Tags
Reflecting on the idea of the ‘Abrahamic faiths’ drove me back to Paul and his Epistle to the Romans, not least to Chapter4. The central, and at the time (and since) controversial point which Paul makes here is a shattering one, and must have been so to a Jew of his upbringing and education. As a Jew he is well aware of something we often forget, namely that God has a covenant with His people; the question with which Paul deals here is one we all wrestle with – ‘who are God’s people?’ To that the Jews had a simple answer – they were. It was with them that the Covenant had been made, they were suffering for having been unfaithful, but they knew the Messiah would come and put all things right; until then, as Saul the Rabbi would have told them, a strict observance of the Law was necessary to show that they were indeed to be reckoned righteous – that is justified by their keeping of the Law in the eyes of God. But now Paul’s eyes were opened.
Abraham himself had been reckoned righteous, but not because of his observance of Torah – indeed there was no Torah. No, Abraham’s righteousness was the result of his believing in God, and circumcision was simply the sign or the seal of this righteousness. The Gentiles are in like condition to Father Abraham. They do not have the Law, but they trust God. Genesis does not tell us that Abraham kept the Law and therefore God found him righteous; righteousness came through faith. They, and we, start where Abraham started, and we are part of his covenant because like him we believe. This is the larger sense of what he has to say on the subject in Galatians.
Abraham is the father of the circumcised and the uncircumcised; Jews and Gentiles who believe in Jesus are thereby made righteous. There is a clear statement made here about those of the circumcised who do not believe in Jesus; they are not made righteous in God’s eyes by the observance of Torah. Circumcision availeth naught, the one sign which matters is the sign of Jesus. The Law, by itself, points up sin, and by it all are condemned, for all are sinners. God’s promise is to be delivered to all His people – regardless of race or gender. But the point is plain – God’s people are defined by belief in the saving Grace of Christ Jesus. Just as Abraham’s faith began God’s covenant meant to begin the process of putting creation to rights, so does our faith make us a part of that covenant family.
Abraham believed that God could give life where there was none, and Christians believe that God raised Christ from the dead to give us new life where there was none. Jesus died for our sins, and His rising is the sign we are justified – made righteous, not by our acts, but by His faithfulness in obedience to His Father. The Resurrection declared Him the Son of God. Isaiah 53 tells us (verse 11) that the Messiah will bear our iniquities and make many righteous, and Paul is telling us that this prophesy had been fulfilled in Christ.
If we share Abraham’s faith in God’s promises, fulfilled through the Son, then we are part of Abraham’s covenantal family. If not, not.
I would say that belief is a primary necessity of faith but that we need to delve further into the understanding of what faith fully consists. My favorite explanation and unfolding of such is found in the Letter to the Hebrews, Chapter 11 – 13. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2011-13&version=NRSVCE
Note the obedience expected to our spiritual leaders and our obedience to God’s words and commands. Also, implicit is the acceptance of suffering and hardship with all patience as we are treated as Children of God who at times need be chastised for our own spiritual benefit. All seems to round out a “mature” faith and seems to be contained within the meaning of the word Faith itself.
LikeLike
Agreed, but, like salvation, it is a process, and once we are His, we are changed forever.
LikeLike
True, my friend. Just don’t want people to walk away with a Bosco understanding of what is required by faith: i.e. I believe therefore I’m saved and nothing I do will ever take that away from me. Unless, of course you’re in the new Episcopalian Church and you make all ten hoops from the foul line. π
LikeLike
I hope no one will walk off with that – or if they do that they take it away and bury it π
LikeLike
Well, it can be modified by each individual to whatever skill set they have: quilting, cooking,surfing, playing music etc. Lots of ways to bypass the conventional requirements. If this were a syndicated column though, you would be right. New churches would be springing up all over the place. π
LikeLike
They would indeed. π
Rereading Romans and finding so much there – all Paul’s letters have that quality, but reading this with Galatians in mind makes sense of the comments about Judaisers.
LikeLike
Yes they do seem to be complimentary texts in many ways. BTW check your first link in your post. I think you will be surprised as to where it takes you. π
LikeLike
I was. It was a most moving post. That’ll learn me to get my links right; thanks for the heads up.
Yes, some of my commentaries see Romans as an attempt to explain Galatians – which makes sense.
LikeLike
Well, I love her posts as well. They are well worth the read. π
Yes, many such cases exist in scripture and I wish we had the transcripts of all their talks to aid our understanding. It seems to me that sometimes these writers are using shorthand because the details had already been discussed and many questions answered. Makes you wonder how many of the Apostles letters were found and if there were more that were lost to history.
LikeLike
I agree on both.
We have, I think, to assume that what survived is what we need – and Paul can be hard enough, as Peter thought!
LikeLike
I can see why, from the Catholic point of view that is so. But when a Church maintains that Islam is a religion worth its head sending a nice message to at the end of Ramadan and is part of the Abrahamic faiths – it is hard for Christians of other traditions to see they should be lining up with that.
LikeLike
I don’t know, to be honest – it would certainly have been more liekly.
LikeLike
I can only go where I am called – and I listen carefully.
LikeLike
Lack of anything within 120 miles. One needs a community, and I have that where I am.
LikeLike
If I thought that the alternative, well I should have done something. But I don’t.
LikeLike
I do, and that is made up of those redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb.
LikeLike
If one really holds that the Church is limited to those in communion with the bishop of Rome, I can see that. But as I don’t, and as I believe the body of Christ is made up of the local churches, I see it everywhere.
LikeLike
I agree, but I see everywhere churches which agree with the Creed. From your point of view they are perhaps closer or further away from the RC position.
LikeLike
I think they simply show a different understanding, one rather more similar to the orthodox one.
The OC would see an Ignatian model – the church gathered around its elder/bishop. This worked in the early church, and can work now.
LikeLike
The Head is, always has been, and always will be, Christ himself. The OC stops were we Nonconformists stop – at the local. There we know our flocks and our pastors, and we do not have the sort of thing you get when your CEO is in Rome surrounded by bureaucrats.
Local is best.
LikeLike
The problem with that is that even in the early days there were churches which had nothing to do with Rome. The whole Church of the East had nothing to do with it, and the non-Chalcedonians have had nothing to do with it since 451. Either we believe that their sacrifices and witness have been vain – through no fault of their own – or we need an ecclesiology which incorporates them, and other Christians.
The idea of pontiff with universal jurisdiction really has not worked well since the Middle Ages.
LikeLike
The Church of the East never had anything to do with Rome, it lay outside the Roman Empire and was forbidden by the Persians to have any contact.
Among the non-Chalcedonians, there has never been much desire for union, and the circumstances which led the Chalcedonian East to want reunion were not so strong as to lead them to accept Florence.
I suspect that if Rome would settle for the role you describe, there would be a deal of agreement with it – I certainly would have fewer problems.
LikeLike
That is because you do not see
LikeLike
There’s none as blind as them as doesn’t want to see, Rob.
LikeLike
I don’t think it all a big misunderstanding, but I do think the Fathers at Nicaea have much to teach us if we liste,PM.
LikeLike
Indeed, it is so.
LikeLike
I wonder if these are not a little self-defining? Would one, for example, say that there is unity within the Catholic Church? Indeed, one might ask the same of other churches. Holiness, certainly, although we have to remember that no all who call Him Lord will be acknoweldged by Him. Catholicity/Apostolicity, depends how one reads those. If one narrows it to Peter, you still end up with a church not notable for its unity and holiness in some ways. We should be more ready to read Body of Christ as a metaphor.
LikeLike
The unity seems superficial. I really see little that unites you with a man like your Pope. Surely it is the interior disposition that matters? Holiness is to be found across the Christian spectrum, as is Godly living.
LikeLike
Most churches have similar signs of unity. Purity of doctrine is an interesting one. The OC would maintain that the RCC has added to doctrine.
LikeLike
On the whole, the OC have both. On contraception, while some bishops approve, others don’t – as is the way there.
LikeLike
In what respects?
LikeLike
Much though I agree with you on contraception, it is not an issue upon which our salvation depends.
LikeLike
I think one might not suppose that everyone who contracepts is sexually immoral – though I take the gist of this.
LikeLike
I concur. I think the whole mentality it creates is a bad one.
LikeLike
I should be inclined to see it as the latter. The health reasons are pretty obvious.
LikeLike
There is a deep-seated human revulsion about blood, which has to come from our deep past. One can see why, especially in the Middle East, one would stay away from the stuff in that heat. But yes, there is a taboo about it.
LikeLike
Yes, I suspect you are correct there.
LikeLike
I think that’s right. Although, until relatively recently, we had the ‘churching’ of women after they had given birth.
LikeLike
I see, interesting.
LikeLike
An interesting account – and surely right.
LikeLike
Yes, I have taken a quick look and it sppears very sound – in subjects our society is very unsound on. My own view has always been that married couples must be open to God’s gift, and Mrs S and I have been fortunate enough to be blessed five times.
LikeLike
Thanks to be to Christ.
LikeLike
Splendid – I am just back from a long walk up the valley and ready for intellectual stimulation!
LikeLike
I have no problem with any of this, but the difficulty is that Rome’s insistence allied with its inability to put its own house in order makes for an unappealling mix, surely?
LikeLike
You may be right, but of course one hears such comments about the Vatican. For me, well, I am where the Lord has palced me – and He must have his reasons.
LikeLike
Thank you.
LikeLike
Good old Belloc – I’d have enjoyed a long walk between taverns with him – aye, and a longer one to Rome perhaps π
LikeLike
Yes, as a young man I loved it, and as a life-long walker, I admire the way he captures the reality of long walking.
As for the journey, that is up to Grace.
LikeLike
It doesn’t, my friend, but your witness and zeal are a credit to you, and I am glad we have come to this place of better understanding. I’m an old man, and will do, as I’ve always tried, my Lord’s work, and I trust in Him to know how to use my cooperation.
LikeLike
All to the good my friend, and I am bold to believe that all will be well, and that all manner of things will be.
LikeLike
After reading the above, I have come to the conclusion that you are a Catholic but can’t seem to say so; kinda like C.S. Lewis. π And we are happy to have you as one of us, my friend. π Welcome!
LikeLike
I am not far off, but some obstacles remain.
LikeLike
Yes: the roadblocks in your mind which you fabricate to prevent what you know would mean an irreversible and transforming change to your life. Every convert is successful at creating them: some make it official and others don’t quite get there. Once I figured it out – I allowed a full 3 years to ratchet up the courage to make the change. But C.S. Lewis is an interesting case. My thinking is that God left him where he was to point the way for others across the divide. Funny how he is revered by all Christians. π
LikeLike
Yes, he’s an interesting case. I can do no other than I do π
LikeLike
I understand but I don’t think your old Catholic friend has given up on you yet. π
LikeLike
I suspect you are right π
LikeLike
Just so you know, I haven’t given up either. π
LikeLike
That’s good to know π
LikeLike
What are friends for, anyway. π
LikeLike
Good to have them π
LikeLike
Indeed. π
LikeLike
π
LikeLike