The Pope recently came under criticism from the Pakistan parliament for making “derogatory” comments about Islam. In a speech about the concept of holy war, the Pope quoted a 14th century Christian emperor who had said Muhammad had brought the world only “evil and inhuman” things. While the Pope was not saying this himself, and was, in fact trying to cultivate a position of respect and dialogue towards other religions and cultures including Islam, his comments were, nevertheless, taken to indicate quite the opposite.

I strive in my work and my life to be open-minded about people of other faiths and cultures and not to judge others on the basis of stereotypes and I believe this is a fairly general value in our society. However, I often feel offended by the language of the Bible. In particular, readings from the Old Testament often refer in negative ways to the Jewish people. While I appreciate that these words were written in a particular historical context and of relevance to that time, I do nevertheless feel uncomfortable listening to them now. After all, we live in a completely different historical context where these words are easily heard as inflammatory, prejudiced, and even racist. Why do we continue to use such texts as lessons? And why do we use the Old Testament as a source of lessons when it was replaced by the New Testament?

As I offer an answer, I must state up-front that I speak on behalf of no one but myself, out of my own (sometimes ill-informed) opinion.

First, regarding the Pope’s statements in September. I’ve gone back and read the news reports and the excerpts from the speech Pope Benedict XVI gave in Bonn, Germany in mid-September. His comments were clearly taken out of context, and I personally believe that we have the media to blame for the outrage, rather than the Pope or reactionist Muslims. The Pope was giving an academic lecture at a University on a topic that was of very little interest to anyone not gathered there. But that’s where the Pope’s problems lie.

The Pope, like the Archbishop of Canterbury, is an academic theologian. He has devoted his life to studying the Christian faith (and likely others) from every angle, and most likely in ways that have little to do with our daily lives as Christians. While there is a need for academic theologians, their statements and lectures are sometimes incomprehensible, and often can only be understood in the context in which the statement was made (ie, an academic lecture). I’ve read a few bits of Ratzinger’s (the Pope’s ‘real’ name) writings for essays while in theological college. I’ve read a bit more of Rowan Williams’, and I find him often incomprehensible, while maintaining that he is very astute, pastoral and a Godly man.

The difference is, I think, is where they perceive themselves to be within the public eye. The Archbishop of Canterbury has been in the media for years, well before he was Archbishop of Canterbury, and certainly while he was Archbishop of Wales. While he may sometimes come across as hard to understand, he knows that the media (at least the British media) is always watching him. I don’t think that Pope Benedict has learned that, yet. As Pope, he is not only the leader of over 1 billion Roman Catholic Christians in the world, he is looked to by many, many others as having important things to say about faith and life, much moreso than the ABC. I think that the Pope took for granted that no one would be interested in his academic lecture, but he was wrong! As Pope, in the media age, every word uttered by this man will be heard by someone, and, if ‘newsworthy’, will be picked up by the media. This will be an important aspect for the Pope to master, especially since he is quite conservative in an increasingly liberal West, and an increasingly conservative East of other faiths.

But what of the use of ancient texts, including our own? I would say that there are three reasons to engage with writings of any age, especially our religious documents:
1. To understand the roots of our religion and faith;
2. To be spiritually nourished by what is written, and how it can be applied to our lives with fresh eyes;
3. To learn from history, lest we be doomed to repeat it!

I think those three speak for themselves, so I won’t belabor the points. But I will write about what I think about the importance of the Bible and the use of the Old Testament, and of Christian writings written since then.

The Bible is the best selling book, but the least read by individuals. It’s quite common for a household (in the West) to have a Bible, whether a family Bible or a newer version. People who have never set foot into a church have Bibles. There is something about the Bible that people think brings God into their homes. The Bible doesn’t do that. The Bible is of no use to anyone unless it is read!

Furthermore, I take what is called the canonical approach to biblical interpretation. That means I look at the whole canon (what books are in it) of the Bible when applying it to my daily life. From Exodus onward (save a few books), the Bible is pre-dominantly historical, many of the characters (not necessarily the exact stories) showing up in other non-Jewish and non-Christian writings of the same era. Personally, I find the stories in the Old Testament neither always literal nor always allegorical. I don’t believe interpretation of anything (written, spoken, etc) is that black and white. I also believe that God does cause what we call ‘miracles’ to happen. As a scientist, I know full well that science cannot and does not explain everything.

Looking at the Bible and Christian history as a whole, I very firmly declare that the Bible has very little to do with being an instruction book for how to live your life, and everything to do with God’s love for God’s people. Christianity is not about being good; it's about loving God and responding to the unconditional love that God gives us…freely. That expression of God’s love begins at the first verse of Genesis, and doesn’t end, even after the last words of Revelation (which is “The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints. Amen.”, by the way). The revelation of God’s love for His people is not only contained within the Bible, but more on that later. All that said, when the Bible is quoted out of context, even as part of the cycle of readings on a Sunday morning, it is easy to lose sight of what God is/was doing in the Bible stories. Paul is accused by liberals of excluding people, when in reality, Paul is one of the most inclusive people in the New Testament. He was called to give the Good News to the Gentiles, when all the Apostles were preaching to Jews or insisting that Gentiles converted to Judaism before becoming Christians. The horrible violence in the Old Testament is related to God’s promise of land to the Israelites, which lies at the heart of the problems in Israel / Palestine…to whom, exactly, was that land promised?

The Old Testament has a lot that can still speak to us today, and it was not usurped by the New Covenant (which is what we learn about in the New Testament). The Old Testament tells us a lot about “God’s People”, the promise of unconditional love from God, and the command that we return that love. The bits and pieces we don’t typically like are usually (with the exception of the Book of Joshua) about those who do not follow God. The prophets rebuke the Israelites for not returning God’s love, which is partially expressed by “being good”. The prophets were well up on social responsibility, serving the poor, and the ills of selfishness and self-centeredness...that’s not a Guardian newspaper or New Labour invention! The Exile is said to be God’s response to the Israelites’ not upholding their end of the Covenant, and their lack of social responsibility. We on the liberal end of the Church do not like to say “God punishes”, but there is no evidence in Christian or biblical history to that…quite the opposite! But despite the Restoration of the Israelites and of Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the Temple, the Israelites still fail to uphold their end of the Covenant…which brings us to the new covenant…in Jesus Christ. God came to earth as man so that the Covenant might be restored. And as you read the four Gospels in light of Israelite history and the Old Testament, a lot of it becomes a lot clearer!!!

So, how do we know God loves us? Certainly one way is by reading the Bible, but one needs to take into consideration what has been written above. The Bible is not the only way to know of God’s love or to experience God. However, the Bible informs us of the nature of God, that God works in the world, that God does love His people, and that God wants us to love Him and all of His Creation in return. As I mentioned, I typically have a canonical approach to biblical interpretation, yet, I do not think that the canon should be closed!!! It was closed sometime in the 5th Century. The revelation of God is going on all the time!! And those who write about it must be heard! Despite what I think about him, many people are uplifted by the writings of the Archbishop of Canterbury and gain a deeper understanding of God. I am inspired by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who died in a Nazi concentration camp. I am also inspired by many of the Desert Fathers from the early Christian era, and they have taught me how to see God though different means. I would include some music in their, as well. Never stop searching for God! The Church, through biblical interpretation of the life and ministry of Jesus, gives us assurance that we meet God in two ways: Baptism and the Eucharist…which is what a sacrament is. John MacQuarry (and others, including me) says that anything can be a sacrament…but we only know when we have that encounter. The 14th Century Emperor whom the Pope quoted probably had some significance, and might be used today by some as spiritual nourishment. However, the main thing about that situation was that the Pope was giving an academic lecture at a university! It was perfectly reasonable for him to use such an old writing.

None of this, though, in my mind, suggests that can be 'spiritual but not religious'. “If we can encounter God in anything, then why can’t I just do it on my own?” That suggests that one has a Bible in the house, but has never read it! God calls us to be a community: local, regional, global and otherwise. “Spiritual but not religious” lacks accountability and is inherently self-centered (humano-centric). God, throughout the Old Testament, as well as through Jesus Christ in the New Testament, wants us to look beyond ourselves. Christianity, Islam and Judaism do not allow us to give up our reliance on God! “Spiritual but not religious” allows one to make up one’s own rules, and is neither spiritually nourishing nor open to be in relationship with others. It is “I am always in control of me.” I heard in a Thought for the Day several weeks ago about submitting to the Lordship of Christ: Lordship of Christ is not about subjugation, it is about is accepting above all else love, life, and liberation for all of God’s people, because that is what Christ came into the world to be the Lord of. Being a part of the Christian community that, together, strives toward the Kingdom of God can, we pray, bring about a global community in a way that no New Labour, Old Labour or ‘New Tory’ government could ever dream of!

The Lordship of God was the original socialist government! The 10 Commandments, the laws in Deuteronomy and Leviticus, and even the laws that Jesus cites and which Paul implements, are all about people living peaceably in community with one another. Leviticus and Deuteronomy may seem odd in a 21st Century context, but consider going from a nomadic community over two generations to a city-based, Temple-centered community. The Israelites needed to learn how to live together in a different way, and so do we in an age of media and technology!

Deuteronomy 6:4-5 sums up everything I’m trying to say, and it is also what Jesus quotes when He gives the “Golden Rule”: “Hear, O Israel: The LORD is our God, the LORD alone. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might.” Jesus adds: “And love all humankind as you would love yourself.” We are now a global community, and love for God and love for neighbour is where the true Kingdom of God is.

It is too bad that the Pope’s comments caused such a stir, wherever the blame is placed. Though, if we believe ourselves to be liberal, open-minded and tolerant, that predicates that we respect all (or most) opinions and ways of life, not just ones like our own; for the latter, we’re not liberal, open-minded or tolerant at all! And we have a lot to say to the world as Christians, which sometimes we give up in order to let others speak. And on that note, I offer two Letters to the Editor from the Church Times on the subject. (see below)

There are parts of our Christian and biblical histories which make us uncomfortable. There are bits of the Bible and our dogma and doctrine that we would rather not engage with. But just like the Pope’s quoting of the 14th Century emperor, the Bible, our dogma and our doctrine must be seen in its full context. God is not easy to get to know…primarily because we put up barriers, not God. Reading the Bible and other texts, even from other traditions, help us to begin to break down those barriers, and begin to understand the awesome nature of God’s love. I know I’ve preached on it several times, but let go of the self and open the self up to God! In that vulnerability, amazing things can happen!

-The Revd Ian M Delinger, November 2006