Silver & Gold
I came upon this passage on my plane ride on Wednesday . . . and I am not sure I can begin to describe the thought process it began inside my head . . .
So the emergence of the cross signifies what we today would call a "paradigm shift" in the human understanding of the person and work of Christ; that is, the basic structure of the redemption relationship between us and God came to be pictured in a way radically different from its previous New Testament conception. The cross act was first narrowly interpreted as mere vicarious suffering and then mistaken for the whole redemptive action of God. Christ's life and teaching were therefore nonessential to the work of redemption and were regarded as just poignant decorations for his cross, since his only saving function was conceived to be that of a blood sacrifice to purchase our forgiveness.
The effect of this is shift is incalculably vast and profound for the history of the church and for the realities of the Christian's walk. They are well-illustrated in a story - probably apocryphal - that is told about one of the great thinkers of the Roman Catholic church, St. Thomas Aquinas. The story goes that, while walking amid the splendors of Rome, a friend said to St. Thomas, "We Christians certainly no longer have to say to the world, 'Silver and gold have we none.'" To this St. Thomas replied : "But neither can we say to the lame man, 'In the name of Jesus of Nazareth rise up and walk'". As the shift settled in, the power diminished, just as St. Thomas Aquinas saw it. The church of his time could profess to dispense forgiveness but could not command a healing life force.
-The Spirit of the Disciplines by Dallas Willard (pg.36)
posted by jen leonard @ 8:59 PM
2 Comments
2 Comments:
Here is some more salt for our wound:
“We’ve tended to soften Jesus’ conflict with the system ever since we became a Church of the establishment. The year that we blame is the year 313. That is the year of the Edict of Milan or the Constantinian Revolution.
It is then that the church changed dramatically and changed sides dramatically. Up until that time the Church was by and large of the underclass. It identified with the oppressed and the poor; the Church itself was still being oppressed and Christians were being thrown to the lions. It reads history from the catacombs; literally from the underground, which always gives you a different perspective than ‘those found in palaces’ – exactly how Jesus distinguishes his cousin John (see Matthew 11:8).
…Once we moved from the bottom of society to the top, we developed a new film over our eyes, and we couldn’t read anything that showed Jesus in Confrontation with the establishment. We became the establishment. Clear teaching on issues of greed, powerlessness, non-violence, non-control and simplicity were moved to the sidelines, if not actually countermanded.
We’ll see as we get into the Sermon on the Mount that Jesus intended for us to take the low road. He intended us to operate from the minority position, from the position of ‘immoral’ minority, much more than the moral majority. When you’re protecting your self-image as a moral, superior or ‘saved’ person, you always lose the truth. The daring search for God – the common character of all religion – is replaced with the search for personal certitude and control.
As long as the Church was underground in some sense, as long as we operated from a minority position, we had greater access to the truth, to the gospel, to Jesus. We in our time have to find a way to disestablish ourselves, to identify with our powerlessness instead of power, our dependence instead of our dependence instead of our independence, our communion instead of our individualism. Unless we understand that, the Sermon on the Mount isn’t going to make any sense. As soon as people are comfortable, they don’t want the truth beyond their comfort zone” (Rohr, 1996 - "Jesus Plan For A New World").
http://www.livejournal.com/users/bickle_t/
i love that quote.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home