as I would like to say denominations don't matter; they do. That isn't to say that salvation is exclusive to certain denominations. It's not. However, denominations allow a group of churches to accomplish so much more; to organize and cooperate with one another. Why does my church choose to associate with the ELCA when a lot of people probably couldn't tell you what ELCA stands for, when the churchwide assembly was, who the presiding bishop is, and what Lutheran theology is. I know, not everyone will be a Lutheran expert. But why does my church choose to say associated with the ELCA rather than, say, the Willow Creek Association? I don't know.

This has made me feel so discouraged. I have, for some time, looked online for other Lutheran churches in the area. The number of ELCA churches seem few. Up here, LCMS and WELS seem more widespread. Plus, leaving scares me. I have a small group that has become my community and my friends. If it is not close, it's harder to make myself go. And it's easy to get lost in the search and just give up.

I know this post isn't highly theological or academic. But what it is, is real. I needed to sort of debrief on my experience at church, this morning, in hopes that maybe it would ease my anxieties, quell my anger, and calm me down.

I Am Not a Practical Theologian

I am a theologian. That sounds pretentious, but it's what I do, and it's what I want to do with the rest of my live. It is my intended vocation. It is my passion. I love theology.

I define theology as, "Attempting to speak faithfully about God in a way that is life-giving and liberating to all of creation." The criteria that theology must be life-giving and liberating is a non-negotiable to me. If Jesus came to bring life and to set people free (in a myriad of ways), then theology must reflect this.

I do not consider myself a practical theologian. Admittedly, I am sometimes guilty of scoffing at "practical theologians" or those who receive "practical ministry" degrees. That's not the right attitude. I know. However, I truly do not consider myself a practical theologian in the technical sense of the word.

However, in spite of this, I do care about how theology is affects people's lives. I often find myself asking "So what?" Sitting around thinking about "God," and not rooting that thought in that which is revealed in Jesus seems pointless and self-indulgent. I have no interest in philosophical theology that is rooted in theory and assumptions with no real application.

See, theology is more than just a cerebral exercise between us and God. Our theology has implications for us, those around us, and the world. Perhaps this is why doing theology in community is an attractive option. We all have stories; all of our stories are different. Theology intersects the story of God with our stories, and the more stories we include in that, the more we can ensure that theology is, indeed, life-giving and liberating. Not just for you; not just for me--for all of creation.

When our theology proclaims an eschatological vision of the future that is void of any concern for the here and now, we are apt to forget about the fragility and giftedness of creation. When our theology promotes a view of the atonement that promotes sacrifice as the highest virtue, we are sending the wrong (and dangerous!) message to women experiencing domestic violence. When our god-talk is male-centered all the time, we are perhaps alienating the girl whose father molests her. When our theology claims faith in God eradicates sickness and promises healing, we are sending a confusing message to those who have prayed for healing and have received none. When our theology is based on view of humanity that promotes heterosexism and views homosexuals as "sinful," we are failing to honor our sisters and brothers, by failing to honor that they, too, are made in the image of God.

I am not a practical theologian. However, I do contend that it is imperative that we consider how our theology is heard or read by others. What message does it send to those around us? How does it affect other humans, and ultimately the world?

Theology is a powerful thing. Bad theology has the ability to hurt, wound, and destroy. However, theology-done-rightly has the potential to empower, heal, and liberate. Which one will your theology be?

Who is Jesus?

I remember the day I became a feminist. I was in a systematic theology class during my junior year of college. This picture was passed around, and reactions were solicited:

The picture might be a bit hard to see, but it is Jesus, portrayed as a bare-breasted woman, hanging on a cross.

The reaction from one older, male student stood out to me. As we all talked about women's oppression and Jesus' identification with it, he said, "Women are not oppressed in the church." That was it. That was the moment. Right there.

I responded to the student, Tom, and said, "How can you say women are not oppressed by the church when there are some churches where women can't even speak, let alone preach." I'm sure I said other stuff that day, and women's oppression by the church has become even clearer to me.

Really, though, this conversation was larger than Tom's feeling that women were not oppressed by the church. It was about the image of God Tom, and others, have in their heads. I am certain Jesus' being portrayed as a woman created even greater irritation and unsettled feelings in Tom. However, I can't help but wonder if there would have been similar reactions to a picture of Jesus that strayed from the pretty, white Jesus with soft, wavy hair.

In the class for which I am a TA, we looked at various images of Jesus, which by the nature of faith, are various images of God. Here are some examples of how Jesus has been portrayed in art, over the centuries and throughout the world:

These are just a few of the vast number of images. Some critics might suggest this is making God into our own image, rather than us being made into God's. However, Jesus identified with humanity--all of humanity. He sides with the oppressed, for in the crucifixion, he identified with those who have faced persecution and death. Jesus knows our struggles, and the representation of Jesus can take on many forms. Jesus is the battered woman. Jesus is the gay teenager who is fearful of coming out and who faces ridicule from his peers. Jesus is the poor, working mother. Jesus is the man who struggles with the pressures of being a "real man" and providing for his family. Jesus is.

ELCA CWA and Human Sexuality

The pastor of my church finally has responded to the ELCA's actions on human sexuality. Below is his letter. Below that is my response to him, as I felt it was important for him to know I appreciated him bringing this position to light, but also that we were not in agreement. (I fear more people, than not, agree with his stance.

9/16/2009

To my dear Joy! family,

During the Churchwide Assembly (August 17-23, 2009) of our denomination, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), many decisions with wide-ranging impacts were made. Over one thousand delegates from around the country, pastors and lay members, gathered to vote on various proposals. They approved a resolution that puts us in “full-communion” with the United Methodist Church. Funding and strategies were approved around the issues of HIV and AIDS as well as fighting Malaria in sub-Saharan Africa. It was, however, the issue of sexuality that provided the most outside attention and certainly the most press coverage.

A social statement called “Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust” was approved by a two- thirds requirement. Social statements are documents that attempt to provide an analysis and interpretation of an issue through theological and ethical perspectives in order to offer guidance.

This document addresses everything from a basic Lutheran theological approach to social issues to the blessing of our sexuality and the abuse of sexuality. In a section named “Lifelong monogamous same-gender relationships” the document points out that within the ELCA people are not of one mind regarding the issues around homosexuality. While it does not actually take a definitive stand, it encourages people to respect each other in their deliberations, decisions and convictions. It is simply a statement and does not require any action by churches.

Some other important resolutions were approved regarding the standards for rostered leaders which includes pastors. The wording of the central resolution is as follows:

RESOLVED, that the ELCA commit itself to finding a way for people in such publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships to serve as rostered leaders of this church.

The phrase “finding a way” is significant. First, there is currently not a generally accepted means for providing an accountable covenant (civil or religious), such as there is through marriage. In order that there might be such a covenant the assembly also passed a resolution to “find a way” for that to be possible. It is unclear how this will happen.

The other resolution that is important to know about is that congregations will be allowed to decide for themselves if they will call rostered leaders in same-sex relationships. If a congregation, bound by its conscience did not want to call a homosexual pastor in a committed, accountable relationship, it would not be required to do so. The resolution simply makes it possible, but at this point the means by which

this will all happen is not in place.

How do these decisions impact Joy! Lutheran Church? In a practical sense it doesn’t change anything at Joy!. Sometime in the future, if it chose to do so, Joy! could call a homosexual pastor in a “publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous” relationship, without losing its status as a congregation of the ELCA. This would be an option, but it would not be required. Homosexual pastors have been able to serve in ELCA

congregations in the past, but like single heterosexual pastors, they are required to be celibate.

During the past several years we have not joined the ELCA’s conversation about these matters. It may have been good to have raised this issue before the Assembly’s historic vote, but we didn’t. For my part, having come to Joy! in the midst of upheaval, I believed there were more important issues to address in order to clarify and carry out our mission into the future.

As for me, these decisions have brought up some conflicting feelings as well as some important convictions that I would like to share with you.

• First of all, I know that I cannot please everyone with my views and that no matter what I say, someone will be unhappy. My purpose in writing this letter is not to upset anyone; rather it is to inform you so that we can have the necessary dialog.

• I have had gay and lesbian friends and acquaintances that I have cared for deeply. We have shared life and faith in meaningful ways. I can’t help but think of them…of their gifts, struggles and faith. One of our stated core values says that we will “Accept each person as they are.” My hope is that we mean what we say. I also hope and expect that none of us will remain “as we are” when we encounter and live in the transforming power of God through this faith community.

• While I have wrestled with these issues through the years I remain within the general orthodoxy of the church which states that homosexuality is sin. For me it means that I will not preside at the blessing of a same-gendered union or support the hiring of a homosexual pastor in a committed relationship at Joy!. Please understand that this is not a mere moralization, but a view shaped by the church, scripture and theology. Having been a pastor in the ELCA for 20 years now, I have listened to the arguments of those who are celebrating these decisions. Many are friends and teachers who have, with honesty and integrity, also wrestled with these issues. While I am not convinced that the church’s teaching for two thousand years should be overturned, I will continue to engage in the conversation. I trust that my friends and teachers will also.

• I am concerned that we have made sexual sins the greater sins and among sexual sins we’ve made same gender sex the greatest sin. Scripture doesn’t provide a hierarchy of sin. Any honest look at our sexual thoughts and actions will show all of us our brokenness. Because sin distorts our relationship with God and the image of God in us, we are all called to confession and repentance. “…all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus” (Romans 3:23-24).

• I have lived with my friends, teachers, Bishops, pastors and lay leaders in the ELCA for 20 years now. I have not always agreed with the decisions made or the processes followed, but I have chosen to stay in relationship with them. I trust that God’s will is done somehow in the mess of our daily living and difficult decisions as the church. So the question is, “What will we do now?”

I suggest that we strive to move forward with the mission, initiatives and goals that God has led Joy! to fulfill. While we prayerfully consider what all of this might mean or not mean to our future, let’s not move away from our central focus or do anything to hurt the Joy! community. I would be sorry that anyone would leave Joy! because of the assembly’s vote, but I understand that it might happen. My invitation to you is to join together and focus on our mission to “reach our neighbors with Christ’s radical love so that all our lives are changed.”

I caution you to share accurate information from reliable sources rather than passing on assumptions and rumors. The fabric of our community is at stake. Please include me in your conversations and know that I will be glad to meet with you about any concerns. My email address is ___________ and the church office phone number is ________. If you would like to look at the resolutions that were passed by the ELCA Churchwide Assemble go to www.elca.org.

We are blessed to be together at this time in our congregation’s history. We have the opportunity to witness to the world around us God’s most precious gift…his one and only Son.

May the peace of Christ be with you always!

Pastor Scott

My response:

Thank you for your letter regarding the actions on human sexuality, as taken at the ELCA Church Wide Assembly. I closely followed the CWA, as it was happening, and I was hoping you would address these actions, as I think it's important for the congregation to know what is going on in the denomination-at-large. Although our responses and positions differ regarding this denominational legislation, I am thankful there is room for all opinions, as we seek to radically love--and not merely tolerate--all of God's children.

Again, thanks for your words.

Peace,

Heather

Responding so peacefully to something I believe in strongly does not come naturally to me. I hope I made it clear, without being abrasive, of where I stand on the issue. As if it even matters.

September 11

**Written 9-13-2001, two days after the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center**

This whole time of tragedy has truly affected me more than I would have ever anticipated. It has me thinking a lot about so many different things, and there is nothing simple about it.

My sentiments vary from that of the typical american. Of this, I am convinced. Let me start by saying that the acts of violence have been truly horrendous. They are TERRIBLE, and among all of my thoughts, not one is denying the horrible nature of this tragedy.

However, like I said, my sentiments are very atypical of your average american. Not once have I felt patriotic during all of this. I don't necessarily feel that my COUNTRY was attacked, nor do I know if it is a time for nationalism. I think we should hurt just as much regardless of who was killed. Also, I think often the United States arrogantly totes itself around like the Mighty USA that is invincible, and somewhere people are laughing that 4 plane crashes nearly brought us down, if even for a day.

The obvious question lately has been, "now what?" A popular consensus is to launch a military attack or to hunt down Osama Bin Laden and kill him. First of all, it is too early to be too sure who has done this. Second of all, as a pacifist and conscientious objector, and most of all a Christian, I never think that violent attacks, whether against nations or individuals, are appropriate.

So, now what? Of course I say pray for the victims and their families. That is highly important, but to simply end at that is a cheap answer. It is like we simply want to be detached from everyone's problems. However, Christ presents us with a very radical answer-- "You have heard an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth...but I tell you to love your enemies and pray for those who hate you." Wow...love your enemies...pray for those who HATE you, rather than perpetuating the hate. That is radical. To try to administer justice through violence is believing that our human capabilities can somehow bring resolution. However, to put it into the hands of God through prayer and to love, even when you have been wronged, is showing that we, in our human-ness, are inadequate and that God can bring justice in a completely new way, other than violence.

My prayer: Heavenly Father. Thank you for the day you have given us. Thank you for being the same God you are today that you were Monday, before the chaos began. May we learn to praise you and give thanks, amidst the tragedy. Please, bring your spirit of comfort to us today. Fill us with your love. Fill us so that we, too, may love with your love. Help us look to your Word, knowing that we can only love our enemies with your help. Give us your peace, and help us pursue peace. Guide our leaders to make the best decisions according to your will. Break through the hatred and pain. Unite us not only as a country, but as a world. Open us up to learn from this and to receive and administer love, grace, mercy and forgiveness. We thank you God for all you do. And it is in the name of your Son who, too, was the victim of hate in violence that we pray this. Amen