Egypt was once the centre of the highest spirituality on Earth but then it descended into a concern with magic and power and became the oppressive nation we know of from the time of Moses. Israel was once the focus of God's attention, a chosen nation that was the ground from which the Messiah was born, but then it too descended into materialism, corruption and legalism. Christianity was a religion that gave the believer direct access to the Son of God but it gradually lost power as too many of its leaders succumbed to this world, and now its outer structures remain in place but the fire burns low.
Nothing lasts in this world and that is truer than ever in our day which is a time of increasing destruction. There is no outer spiritual body that will save you if you put your trust in it. The time has come when all aspiring souls must strive for truth within themselves. They can still use the outer forms but they must not allow themselves to be restricted by them. I know there is a verse in the Bible in which Jesus says the gates of Hades will not overcome his church but almost immediately afterwards he calls Peter, Peter the rock on which he will build that church and whom he has just praised fulsomely, Satan! I don't think we can build an entire spiritual edifice on one verse particularly when it can't be certain what Jesus meant by the word 'church'. And given the recent arguments about inner discernment and outer authority we should also note that Jesus commended Peter for knowing he was the Messiah because he had had that revealed to him not by flesh and blood (outer authority) but by his Father in Heaven (inner knowing).
I have to say that some people seem to mistake the lamp for the light. You can have a beautiful lamp, made of gold and adorned with jewels and with finely polished glass so that it allows the light to pass through clearly and without obstruction. But it is still the lamp. What is more, the glass can get dirty unless it is regularly cleaned, even replaced when it gets old. When that happens those who look for light in a pure form may have to look elsewhere. Some light may still pass through discoloured glass but it is less than it was and to pretend otherwise will help no one. Those who look elsewhere may still value the lamp for its beauty and the light it continues to transmit but what they really seek is light and they will look for that wherever it may be.
Why do we come into this world? If it is just to obey an outer authority we could do that better in the higher worlds. But if it is to learn to become a real divine being then we have to reach inside ourselves to find the living God there. The church serves supremely as a bastion of tradition and authority but it is like a mother. The growing child cannot stay clinging to its mother or it will never grow. Naturally, it will always love and respect its mother but if it is to become a mature adult it must start taking responsibility for itself.
Those designated Romantic Christians merely believe that the sabbath was made for man not man for the sabbath. They see the Christian religion as a living thing but living things either grow or start to decay. No one is saying the church should adapt to modernity because that is tantamount to saying it should secularise itself which is more or less what the Church of England has done to its catastrophic loss. But that is changing in a negative sense. There is positive, creative change too that reflects a deeper engagement with spirit (rather than accommodating to the world) and that is all the Romantic Christians are interested in. Speaking as one who may be said to fall into that category, I would say RCs (no pun intended) love and respect the church but their real love is for Christ and they will seek him everywhere.
9 comments:
Thanks for this, William. It sums things up well and helps clarify some of the misunderstandings that have been aired over the past week or so.
> The church serves supremely as a bastion of tradition and authority but it is like a mother. The growing child cannot stay clinging to its mother or it will never grow. Naturally, it will always love and respect its mother but if it is to become a mature adult it must start taking responsibility for itself.
Well put. For Christians who have grown up and raised in a particular church, they should at some point recognize that they are continuing to choose that system above others, and take responsibility for making that choice.
If your parents are still your highest authority as an adult, and you feel compelled that they should remain as such despite your own convictions and intuitions, then are you not still a child? Likewise if the church remains your highest authority above all, then in some way do you not risk remaining but a spiritual infant?
Like a loving parent (or properly oriented church primarily concerned with making disciples set on Christ), I think Jesus desires much more from us, and gives us plenty of strength and guidance to "go it alone" with Him if we genuinely choose to walk that path.
Thank you both for your comments.
"I don't think we can build an entire spiritual edifice on one verse particularly when it can't be certain what Jesus meant by the word 'church'. "
Needed saying - because this must be the single most over-worked, excessive-weight-bearing verse in the entire Bible.
The problem today that Dr. Charlton and Francis Berger were getting at is that traditional authorities are now actively leading people astray. As recently as the days of C.S. Lewis, one could reasonably follow the dictates of the Church of England and be saved. Sure, there were disagreements over high/broad/low church. However, the organization undoubtedly was seeking salvation. The same applied for the majority of organized churches.
However, that is clearly not the case. Not a day goes by that I don't see conservatives/traditionalists publicly disagree w/ their church leadership. From the Protestant side, the publication Christianity Today is now openly hostile to traditional Christian values. The Vatican is undermining Catholicism. The list goes on. Discernment wasn't as necessary in the past b/c the institutions were largely good. However, blindly following one's leaders today will lead to damnation. It's unfortunate that this discussion got out of hand. However, behind all of the noise, that was the point Charlton and Berger were trying to make.
I wonder if the rise of social media and a 24 hr news cycle has a role in how people relate to their church leadership. I highly doubt the average medieval peasant even knew who the current Pope was. He would have been focused on his local church/community. I believe that this is the path that Christians should take. Decentralization is now happening in the secular world as the system is heading into collapse. It will probably happen in the spiritual world as well. Instead of hand wringing over the next idiotic statement that comes from the church leadership, find a local community to support spiritually. It doesn't necessarily have to be a church as family or friends can become a congregation. All it takes is two or more. It's time to ignore the apostate leadership and rebuild on a local level.
You're rlight but I wasn't really addressing that side of things/ But, as you say, the church, collectively speaking may have reached a tipping point where from being net good it becomes actively harmful from a spiritual perspective. I don't really have enough experience to comment on that but the signs are there.
I don’t think the phrase “this rock” refers to Peter the man. I think it refers to what Peter just did in verse 16. “(15) He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? (16) And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” The “rock” on which Jesus founded his Church was the faith in Jesus first exhibited by Peter. I also think that the word “it” at the end of verse 18 refers to the rock (of faith) and not the Church. The standard reading may be more obvious in the original language, but my reading seems more natural in English. It also seems more congruent with the other teachings of Jesus.
That comment from Anonymous is really from me, JMSmith.
That interpretation makes a lot more sense to me, and it does, as you say, chime much better with the other teachings of Jesus. Recognising Christ as the Son of God is a test of openness to truth and in that respect shows the proper orientation of the heart more than anything else.
Post a Comment