Thursday, December 29, 2016

Religion in the Age of Secularism

Religion in the United States is gradually losing an ongoing battle with secularism. A recent study by Pew Research not only shows that people identified as non-religious are growing, but they are in fact becoming even more secular. The same organization made a study to find out why people were leaving their faith tradition. While everyone’s experience is unique in the decision, the study was able to find some common ground in the responses. The number one reason being a lack of belief, led many to abandon their faith. The study drew this response from many that referred to this experience or decision as, growing out of the faith, the use of common sense or logic, and science as the ultimate factor that led them away from belief. Other reasons included a dislike of organized religion, no need for religion, or religion being too much like a business.

It is clear that we live in a secular age and studies like this one only suggest it is growing in the United States. Much of the response from religious groups however has been counter-productive. Often, I read headlines in articles that proclaim religion is being persecuted or that people of faith are being harassed. (Must of them from Catholic sources) This sort of response does not help religion as a whole, nor does it help people of faith. It further antagonizes religion and secularism by placing them at a contradiction. Pope Francis constantly reminds us of the welcoming response Christians should offer atheists. After all, he even claimed that atheists that followed their conscience are welcome in heaven too!

Image result for Jacob struggle with GodReligion and secularism are in contention with one another because secularism has leveled the playing field. In the past, religion had always the upper hand simply by being married to divine rule. Now, in democratic states, religion is no longer able to exercise this type of influence. Naturally, religion is losing some of its power and influence and this has shown in how it communicates beliefs to people, leading many to leave their faith traditions. More so, in a postmodern age, any single narrative is not only questioned but abandoned for being too rigid and simplistic.

Instead of focusing too much on the problem of why so many are fleeing Church pews and exchanging them for just about anything, a better approach is to propose an alternative for a response. Notice I did not mention solution because firstly, that would be too overconfident but mainly because it is a suggestion. First, religion does not have to be at opposition with secularism. This might sound like a contradiction itself—but I believe firmly is not. For religions to exist they must co-exist with other religions and this includes secularism. Religion must dialogue with secularism and find common-ground. Secularism for instance, does not abandon ethics and morality. Christians can speak of ethics and morality from a Christian point of view. An absence of religion does not mean an absence of good—sometimes the biggest obstacle for dialogue and understanding is semantics!

Most importantly, people of faith must really ask the question: Why do I want to pass down my faith? I believe firmly that religion is most authentic, and therefore attractive, when it is radical. This word gets a bad rep but it is used intentionally here. There is an aspect of religion that is crazy—but crazy for love and good. To love those who hate me? To pray for those who want to hurt me? What else would you call this type of behavior—stupid and crazy! But faith demands this from us. People are drawn to this type of religion. They recognize its authenticity, they see the fruits that it brings, they admire it, and they yearn to be moved by it.  


And so in this era of secularism people of faith can dialogue with it and find common ground and in the process find out that alienation is not an option. Instead, people of faith can find that in dialogue partners are made and that Jesus did not close the doors on those of little faith, but was harsher with those who called themselves self-righteous. But people of faith can also attract by example. By living lives so radically that it leads other people not only to see the good in religion but to partake in the journey of faith as well. 

Saturday, December 17, 2016

The Cost of Discipleship in Luke: A Radical and Daily Commitment, and a Hatred of Possessions



Luke’s Gospel originates approximately around 80 CE and 90 CE, the same time in which Matthew’s gospel was written. After The Jewish War of 66-70 CE, Christians spread throughout the Roman Empire. Luke finds himself writing to these highly diversified communities that had survived the war and had gone into exile. Among these groups, Luke addresses a particular group called ‘God-Fearers’ who followed Jewish beliefs and practices. (Ludwig, 164) Luke, like Matthew, addresses the Hellenistic Jewish Christian mission to the Gentile world, but is particularly concerned with Gentile Christians. (Ludwig, 184) Throughout his gospel, Luke offers numerous passages on discipleship. As with all gospel writers, the context in which the writer finds himself in shapes his writing and therefore the meaning he tries to convey. For instance, Mark finds himself writing after the destruction of the Temple in 60 CE to a community in distress. Because of this, he stresses the helplessness of disciples to remind his readers of the hidden glory of God. Mark’s eschatological revelation is concealed from the disciples. Instead, Luke writes for Hellenistic Christians spread throughout the Roman Empire who are no longer concerned with the parousia, or second coming. Luke’s community is not primarily concerned with eschatological purposes. Because of this, there is a theological shift for Luke’s community. Instead, Luke’s community is concerned with the semeron (this day or daily affairs). (Plessis, 62) Due to the context in which Luke finds himself and the present condition his community faces, discipleship is more of a daily commitment, an existential decision for Luke. (Plessis, 58)
The structure of Luke’s gospel is also particular. Luke uses three sources to write his gospel. The first, also found in Matthew’s gospel, is material borrowed from Mark’s gospel. (Ludwig, 183) The second source can be seen when Luke, like Matthew, uses an independent source of Jesus’ sayings called ‘Q’. In the text Luke also provides his own independent, and third, source, ‘L’ not found in Mark or Matthew. (Ludwig, 183) It is essential to point out here that the Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles are to be considered two volumes of a single literary project. (Johnson, 187) The author wrote both volumes with the intention of it to be part of one single message: Salvation History. The outline of Luke’s gospel can be divided into the following: Prologue (Lk.1: 1-4); Infancy Narratives (1:5—2:52); Preparation of Jesus’ ministry (3:1—4:13); Jesus’ ministry in Galilee (4:14—9:50); Journey to Jerusalem (9:51—19:27); Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem (19:28—21:38); Passion of Jesus (22:1—23:56); and the Resurrection of Jesus (23:56b—24:53). (Perkins, 215) 
            As with any literary analysis of a text, a term must be seen through the lens of a major theme or motif. For instance, Luke’s gospel has Jerusalem as one theme. This theme serves as a geographical structure for the entire gospel. The center of the story is the city of Jerusalem, the infancy narratives lead to the presentation of Jesus at the temple (2:22); the climax of the temptation narrative is reached at Jerusalem (4:9); the transfiguration and end of the Galilean ministry prepare Jesus to go to Jerusalem, and even the resurrection appearances take place in the environs of Jerusalem. (Johnson, 194) Naturally, this theme affects how Luke perceives discipleship. As an example, Jesus’ sayings on discipleship in Luke 9:23-27; 9:57-62; 14:25-35 (under consideration later) are substantially shaped by this theme.  We now turn to these passages.

The Meaning of Discipleship in the Text
Luke 9:23-27; 9:57-62; 14:25-35
            Luke touches on the theme of discipleship explicitly in Luke: 9:23-27; 9:57-62; 14:25-35. From these three passages it is clear Luke intends to communicate the hardship of discipleship. In all three passages Luke highlights nuances in the conditions and demands for discipleship not found in the other synoptic gospels, indicating the emphasis he places in the difficulty of the demands of this world. In the following section these passages will be carefully studied to further develop the notion of discipleship in Luke’s gospel—and how it can be considered radical.
Related imageLuke 9:23-27 is the first passage in his gospel to address the conditions of discipleship. The pericope is borrowed from Mark and it also appears in Matthew. In Luke’s version however, there is an addition in v23 not found in Mark or Matthew: ‘daily.’ This first pericope that outlines the radical dedication to follow Jesus to the point of ‘denying oneself’ is shaped by Luke’s meaning of discipleship, a daily and existential commitment. (Plessis, 58) The stipulation clarifies that Jesus is not referring to how one is ‘born-again’ or justified before God (as it is with some Pauline-theology) but instead, discipleship requires one to ‘deny oneself’ and to ‘take up his cross’ in a commitment one undergoes daily. (Tanker, 48) This understanding of discipleship as a daily-commitment is echoed in Acts, "Through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God." (Acts 14:22)
The word ‘deny’ in v23 asserts Luke’s radical notion of discipleship. The Hebrew (άπαρνέομαι) can be interpreted in two ways: first as ‘to refuse to recognize or to acknowledge someone’ and second, as ‘to act in a wholly selfless manner.’ (Tanker, 48) The word first used in Mark, and then copied in Matthew and Luke, is used to express the latter. In the passage, deny oneself becomes a way-of-being, it is a demand to place God’s will first, and one’s own second. For Luke, a disciple is someone who constantly (daily) is seeking to place God’s will as his or her priority, above one’s own.
The verse continues to provide the most radical condition of discipleship in the words that follow, ‘take up your cross and follow me,’(v23) which imply a commitment not only to deny one’s will daily, but to do so willing to face even death. This verse found in Mark and Matthew is deliberately placed in all synoptic gospels for the same purpose. The writers are speaking to a group of early Christians and, or, Jews, that had a clear notion and understanding of a death by cross. By placing these words in Jesus’ mouth and equating it to a condition of discipleship, the authors are conveying the message of suffering, and even death, as a result of being a disciple. Luke intentionally places this pericope in the journey narrative. (Luke 9:51—19:44) Jesus gives these requirements for discipleship on his journey to Jerusalem with his own death in mind.  While the disciples are clueless on the literal meaning of this command, (although Jesus reminds them several times in Lk. 9:51; 13:22; 17:11; 19:11, 28) the community Luke addresses is very mindful of the meaning of Jesus’ words. Luke Johnson sums up the intentionality of Luke, ‘this travel motif gives the entire section a dynamic quality and renders more dramatic the calls to discipleship.’ (Johnson, 204) In other words, Jesus invites his disciples to be willing to model what he is about to do, to die on a cross as a means to be a disciple.
The second pericope under consideration is found in Luke 9:57-62. This pericope outlines three conditions to become a ‘follower’ or disciple of Jesus. In Luke 9:23-27 Jesus address his disciples in monologue but in 9:57-62 we find a dialogue between Jesus and three followers-to-be. In the dialogue Jesus harshly rejects the three followers-to-be for different reasons. The afore-mentioned passage serves to reinforce Luke’s radical notion of discipleship yet again.
 Also found in Matthew 8:20, as in Luke 9:57-62, the first follower-to-be precipitately announces his wish to follow Jesus, to which Jesus replies with an extreme call to renouncement of security and well-being as a fundamental requirement of discipleship. In other words, the first condition is the willingness to let go of security as the price of discipleship. (v58) (Plessis, 63) This verse speaks of detachment; to follow Jesus means to not only to embrace the hardship of discipleship, but to renounce our own false sense of security. Then, Jesus invites the next follower-to-be who accepts but places a provision: He needs to bury his father first. Jesus rejects this provision severely by saying ‘let the dead bury their dead, but you go proclaim the Kingdom of God.’ (v60) It was part of Jewish custom to bury the dead, a sign of piety and responsibility. To neglect the dead was an exceptional disgrace at the time. Therefore Jesus’ response was a strong threat to Jewish sentiments. (Hays, 50) This second condition demands both the sacrifice of cultural demands to be a disciple of Jesus, and the willingness to face opposition for it. (Plessis, 63) But the third and last demand is perhaps the most challenging of all three. The third condition found in v63 speaks of a man who declares his wish to become a disciple but then quickly finds a priority over the call—a simple goodbye to his loved ones. Jesus again rejects any excuse, for loved ones come second when one is committed to being a disciple. (Plessis, 63) For Luke’s understanding of discipleship, this is not an excuse. This last verse (v62) also highlights the supremacy of Jesus over Elijah. The verse is reference to a passage found in Elijah 19:20—where Elijah allows his disciple Elisha to kiss his parents goodbye, whereas Jesus sets harder conditions and a more radical degree of commitment for his disciples. (Hays, 53)
Luke continues to develop his radical understanding of discipleship in Luke 14: 25-35. The opening of the passages tells us that Jesus addresses a large crowd and delivers a devastating one-liner. In v26 Jesus claims that a measure of discipleship is to hate family members and even one’s own life. The verse is also found in Matthew 10:47 with nuances in Luke. Perhaps the major difference being that Luke uses hate whereas Matthew expresses it as ‘if you love (them) more than me’ you are not worthy to be a disciple. Another difference is that in Matthew’s version, the condition is given only to the twelve (Matthew 10:1-42), whereas Luke addresses a ‘large crowd’ (v25) that was following him. The passage in Luke is placed strategically after Jesus announces several times his passion and death (Luke 9: 22, 44) serving again as a demand on discipleship. Luke’s notion of discipleship is radical not because it uses hate to delineate the intricacies of an unbearable demand, but because it maximizes the choice on the commitment and allegiance that being a disciple requires. Matthew’s version ‘love more than me’ softens the radical commitment to follow Jesus. While Luke’s word choice of hate dramatically indicates that the decision to follow Jesus places everything at opposition. It is necessary here to explain that Jesus does not intend for his disciples to hate loved-ones, but uses the word to emphasize two things: the choice, and its priority.  Brisson states, ‘Hate may be understood, then, as the call "to choose between" or "to have one's life prioritized accordingly to" that which must be privileged above all other things.’(Brisson, 312) He explains further, “Much of the term is used in the Wisdom tradition, when choosing the "fear" of God necessarily requires its antithesis, the "hatred" of evil, not as a destructive response to evil but as a refusal to offer to evil one's allegiance. (312)  


Luke’s Concern for the Poor

There is a clear theme on the concern for the poor in Luke’s gospel. (Luke 4:18; 6:20-23; 7:36-50; 14:12-14; 15:1-32; 16:19-31; 18:9-14; 19:1-10; 21:1-4) And by the same token condemning those who place their material wealth above God. (Luke 6:24-26; 12:13-21; 16:13-15; 19-31; 18:9-14; 15-25) The calling of disciples includes a verse that Luke uses repeatedly: ‘leave everything.’ Luke’s account to call Peter, John and James as a disciple ends with, ‘so they pulled up their boats to the shore, left everything and followed him.’ (Luke 5, 11) Levi ‘left everything’ (5:28) and rose and followed him. These passages highlight this requirement of discipleship. In Luke 9:23-27, Jesus once again assigns p
ossessions as a detriment to discipleship. In v24 He uses the word profit to associate it with wealth and money. Then, He compares the gaining of wealth to a man who would ‘lose or forfeit himself’ in the world. In the followers-to-be pericope, the first condition is associated with the renouncement of security, and therefore possessions. (Luke 9: 58) Similarly Luke 13:25-35 ends with ‘every one of you 
Image result for the rich young ruler
who does not renounce all his possessions cannot be my disciple.’(v33) Luke places parables after the sayings on discipleship, implying that these are for all disciples to hear. Among them he places Luke 16:9-13, tying wealth with dishonesty and the final premonition in (v13); ‘You cannot serve God and money. But perhaps, the most straightforward tie of the condition to denounce possession to discipleship is found in Luke 18:23, where Jesus meets a wealthy man and invites him to follow him. The condition is simple, ‘sell
all that you have and distribute it to the poor.’ (v22). 
Not only is leaving everything, leaving all, or renouncing all possessions condition of discipleship but it is also the nature of the mission. In Luke 9:1-6, Jesus sends the Twelve in mission, and in v3 he sets a condition for the work, ‘take nothing for the journey, neither walking stick, nor sack, nor food, or money.’ Again, emphasizing the renouncement of possessions, even daily needs! This pericope is mirrored in the sending of the seventy-two in chapter 10. In Luke 10:1-12 Jesus commissions seventy two disciples to go proclaim the Kingdom of God. Yet again, the condition is to ‘carry no money bag, no sack, no sandals.’ (v4)
The disciple and the disciple’s work require a renouncement of possessions. And for Luke the Kingdom of God itself is for those who are poor.  (Luke 6:20) In this verse, Luke departs from Matthew’s ‘poor in spirit,’ (Matthew 5:1) to simple ‘blessed be the poor.’(v20)  It is essential here to clarify that Luke’s Greek has two words for poor: πενής and πτωχός. The former Greek term included the masses who were involved in subsistence living as small peasants, tenant farmers, craftsmen, small traders, and day laborers. The latter Greek term is used to describe the destitute and beggars. Luke always uses the latter as a condition of discipleship, the nature of the mission, and for those who will inherit the Kingdom. (Kraybill, 232)

For Luke, being a disciple is not an easy thing to do, far from it. It is a radical lifestyle. Luke’s attention to discipleship is centered on the commitment that requires you to renounce everything and the existential decision it takes to be able to make this choice daily. The choice is such that it antagonizes loved ones, comfort and security, cultural norms, and even one’s own life. The commitment is such that it embraces persecution and death. Luke’s understanding of discipleship also includes a total dependency on God. An attachment to any other sort of security measure is a threat to this relationship. Hence, Luke places wealth and possessions at an opposition not only to being a disciple, but also as an opposition to the Kingdom itself.

Thursday, November 24, 2016

The Historical Jesus: Who Do You Say that I am?




Jesus and his disciples were on the road to Caesarea Philippi when he asked them, ‘Who do people say I am?’ his disciples replied, ‘some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and still others, one of the prophets.’ Jesus then asked, ‘Who do you say that I am?’ And Peter boldly claimed, ‘You are the Christ.’[1] The story quickly turned sour for what was a moment of recognition for Peter turns into a reproach as Jesus calls him Satan for wanting to convince him to follow his own idea of what a messiah’s fate should be. These two questions Jesus asked his disciples are still echoing throughout history today. In many ways, we can answer these questions like the disciples did or like Peter. On the one hand, there are many voices still today that proclaim who Jesus is just as the disciples offered many opinions; on the other hand, there is Peter’s faith assertion. However, we can declare in faith like Peter that Jesus is Lord and in the next breath want to change Jesus into our own idea of who God should be. The search for the historical Jesus places the question, ‘Who do you say that I am?’ at the center of the search.
John Meier sums up his life work on the value of studying the historical Jesus with the following claims. He asserts that the search for the Jesus of history does attempt to prove faith (for that is impossible.) He points to the value there is in understanding something by taking into account the processes of history. In addition, he asserts that the Jesus of history takes seriously the scandal of the Word made flesh and it helps us to avoid any tendency to evaporate Jesus into a ‘timeless gnostic or a mythic symbol.’ The search for the historical Jesus also prevents us from adopting ideologies that seem to capture his essence—for he is in nature eschatological, an end in itself nor a means to anything else. Finally, Meier claims that all these measures serve as a catalyst for renewing theological thought and Church life.[2] In the effort to see the significance in partaking of the discovery of the Jesus of history let us further four of Meier’s  arguments: mainly that Jesus was shaped by his historical context and the study of the Jesus of history allows us to better know not only who Jesus was historically but also help us better understand his message, that our Christological statements of faith are grounded in the doctrine of the incarnation and by encountering the Jesus of history we are able to fully embrace this mystery, that by searching for historical Jesus we avoid turning Jesus into an ideology, and that the process of searching for historical Jesus serves as a catalyst or life-giving gift to the Church. Jesus’ question, ‘Who do you say that I am?’ finds deeper meanings as we meet Jesus in history.
At the fundamental level, the search for the historical Jesus allows us to simply understand who Jesus was taking fully into consideration his Palestinian-Jewish-first-century context. Often times, this means stripping Jesus of a Christian understanding and inserting him into the Jewish environment where he lived. In The Misunderstood Jew, Amy-Jill Levine lays out the risk of interpreting Jesus’ words and deeds from a Christian perspective. Levine explains there are two risks in doing so, first in that the scriptures may create anti-sematic attitudes, and second in that a neglect of Jesus’ Jewishness fails to take the doctrine of the incarnation seriously.[3] In the effort to answer the question, Who do you say that I am? We may resemble Peter and reflect our own wishes or biases of who we want Jesus to be. Encountering the historical Jesus allows us to reflect on this answer. If we fail to take into account the Jewish context of Jesus, we distort who Jesus is and sustains incorrect notions that are simply not historical. Levine claims these notions of Jesus are still proclaimed from the pulpit today. Beliefs that Jesus was against the law or at least how it was understood at the time, that he was against the Temple as an institution and not simply against its leadership, that he was against the people of Israel and favored Gentiles, that he was a rebel who unlike every other Jew, practiced social justice, that he was the only one to speak to women, to teach non-violent responses to oppression or to care for the poor and marginalized.[4] Often, Christians are too quick to remove Jesus from his place and time in history in order to openly criticize Judaism so that Jesus may stand apart from his object of criticism. By not taking into account Jesus’ historical context we not only create erroneous views but also support them and transmit them.
In the pursuit of the Jesus of history, we are invited to deepen our knowledge on the doctrine of the incarnation. The mystery of the incarnation substantiates all efforts to know the historical Jesus. As Christians, we believe that Jesus was fully human. Many are quick to disregard this doctrine of faith in the fear that it might take away Jesus’ divinity. The value on knowing about Jesus’ human side is evident—it provides a physical method of coming to know Jesus. If historians were to answer the question, ‘Who do you say I am?’ they can answer this question with a lot of degree of certainty. Most scholars would agree that Jesus was a Palestinian Jew who was born in Galilea, he gathered disciples, taught and preached and was great in deeds and actions, the center of his message was the Kingdom of God, and he was put to death because he was considered a threat to Jewish authorities. Without making extraordinary claims, historians could assert on these principles on the life of Jesus. A person of faith however, finds value in stepping into first century Palestine to be able to rejoice in knowing about a loved one. The mystery of the incarnation allows us to see, feel, hear, touch and taste what Jesus himself experienced. The value for a person who seeks to answer, ‘Who do you say that I am?’ in faith, is to get closer to the human Jesus as an act of love and in response to see God-in-all-things that are human.
The process of knowing the Jesus of history not only transforms us personally but it also transforms us as a Church—communally. Meier warns us against tendencies to make of Jesus a timeless gnostic or a mythic symbol or to turn him into an ideology that fits our world-view. This is still a reality today. For many Jesus is reduced to a leftist-communist, a mythological figure, an indifferent deity or a self-soothing idea, not only ignoring Jesus’ personhood but making him an idol in an effort to support a cause. In the same way that we may encounter our own personal biases when we look at the Jesus of the gospels, we can also run into conventional ideologies supported by zealots, dogmatists or enthusiasts that seek to sum Jesus into a single thought. The community of believers, the Church, halts these groups and their tendencies in the process of the search of the Jesus of history. In the beginning of Christianity, these ideologies were much more evident perhaps, emphasizing the divinity and neglecting the humanity of Jesus for instance, or visa-versa. However, they still surface today in different shapes and forms. Meier teaches us that by searching the historical Jesus we encounter his personhood to be eschatological in essence, ‘that is, always pointing farther toward the ultimate meaning of who he is and what it means to be human’. [5]Nothing can sum up who Jesus is or what he stands for—for he is an end-in-it-self and the kingdom is here-but-not-fully-here.
All of these processes are a catalyst and a self-giving gift from and to the Church. It is the faithful who harvest the seeds and they too reap its fruits. The search for the historical Jesus provides individual and communal transformation—it enriches our response to the question ‘Who do you say that I am?’ It encourages the faithful to challenge our initial understandings of who Jesus is according to the gospels in order to destroy the idols we make, it invites us to openly embrace the mystery of the incarnation fully, that we may see Christ in-all-things-human, it provides a powerful tool to resist current ideologies that seek to capsule Jesus into an -ism, and it gives us life by constantly renewing our love and commitment to the journey of knowing and being transformed by Jesus. In our efforts to answer the question, ‘Who do you say that I am? It is not enough that we may declare Jesus is Lord, for we might commit blasphemy in our next breath. Instead, the question demands a serious look at our declarations of faith, it motivates us to study their origin, it encourages us to challenge our initial understanding of scripture and in the process it transforms us and refines our notion of the Jesus we know in faith.


The Gospel According to Paul: Justification in Faith and Life in the Spirit




One cannot speak of Pauline theology without taking into consideration two major facts about Paul’s life: first his conversion and second his vocation prior to this conversation. It is in the radical encounter with the risen Lord on the road to Damascus that Paul begins his mission, making this event the starting point of departure for Paul’s ministry and Christian theological
thought. Paul believed in the resurrection of the dead prior to this event and the encounter with the risen Lord only confirmed this belief and it affirmed for him that Jesus was the messiah (Ludwig, 123). His violent conversion-experience marked him for life, but Paul’s personality and work prior to this event also provide insights on his theology. In Acts of the Apostles and in some of the letters attributed to him, we come to know that Paul is a Jew (2 Cor. 11:22) and moreover an educated Jew on religious matters. Paul is well versed in the Torah and a zealot proclaiming it. (Gal 1:14). His upbringing, education and life-work put him in a paradox with his encounter with the risen Lord. This irony is clear. Paul traversed the same towns as Jesus, yet never met him, he persecuted Christians and then is called to be a Christian apostle and he was a zealot for the law and now encounters the risen Lord that stands above it. This paradox speaks to much of Paul’s opposing themes in his writings. Paul uses juxtapositions in order to make intellectual claims. In many ways, his writings reflect the paradox he experienced in life. In his writings, he speaks of law and grace, Jew and gentile, circumcised and uncircumcised, life in the flesh and life in the spirit, death and new creation, slavery and freedom, fruits of the spirit and fruits of the flesh, reconciliation and alienation, salvation in faith and salvation in works. Of all of these opposite themes that are product of Paul’s theological thought, two stand above all: Justification through faith in Christ and life in the spirit are the two fundamental themes that Paul uses in all of his writings and form part of his main theological thought. 


Justification through Faith in Christ
Paul sews a theological thread throughout his entire correspondence in the New Testament on the theme of justification through faith in Christ. It is in his the letter to the Romans that we can find Paul’s gospel in its entirety and his argument for justification laid out elegantly. First, it is important to understand what Paul means by justification. The word comes out of the context of a law court and
could be translated today as acquittal (Ludwig, 129). Often, justification is also used interchangeably with salvation. It is also fundamental to understand Paul’s outlook on the human race, since the argument found in Romans is a complete theological position on the history of salvation culminating in Christ. For Paul, sin is a religious and not a moral act (Johnson, 309). Sin is a turning away from God’s will, it is a life orientation, a rebellion, a boasting, a self-aggrandizement and Paul sums up this state-of-being by often referring to it as living according to the flesh. In short, it is our human condition to be sinful and because of it we are in need to be justified. In fact in Romans, Paul claims, ‘There is no one just, not one, there is no one who understands, there is no one who seeks God. All have gone astray; all alike are worthless; there is not one who does good, (there is not) even one” (Rom. 3:10-12). The argument then proceeds, because all have sin, Jew and gentile alike, all have access to justification through faith in Jesus. The Law alone cannot save. Through justification all are made righteous and reconciled with God (5:10). The letter continues with a powerful and yet simple message, justification through faith in Christ transforms. This gift we have received has real implications in our life and it demands change, ‘for the love of God has been poured into our hearts,’ (5:5) so that we may put to death the sins of the body (8:13) leading to a newness in life grounded on radical hope (8:22). The change that comes as a product of justification through faith in Jesus in the life of a believer, Paul calls life in the spirit. 

The response to the Romans to live in faith is far from a superficial assertion. Paul’s convocation to live in the spirit as one who is reconciled with God has ethical dimensions. Paul tells the Romans that this transformation must be revealed in works. In other words, there must be clear signs of Christian living that demonstrate a life lived in the spirit. As this transformation seeks what is perfect, ‘Do not conform yourselves to this age but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and pleasing and perfect’ (Rom 12:2). It is here that Paul mirrors directly Jesus’ gospel according to Matthew in the works of salvation (Getty, 224). His culmination of the life in the spirit as it is lived in the Christian life is found in Romans chapters 12-15 and it is summed up by the blessing of all, especially those who persecute you. He commands Romans to love one another in a genuine love, in a love that is mutual and perfect (12:9-21) for love is the fulfillment of the law (13:10); for a life of those who live in faith is expressed in mutual love and acceptance of one another. (Johnson, 321).

Life According to the Spirit
The life in the spirit, or the life of God, is a powerful theme for Paul. In his correspondence to the Galatians, he argues that the life in the spirit begins with the freedom received by Christ referring to the insignificance and bondage of circumcision (Gal.5:4). Instead, it is faith working through love that sets us free (Gal 5:6). It is here that Paul sums up the life in the spirit by the word agape—a love that builds up and is expressed in joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control (Gal 6:22).
While the letter to the Galatians lays out Paul’s theological thought on the life in the spirit as it begins with freedom in order to serve one another in love, the letter to the Corinthians points out to the dimension of transformation that is demanded when one is committed to the life in the spirit. In the first century AD, Corinth was a metropolis and cosmopolitan society. Jews and gentiles found Christianity appealing for different reasons. As an infant Christian community, some of the challenges they faced were spiritual elitism which led to factionalism (Johnson, 264). The communities overemphasized the powers given by the spirit, causing them to identify themselves by the spiritual gift they had received. Paul’s response is drastic but it provides a clear vision of his theological outlook on Christian life. He demands two things from the Corinthians: first that they transform to be of the same mind (1 Cor. 1:10) and second, that they acquire the mind of Christ (2: 16). Those who accept this calling will put their gifts in service to the entire community, for the primary gift of the spirit is love (1 Cor.13:1-13) and its main manifestation is the building up of the entire community (Johnson, 268).
Pauls’ correspondence to the Galatians and to the Corinthians lay out a theological foundation of the life in the spirit. The life in the spirit as Paul understands it begins with the freedom received by Christ. This freedom is not to be distorted in order to neglect the law and be replaced with self-indulgence, but rather we are set free to serve one another in love. Agape—a love that builds up, is the measurement of our justification, is the measurement of our freedom, and is the measurement of our spiritual gifts.
We can see two real examples of Christian living in how Paul responds pastorally to his communities. In Corinth, the dispute between those Paul called ‘strong’ and those he called ‘weak’ demand a communal response. While Paul sides with the ‘strong’ supporting their thinking (a thinking that rejects being subject to idols), he criticizes them as spiritual solipsists and reminds them that to live in the spirit should lead them to build up the ‘weak’ (Johnson, 268). However, in Galatians, Paul speaks to the personal response to the life in the spirit. The Galatians’ aggrandizement attitude toward freedom led them to antinomianism—the notion that they were saved by faith alone (Johnson, 299). Paul urges the Galatians to retract from perverting their freedom gained by Christ.  This response is personal speaking to the conscience of the individual. 

Implications in Ministry
            The themes of justification through faith in Christ and life in the spirit that compose Paul’s gospel mirror the gospel of Jesus Christ. Paul boldly claims that a transformative relationship with the risen Lord should come first, and without it the Christian life is dead. But the gospel also has implications in our personal and communal lives so that we may hope in Christ and serve and build up our communities. 
The first practical application of understanding Paul’s theology in my ministry is that it gives me the ability to be in dialogue with non-Catholic. Many Christians receive a particular understanding of salvation through faith in Christ. For instance, they often emphasize the individual journey of the Christian faith and often base it on the Letter to the Romans. I believe my role and response in dialogue is to invite Christians that embrace this theology to see Paul fully. This reflection allows me to re-direct this understanding of Paul to the demands of justification as we see in Romans, First Corinthians and Galatians. Not only to challenge Christians of all denominations to reflect in the personal relationship with the risen Lord, but to point to the measurement of this relationship in the building up of their communities—starting with the present community that they find themselves in. 
This new understanding from which to see Paul speaks to my own faith deeply as well. The theological dispute between Catholics and Protestants on salvation becomes now a personal calling to enrich the conversation further. By studying Paul, the claim that salvation is through faith alone must be supported by the entire thought of Paul’s theology not only in Romans but also throughout all correspondence attributed to him. The claim of salvation through faith alone must respond to what Paul calls life in the spirit. Justification through faith in Jesus must also answer to how Paul describes the Christian life that originates from living the life in the spirit. In other words, the measurement of justification—must be what Paul calls agape, a love that builds an entire community. 
            Finally, the Christian journey is not merely empty intellectual and theological discussion but a personal commitment to live to these ideals. Understanding Paul in a new light pose the question of whether I am living up to the standard of what he describes as the Christian life. Paul utters Jesus and therefore he reiterates the challenge to love enemies as a clear sign of what it means to be Christian. This statement is a challenge to anyone whoever comes across it. In my own life, to love enemies as Paul refers to it by addressing the Romans, Corinthians and Galatians, has a lot to do with my interactions with those who I do not agree with. As Paul describes intentionally, Greek and Jew belong to the Body of Christ and all are called as a community to do both: establish and hope for the kingdom of God. 





Thursday, August 4, 2016

Teaching Religious Education in the Catholic School: 5 Methods to Teach Religious Education in any Content Area


The mission of the Catholic school is to carry out the mission of the Catholic Church. Therefore, the mission of the Catholic school is to evangelize, through catechism and the instruction of the faithful.

Now, while the methods in which Catholic schools have partaken on the task of catechesis and evangelization is broad throughout history, for the intention of this article we will only outline the current means of catechesis as they pertain to the Catholic High School in the 21st century.

So how exactly does the Catholic Church addresses the role of evangelization in the Catholic school? Gravissimum Educationis provides an answer, through the maturity of faith, the participation in the sacramental life and the development of a personal calling for the contribution of the common good in society.

The Church continued to refine her language to describe the role of evangelization in the educational setting. In 1971, the United States Bishop wrote, To Teach as Jesus Did, a document that outlines the mission of Catholic schools in the Unites States. The bishops declared the mission of the Catholic school to be rooted in proclaiming the gospel, living in community and fellowship, and the service to humankind.

But the outline of the mission of Catholic schools will be incomplete without reference to one contemporary document that serves as the consummation of all previous documents. The Holy See Teaching on Catholic Schools is a document that is essential and a point of reference for the mission of a Catholic School in the 21st century.

Holy See Teaching on Catholic Schools designates the following five marks as essential for a Catholic school:  1. Inspired by Supernatural Vision, 2. Founded on Christian Anthropology, 3. Animated by Communion and Community, 4. Imbued with a Catholic Worldview, 4. a) Search For Wisdom and Truth, 4. b) Faith Culture and Life, 5. Sustained by Witness and of Teaching.


In the characteristic identified as Imbued with a Catholic Worldview, The Holy See highlights the need for R.E.A.C (Religious Education Across the Curriculum) in every Catholic School. The Holy See articulates what the characteristic entails, ‘Catholicism should permeate not just the class or period of catechism or religious education, or the school’s pastoral activities, but the entire curriculum.’ The document continues, ‘instruction should be authentically Catholic in content and methodology across the entire program of studies. Catholicism has a particular ‘take’ on reality that should animate its schools. It is a ‘comprehensive way of life’ to be enshrined in the school’s curriculum.’

So what is religious education across the curriculum and why do Catholic Schools need it? As mention above, the mission of the Catholic school is to evangelize.  In order to fulfill her mission, the Catholic school cannot limit this great task to the religion department exclusively, but instead should be an affair that engages the entire school community—and hence, religious education should permeate the curricula of the school. R.E.A.C is then, the effort of the school to seek religious education throughout all components of the curricula of the school.

When we contemplate the question of R.E.A.C in the Catholic school, the question of building bridges between content areas and theology can become a burden. It does not have to be so. In fact, the task might become a burden when we lose track of the mission of the Catholic school, the intrinsic connection between education and faith, and the precedence of wonder and imagination over any content area.  If this becomes our center and point of departure, it is much easier to imagine a subject of study and its correspondent religious expression.

In our task to nominate all content areas to their religious foundation, let us begin with the natural sciences.
“The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are.”  CCC 159.
And furthermore,
“Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason.” CCC 159.

The natural sciences have as their domain: creation. In the journey of unveiling truth in creation, we can see the hand of the creator, face-to-face as it were. In any of the natural sciences whether it is astronomy or physics that attempt to reveal the mysteries of the universe, biology that seeks to comprehend the vast and diverse domain of life, chemistry that seeks to actualize the concept of the incarnation by studying matter, or mathematics that unfold the language of the universe, creation is the scope of study. From the heavens, stars and galaxies, to the processes of homeostasis, to the vast diverse expressions of life, to the beautiful mathematical theories that express how the universe works, all of it unfolds the creation of God. In the natural sciences, not only the scope of study is religious but the process of engaging with the material too.

The social sciences examine the religious from a different view. The affairs of societies throughout history inform us on the nature of human kind. In this process, the content as well as the process is religious. While the natural scientist can be described as a contemplative, the historian or social studies teacher is concerned with creating a Christian community. The objective of the history and social studies is citizenship, the common good, and the dialectic process of transforming society through the education of its members. Some major themes of Catholic Social Teaching, that every social science teacher can incorporate in her curriculum and methodology include but are not limited to: Life and Dignity of the Human Person, Call to Family, Communion and Participation, Rights and Personalities, Option for the Poor and Vulnerable, The Dignity of Work and Right of Workers, Solidarity and Care for God’s creation.

While social studies and history explore groups of people and the process of humanity as a whole, language arts and the humanities focuses on the individual. The language arts place the content of study on the question: What does it mean to be human? Let us recall that the Holy See calls for an education ‘founded on Christian anthropology,’ where the expression of being human is celebrated as a whole. While the dimension of spirituality of the scientist is contemplation and the history teacher is establishing the Kingdom of God, the spiritual dimension of the English teacher is metanoia, or personal transformation and conversion. The English teacher seeks to create a classroom of introspective and reflective students that internalize transformation as a necessary cycle of life. In addition, the English teacher infuses literature as a tool to contemplate grace. The Catholic imagination is a tool of literature that helps students see God-in-all-things. Through the language arts students can learn to use their imagination to shape their spiritual life.

Finally, let us contemplate the arts. The arts teach us to find joy in life, to celebrate all forms of life. Whether it is music, theater, visual arts, foreign languages, and any other form of art, the content of their subject is to communicate beauty, in all forms. The Holy See takes the arts seriously in religious education, “faith and culture are intimately related, and students should be led, in ways suitable to their level of intellectual development, to grasp the importance of this relationship.” The arts teach the diversity of peoples and their expression of the divine in each culture. The art teacher can be referred to as the psalmist, praising glory to the creator through different expressions of art. For the psalm reads
“I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made, your works are wonderful, I know that full well.” Psalm 139:14.

5 Methods to Teach Religious Education in any Content Area

The method to apply R.E.A.C proposed here is solemnly grounded on the process of making questions in teaching. It encourages teaching faculty to formulate questions in their teaching based on five categories that link their content area to theology. Teachers do not need a background in religion and theology to formulate these questions. Also, in the effort to incorporate these questions in their teaching, teachers are not required to spend a lot more time planning. Instead, following these five categories below, at all time and in any lesson (even improvising), teachers can formulate these questions to add a theological and spiritual dimension to their practice. The categories are the following:
a.       Appealing to the Imagination and Curiosity: Finding God in All Things
b.      Teaching Contemplation: Falling in Love with the Good, the True and the Beautiful.
c.       Creating Christian Communities: Building the Kingdom of God.
d.      From Individual to a Global Conscience 
e.       Prayer and Rituals: Living in Community

a.       Appealing to the Imagination and Curiosity: Finding God in All Things.

No matter what you teach, the teacher is constantly appealing to the imagination and curiosity of the student precisely to lead to understanding. To conceptualize a mathematical problem, to
construct an image of a character, to visualize how societies lived in a particular time period, or simply to seek for a new way to solve problems, all of these processes require imagination and curiosity. The great Ignatius spirituality focuses on the power of imagination. St. Ignatius was convince that God can speak to us as surely through our imagination as through our thoughts and memories.

In the application of this thought process, questions can be generic enough for faculty only to encourage students to connect their subject area with their religious component. Relying on the fact that students learn best when they let their imagination and curiosity run free—the teacher is only but a catalyst that asks for students to seek connections between religion and their particular content area.

Questions can move from very generic to specific depending on the teacher’s emphasis. For instance, in biology class, a teacher may have students reflect on a question that links religion and their topic of study by asking a generic question:

“What is this topic have to do with how you understand God?”

However, the question can become more specific according to the lesson. In the same biology class, under the topic of elements, the biology teacher may ask:

“What do elements tell you about God in the way that they interact with each other to form new compounds?”

There is no right or wrong answer in this approach, only the task to spark the imagination of students to see God in all things. For a student who loves biology, God is already there. This only provides a language for her to express herself.


b.      Teaching Contemplation: Falling in Love with the Good, the True and the Beautiful.

Despite the subject of the teacher, in their practice they teach their students to love what is good, what is beautiful and what is true. In theology, this is called contemplation—the act of being mesmerized by something to the point of dedicating all your energy and time to this one thing. To have a student
fall in love with the subject he is learning is the dream of every teacher and as we have seen above, every subject already has as its content a religious expression because it either tells directly about God or about His creation. 

The way that this category formulates reflective questions is a little different than the first category. Instead of asking students to build the bridge between the content are and religion, a teach simply uses these three categories, mainly the good, the beautiful and the true, to build the bridge for them. These questions are posed in a way that has students reflect on what is good, beautiful and true in each particular content area. It is the task of the teacher to simply ask the question:

“How is this beautiful, true or good?” Or apply the negative,
“What is this lacking, in order to be true, beautiful and good?”

This process allows for contemplation in any content area. Let us take the language arts as an example. In the study of Romeo and Juliet, teachers can formulate the question:

“Is the love that Romeo and Juliet have for each other true? Is it beautiful? Why or why not? Or “Is sacrifice good in itself? Why or why not?”

These questions allow for teachers to have their students practice contemplation. To have students look not only think about what is good, true and beautiful but have a dialogue with it. In short, to have students fall in love with what is good, true and beautiful is to have them fall in love with God.

c.       Shared-Praxis Approach: Creating Christian Communities

One could say that one way to measure the success of education is through transformation. The Catholic school must create students who go out into the world imbued with a Catholic worldview. Students that are doers of justice, cultivators of peace, seekers of truth, in short, students that build communities grounded in love. This category focuses on the question, How am I going to make this world a better world. The theology translation of this question would be how am I going to build the Kingdom of God?

Every content area has a real application in life. In other words, students don’t learn concepts that have no use outside of the classroom. Instead, students learn skills that allow them to be good citizens. This approach speaks to the real application of learned skills in the real world.

This category is grounded on the application of teaching and the good news is that a lot of teachers already teach this way! The addition is that teaching faculty can formulate questions of reflection based on real problems in the world, country, or Mercy’s own community, in order to form Christian communities that seek metanoia, or transformation. These communities are the voices that proclaim the good news to the poor and marginalized. These communities are Christian communities that go into the world proclaiming the good news.

Let us take social studies as an example for this approach. In the study of U.S History, one current theme might be immigration. This is a social issue that has real applications and dimensions today, not only in the United States but in the Middle East and Europe. Teachers can use contemporary examples to create Christian communities that seek for change in this social problem. They can formulate questions such as:
“What does God teach us about treating the stranger?” Or “Why is immigration a Christian issue?” And, “What is a Christian response to immigration?”

d.      From Individual to a Global Conscience

This approach appeals to the Catholic value of teaching the whole child. In this commitment in the Catholic School, the curriculum should reflect a clear position on moral issues. There is an ethical and moral dimension to any content area. It is the responsibility of the teacher to instruct students to form their conscience intellectually and reasonably, considering the Teachings of the Catholic Church.

Teachers are required to teach by example. The curriculum we explicitly teach is only a written curriculum—but we teach with everything that we do. We set an example with every interaction that we have. Teachers need to model to their students the way in which to live a gospel-centered life. In their daily interactions with students—they are precisely doing so.

Having said that, teachers can also incorporate questions that appeal to morality and ethics without having any background on these disciplines by simply encouraging students to make the connection between their content areas and theology. Let us consider one example in the natural sciences and one in mathematics:
What do you consider the immoral or unjust application of science? Or, How could you use the rules and procedures for solving the current math problems you are studying as metaphors for living a good moral life as a Christian?  How could you apply them to specific moral problems?

e.       Prayer and Rituals: Praying in Your Content Area

This final category simply encourages teachers to ask questions that may be prayers. Teachers are encouraged to do this through their specific daily lesson objectives. There is extensive research that shows how slowing down and taking a moment to pray, mediate or simply gather one-self actually benefits teaching and learning.

A lot of teachers already incorporate rituals in their classrooms but instead they call them routines. That is, a series of actions that follow each other in an organized manner usually to have a positive
effect on classroom management. Teachers can incorporate an additional step in their numerous routines to aspire for better performance in the classroom and to yield to spiritual development. It benefits both worlds!

This category does not require the teacher to pray explicitly. While this is certainly one way to incorporate prayer in the classroom, there are many other different methods that do not require for the teacher to initiate prayer in the customary way we are exposed to prayer. Let us take the example of music class. In the beginning of class, the music teacher might have made it part of her routine to have students tune their instruments before they begin. One way in which she can incite students to pray is to simply add to this routine a question or statement. For example:

‘Today, while you tune your instrument, think about the talent you have been given form God,’ or ‘Do you attribute your talent to your own hard work, or do you attribute your talent to God?’

With no need to share response, the music teacher made an everyday routine—a theological reflection and perhaps a very intimate prayer as well. Teachers can be very creative in how they get students to pray. It is important to mention that the activity must not depart from the lesson. The teacher may find the creativity to simply add one more step to a routine he has set already. The language art can have them write a prayer, while the science teacher may practice meditation as students set up the instruments for the lab, or the language teacher may have them sing a song in another language with pictures on the background that show how this culture prays.

Finally, this area also allows for prayer in the wider context of the school to be done through the eyes of all content areas. In events where the school community gets together to pray, a prayer may be done in a way that incorporates other content areas. The campus ministry may use language to spark the imagination of students to see different content areas in prayer. Examples of this may include the replacement of God to other titles. Examples may include: Creator, Counselor, Master of the Universe, Advocate, Eternal Logos, Three-in-One, Healer, Spirit of Life, All-Powerful, Wisdom from on High, Comforter, Teacher, Spirit of God, Strong-One, My Shepherd.


Why is R.E.A.C so important in the Catholic School? Because without it the Catholic School ceases to be Catholic losing its identity by treating theology or religion class as another subject in the list. If the Catholic School fails to communicate her mission: to evangelize and to carry the good news, she ceases to be a Catholic School. The Catholic School must not do this through one subject; instead it must carry the good news in everything that she does—in every subject and content area.