Catholica Commentary by Fr Peter Dresser: God is Big .... Real BIG! (Chapter 6: Religion and Literalism Part 2)

"God is Big ..... Real BIG!" by Fr Peter Dresser (Chapter Six - Part 2)

Today's reflection from Peter Dresser takes us into the difficult and controversial territory of the twin natures that we ascribe to Jesus. He is both human and divine. How can anyone hold these two contradictory natures at one and the same time? What were the Gospel writers getting at in some of their descriptions? What was Jesus trying to say in some of his descriptions of his relationship with his father? Were they using literal language or talking in metaphorical language? How should be interpret the relationship between God the Son and God the Father today? This ain't "bedtime reading" for the remnant elements in Catholicism or Christianity who believe the answers to all these sort of questions are simple.

Chapter Six (Part 2): Religion & Literalism

Jesus the Son of God...

It occurred to me during Mass that for something like 16 billion years this universe of ours has been evolving and not even for one pecosecond can I believe that our God was not part and parcel of everything that evolved and everything that happened and everything that is. Indeed evolution must have taken place within God and God is part of the evolutionary process. Such a viewpoint is a form of Pantheism that states that all things are in God. As a corollary we can say that God is in all things. He was incarnated if you like billions of years ago and yet a common understanding among most Christians is that God only became part of our fabric in the incarnation of Jesus. We have spoken about Jesus before and we will speak about him again. As stated earlier, the followers of Jesus referred to him as the Son of God, a term that is used extensively in the liturgy and in the creed of the Church and given a literal interpretation by millions of Christians. Certainly God is revealed in a special way in the person of Jesus and today's feast (the Feast of the Annunciation) is an important one for Christians. It makes us consciously aware of God's closeness to us and of his willingness to share intimately not only in the randomness of evolution but also in all our human joys and hopes and griefs and anxieties. But let's not necessarily divinise him. I find him far more beautiful and meaningful as a human being without turning him into a divine person. The miracle is not that Jesus was God; the miracle was that Jesus could be so humanly beautiful that people actually came to see him as God!

We have to be careful of what I refer to as the heresy of literalism. We live in an age where it is entirely relevant to get back to basics and to dispense with much of our doctrinal and dogmatic baggage and in a very real way get back to the fundamentals; to see Jesus without all the paraphernalia we have cobbled onto him and his God, and so to understand more clearly the message that this man came to tell us about the God that he was so close to and the morality and the Kingdom he envisaged. And maybe, just maybe, it is not a question of accepting everything that this man said but as Christians belonging to this tradition we might be able to learn something of his acceptance and love and interest and concern for others. There is an urgent need to make our Christian religion meaningful, credible and relevant in our modern world. This can only be achieved if we demythologise the man Jesus and to make him once again, as he was all those years ago, colourful, exciting, vibrant and dynamic.

There is a story that I think comes from Anthony de Mello that goes something like this. An admirer once said to a proud mother: "That's a very pretty baby you have there." To which the mother replied: "That's nothing — you should see the photographs!"

Too frequently throughout the history of Christianity there has been a tendency to look at the photographs of Jesus rather than looking at the real Jesus of Nazareth. And so as a result we have placed a halo around the head of Jesus and given him divine knowledge and divine powers that put him apart from other human beings and we have encased him in doctrines and dogmas to such an extent that he has become incredibly distanced from all our human experience. All this has given rise to doctrines such as the Trinity, the Virgin Birth, the Immaculate Conception, Original Sin and many other doctrines, many of which have caused a great deal of guilt and pain among ordinary people. And Jesus has been put into a position where he is of no earthly use to anyone and to a large extent has become quaintly irrelevant in the lives of people — something like a railway station twenty kilometres out of town!

The Relationship of the Father & the Son: Jesus obviously experienced a closeness with his God but one has to question seriously whether this closeness meant equality! Much has been stated in this document so far regarding the oneness of Jesus and his God. Some rather unkind people suggest that the writer of John's Gospel may very well have ingested some kind of hallucinatory substance! At one stage in the Gospel Jesus states that the Father and I are one and yet as we read further he claims that the Father is greater than I [John 14:27]. So there is identification with the Father but also acknowledgment that the Father is somehow superior to the Son. And of course this does a certain amount of violence to the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity which states that the Father and the Son are co-equal and consubstantial. But so be it. The Gospels and church documents are not just faith statements, but developing faith statements, about the person of Jesus and other matters. Our knowledge of Jesus and our faithing of Jesus must surely be evolving in our continual quest for Truth. Jesus obviously experienced a closeness with his God but one has to question seriously whether this closeness meant equality! This oneness that John's Gospel speaks of may well be a beautiful way of expressing the intimacy that existed between Jesus and the God that he loved to such an extent that they did in a religious sense become one with each other. Because of this I find it strange that Jesus would have prayed to his Father in heaven. I acknowledge the cosmological construct that Jesus was born into viz., God up there, we down here and the underworld down there. I appreciate still more the fact that Jesus was a Jew and all Jews prayed to their God in heaven. Maybe Jesus got in wrong but it wasn't his fault? Maybe in private Jesus recognised his God in all things; in public he prayed to his God in heaven. He didn't want to appear too radical! I have a friend who suggested that when we pray or communicate with our God, we humans need a focus. In other words we pray to our God in heaven just by way of situating our God for convenience sake. Perhaps. Perhaps.

Just as I think we should demythologise Jesus in order to do justice to him and his God, we should be equally careful not to dismiss Jesus altogether. Bishop Spong and others would see Jesus as part of rabbinical Midrash or Jewish story telling, so that Jesus was not a real person at all but a personalisation of everything that is good and beautiful, whose ideas were liberating and life-giving and whose principal topic was the bringing about of a kingdom of goodness, justice, truth and peace. Firstly, we could ask the question why would anyone want to remove Jesus from history? And secondly, for the Christian, Jesus could be described as a concrete universal in whose human life the divine spirit expressed itself. Thirdly, and once again for the Christian, the person of Jesus must be seen as the word made flesh. Jesus is the incarnate wisdom of God, a theme to which we will return.

But in ending this particular section on Jesus as being Son of God let me simply say that in using this title when referring to Jesus, we are using language analogously or metaphorically and most definitely not literally. Jesus was a man, a human person. God is God and does not have divine children except in a metaphorical sense. In that sense we are all God's children. The fact must remain however that Jesus was not God because God is big. Real big!

NEXT WEEK: Chapter Six Part III: "Religion and Literalism"

“God is God and does not have divine children except in a metaphorical sense. In that sense we are all God's children. The fact must remain however that Jesus was not God because God is big. Real big!” ...Peter Dresser

Peter Dresser grew up in Orange NSW. On completing his Leaving Certificate he studied for some years at Springwood and Manly Seminaries. His life journey has led him down diverse paths and he enjoyed the experience of many and varied employments including postman, public servant and factory worker. He has appreciated his exposure to different life styles and religions and his involvement with music and sport, particularly Rugby League. He eventually turned to teaching where he found an easy rapport with and respect for young people. Peter decided to continue with his studies for Priesthood and entered St. Paul’s Seminary. He was ordained in 1990. Peter's love for his Catholic religion dates from his very early years. His involvement with Science is only a recent phenomenon. His fascination with nature has always been predominant. His continuing pastoral concern is that the Good News proclaimed by Jesus be preached and mediated meaningfully in all its richness and fullness to the contemporary world. Peter holds degrees in Arts and Theology and a Diploma in Education. He produced this document in 2004 whilst Parish Priest of Kandos in Central West NSW. He now lives privately in retirement at Kandos where he spent six memorable years.

What are your thoughts on this commentary?
You can contribute to the discussion in our forum.

Share |

[Index of Commentaries by Fr Peter Dresser]

Michael Morwood: "The Challenge in Resurrecting Jesus in Society Today" In this address given to WATAC (Women and the Australian Church) members on 26th March 2013, Michael Morwood outlines the challenges he sees the Church facing in the years ahead. This address was given in the theatrette of the NSW Parliament at a meeting to celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the Second Vatican Council. 33m 34s [Commentary on the Catholica where this address was published on 29Mar2013] | [WATCH THE VIDEO]

Reports 028: 29Mar2013

Please donate to our Friends of Catholica 2013 Appeal

This site was developed and is maintained by

www.viastuas.net.au
Click HERE to email the Webmaster