HOW TO READ THE BIBLE

HOW TO READ THE BIBLE

There are actually many ways to study scripture. The various methods of reading and making meaning of scriptural texts are collectively called Biblical Criticism.

The least helpful and least accurate way would be to read as a fundamentalist might. Fundamentalists are narrowly focused Christians who believe that non-Christians are rejected by God and that one must accept certain "fundamentals" in order to truly be Christian. Those fundamentals include:

The Bible is to be considered inerrant (basically dictated by God without any mistake or incorrect information), Jesus' literal virginal conception is not to be questioned, his execution is meant to be seen as our means of salvation, the resurrection must be seen as a literal, historical, physical event, and one must expect his literal, physical return one day.

I, personally, cannot affirm a single "fundamental" as being true for me. The Bible is for me a human project, the so-call Virgin Birth is mythological (comparable to many miracle birth stories in antiquity), Jesus' execution was a brutal act by an oppressive empire, resurrection is an experience we share but not a single, literal, historical event, and Jesus' return is allegorical and meant to help us be Christ in the world rather than have us wait for a hero to tidy up our messes.

But I can easily reject fundamentalist views because I have learned to think critically and because I have been exposed to various methods of biblical criticism.

If the fundamentalist approach isn't helpful, what are some ways of engaging scripture that might be more energizing?

Allegorical Interpretation: In addition to characters and stories say on the page, a second level of meaning is extracted from (or applied to) the text. Allegorical interpretation might suggest a story from one part of the Bible represents something from another part (like the Ark representing St. Mary sheltering God's people beneath her veil in stormy times) or it might apply biblical stories to larger, universal themes (rather than asking if the resurrection literally happened, an allegorical approach would be to ask how the resurrection story points to possibilities in our lives to rise above defeat, heartache, unfairness, loss, or disappointment). 

Allegorical approaches to bible reading were used by Origen of Alexandria, by the mystic Emmanuel Swedenborg, and has traditionally been a preferred method of bible study in the New Thought Movement (Charles Fillmore, for example, used each apostle to represent mental states, e.g., John represented love, Thomas represented understanding, Peter represented faith and so on). 

Demythologizing Scripture: This approach looks at the fantastic claims of scripture (walking on water, Jonah in a fish, a donkey talking, people living hundreds of years, etc.) and tries to separate the claimed events from the moral lesson or theological point the stories may be trying to make. 

Historical-Critical Method (used to be called "Higher Criticism") - looks at the traditions, languages, oral transmission of stories, and politics that influenced the writers. Asks who is writing, to whom, and why? Has been used since the 19th century and has always been intended to read the texts free from dogmatic bias. Field of archeology is helpful to this method of study. 

Literary Criticism - tries to establish the genre of the documents (poetry, biography, homily, hymn, parable, etc). Examines the structure, date, and authorship of documents based largely on the internal evidence in the documents, but external evidence is employed when helpful (as in dating texts). If one document quotes another, those quotations are noticed and explored. If the voice of the "writer" changes (suggesting, perhaps, multiple writers) if the writing style changes, those things are brought under examination. Literary criticism studies the Bible as literature using scientific techniques to do so. 

Philology - studies histories of languages and compares languages to one another. Comparing ancient documents (biblical and non-biblical documents from the same periods and regions) in the ancient languages (Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, Coptic, etc.) is a very academic but also very enlightening field of study. 

Rhetorical Criticism - comparing communication styles and philosophies of biblical discourse.

Social Scientific Criticism - Uses anthropology, sociology, and social psychological to analyze biblical texts. Studies the behavior of people in the Bible in a social or cultural context, noticing ritual, customs, and actions within the environments of the actors.

Now, don't be put off by the word "criticism" - that isn't an attack on scripture. Criticism in this context is the use of scientific criteria and reason to understand and explain the meaning intended by the writers, if possible, with a high degree of objectivity. 

Some hermeneutical methods are more artistic than scientific. Theopoetics, for example, might read scripture through a theological lens, seeking to apply it in personal spiritual seeking, describing the process in artistic or poetic ways. It would try to embrace and communicate the experience of scripture to an imaginative reader. 

Some might find the allegorical method to be more artistic, or at least, more creative, than scientific. So, in addition to the scientific ways of engaging the Bible, there are also artistic ways. 

How to read the Bible? I have found every method described here (apart from the fundamentalist approach) to be helpful and enlightening. And, guess what? There are even more methods! 

Regardless of the method(s) we choose, if we approach the texts with open minds and a joy in discovering new insights, we'll probably find that we haven't nearly exhausted what the Bible has to offer us. Keep reading, keep thinking, keep questioning, and keep imagination, and the Bible will continue to open worlds of discovery for you. It might not support your doctrinal training and dogmatic certainties, but that's actually a good thing. (dw)

Bigotry in the Name of Religion is Still Bigotry and It Has Consquences

The killer in Orlando was apparently outraged by seeing two men kiss in Miami, and his reaction was to kill 49 people in Orlando. Obviously he was mentally ill, and he may have been influenced by extremist ideology, but Heterosexism/homophobia was his primary motivation. Two people expressing affection angered him to the point of committing mass murder. Religious leaders and politicians whose rhetoric continuously dehumanize and demonize same-gender loving people are giving unstable people tacit permission to commit violence. Hate speech, even when disguised as a stump speech or a sermon, fuels the fire of violence. Enough blood has been spilled. I will not "agree to disagree" when it comes to the sacred value of LBGT people. Your opinion is not equal to someone's life. We must insist the bigots own their hatred and its consequences and stop blaming it on "God."

A message to a well known evangelical leader

On Facebook today, the Reverend Billy Graham's son (a well known opponent of marriage equality and gay rights) posted a lovely tribute to his parents. His father (Billy Graham) is still alive; his mother died a few years ago. It was actually touching to see him celebrate his parents' lifelong love and devotion. I responded on his wall as follows:
"A lovely tribute to a loving couple; I hope you will one day speak as fondly of all loving couples who are enriched by their bond and shared commitment. Same-gendering loving couples also love deeply and truly and they painfully miss their departed spouses. When we recognize that all mutually shared love is sacred, love will begin to heal our fractured world. God bless your father and his precious memories and God bless all loving, committed relationships." (dw)

The Fundamentalist Persecution Complex

A school in Mississippi had an "optional" assembly that was opened in prayer. Someone sued, the school was fined ($7k i think) and now, of course, the Religious Right is crying that Christians are oppressed, the courts are being used against them, the end is near, the boogeyman ("Satan") is attacking the church...blah blah blah. I asked if they would be as upset if during an "optional" assembly, someone opened the meeting with an invocation to Isis and someone was offended and sued the school; would they rush to the defense of the "persecuted" worshipers of Isis? My suspicion is that in THAT instance they would support (perhaps even lead) the suit against the school for allowing the Isisian prayer!
Moreover, I chimed in with the following:
"1. Jesus instructed people to NOT pray in public...but this is about Christian dominance and Christian fragility, so never mind Jesus' opinion on the matter.
2. Why would anyone go to a public school for prayer meetings? [It wasn't billed as a prayer meeting, but once you pray, it's a prayer meeting, unless, like at government functions, invocations are offered by people of many religions or in neutral language that is more or less to the idea of goodness, hope, and civility and not to any deity or promoting any dogma].
Optional or not, there could certainly be peer pressure to attend, and proselytizing could result (If I were a Jewish or Agnostic or Muslim or Buddhist or Hindu or Wiccan parent, I wouldn't want my children being targets of convrsion tactics at the tax supported public school).
3. When you have to pay a worship tax or have to get state approval to hold worship services on church grounds, then you will have an argument for being oppressed for your faith. When you don't get to have "optional" Christian worship services (where there are also no "optional" Buddhist, Satanist, Sikh, Jewish, Muslim, or Scientology worship services) at a non-religious, tax supported venue, that is not oppression. That is the denial of unearned privilege. Your child can still pray all day long (who would even know?), worship every Sunday with you in the church of your choice, even be driven to school with a rosary dangling from the rearview mirror. Your faith isn't being attacked; it just isn't being given preferential treatment. It's a non-issue."

I await my hate mail.

Bad Theology. Bad Meteorology. Bad Logic. Just Bad. (Fundamentalist Threatens WH with Divine Lightening Strike)

Franklin Graham suggested that President Obama have lightening rods attacked to the White House? Why? Because of marriage equality. 
Graham was suggesting that God might vengefully attack the White House with lightening (which is monumentally bad meteorology as well as bad theology, and PS - is a lightning rod all it takes to defend oneself against divine wrath? It's harder to ward off vampires!) . The threatened lightening attack would be to show divine displeasure with Love's victory resulting in marriage equality in the US (because, you know. God is love, so what would annoy God more than love's victory?). 
Really? 
No thunder bolt from Olympus for Hitler, Stalin, Jack the Ripper, those who delayed initial funds for AIDS research and education, the architects of the Crusades and Inquisition and Apartheid, but marriage equality gets the top popped on the cosmic can of whoop ass? Seriously? 
And not leaders of the 18 countries that preceded the US in marriage equality, just our president? For real?! 
Slavery, Jim Crow, internment of Japanese Americans, the genocide of Native Americans...none of this merited divine displeasure, but love and equality...that's what gets Neptune's trident in the ass? And not the 37 states that already had marriage equality, and not the 5 Justices that sealed the deal for the country, but the president? 
Mr Graham does hear how incredibly hateful, stupid, and crazy that sounds, right? 
Sadly, there is a veritable army of people stirred by his ridiculous rhetoric. 
Sigh.

Lots of Ways to be Brave

Franklin Graham posted today: "Caitlyn Jenner is being honored with the ESPN ESPY Award for courage? I find this hard to swallow after spending time with wounded military veterans and their spouses...they are true heroes."

My response was as follows:

"People who come out (as same gender loving, gender non-conforming or transgender) in a hostile environment (such as the one evangelical churches have created) are courageous.
People who train for the Olympics are courageous (Caitlyn is already brave on two fronts).
People who are first responders are courageous.
Soldiers, sailors and Air Force personnel are courageous.
Single moms are courageous.
Social justice Activists are courageous.
One example of courage doesn't negate others. Of course wounded veterans are courageous, and so are others for other reasons.
A sports network is honoring an accomplished athlete...it took a real act of pettiness on FG's part to try to warp that into a controversy.
The constant vilification of everyone who doesn't look like a Leave It to Beaver character is making religion seem mean-spirited and irrelevant.
As a Progressive Christian I affirm the sacred value of transgender people, but more importantly, as a human being I reject that religion's purpose (or the purpose of any social institution) is to demonize or dehumanize or marginalize anyone..." - Durrell Watkins 

Will Right Wing Christians Support "Religious Freedom" Based Discrimination When They Are Its Victims?

This is a response to someone who defended the "religious freedom" bills that are meant to allow discrimination against LBGT people. He insisted that same-gender coupling was "sinful" (I strongly disagree) and said that while we should always be polite to people, we shouldn't be forced to participate in same-sex weddings (as if selling flowers or cakes or tuxes to people was "participating" in their nuptials). He further stated that while Jesus associated with "sinners" he probably didn't pay prostitutes for sex or steal people's donkeys. I responded with one of my more verbose rants. It follows:

Actually, the Palm Sunday story features Jesus having his disciples steal a donkey. But, there were so many Messianic figures in the first century that was a common practice...in case the next Messianic claimant was really the one, if they asked for an animal to ride, one usually just let them have it...though, the stories don't show the disciples asking, just taking, and when they are caught and asked, "what are you doing?" only then do they say, "The Teacher has need of it." But, Jesus wasn't the literalist that many of his later followers pretend to be.

Secondly, Jesus may not have paid for sex (though we can't know), but his ancestor (Tamar's father-in-law) certainly did (with Tamar, who is listed in Jesus' genealogy)...in fact, ALL of the women in his genealogy are associated with Taboo activity (Tamar and Rahab were prostitutes, Ruth was a pagan Moabite, Mary was an unwed mother)...that Matthew makes a point of showing Jesus' less than pristine lineage shows that Jesus comes from earthy stock...of course the men were pretty gritty too...Solomon with 1000 sexual partners, David who was a murderer and a rapist, Boaz who seems pretty gay to me, etc.

Thirdly, these scriptural and theological discussions are IRRELEVANT for civil law. We aren't a theocracy. All citizens should have equal opportunity and equal protection. Religion shouldn't even be part of the discussion. We already have religious freedoms...we can worship anywhere in anyway or not at all. We are at choice. But religion can't be an excuse to discriminate against others in public life (and business and politics are public life). We settled the issue of if diners could refuse service to people because of race long ago...can they now refuse service to Muslims, atheists, gays, single mothers, non-citizens...NO. 

If Christian Business Owner doesn't agree with abortion, then she shouldn't have one, is free to pray for unwed mothers, donate money to anti-abortion "counseling" services, but is not free to say "I won't sell you my product because i heard you had an abortion." When you open a business, the social contract is that you will serve the public without discrimination. You don't have to agree with Hindus, but you can't deny them service. You don't have to understand that sexual orientation is innate and not chosen, but your ignorance of sexual diversity isn't a reason to refuse service to LBGT people. You can think atheists are on a fast train to hell, but you can't humiliate them by denying them service in this life. If I sell you flowers or cake or a veil that you will use at your wedding that i don't understand or like, that doesn't imply that I agree with you, only that I don't use my personal prejudice as an excuse to humiliate or dehumanize you. You have a business, gays want to support your business (but if they know how you feel about them, I wonder why they would), and that's that. YOu aren't allowed to use your business to force your religious values on others (or to punish them for now sharing your beliefs).

You can even let the Bully Some Homos for Christ Club put posters advertising their next meeting in your window, but you can't refuse to do business with someone just because they are the target of the BSHFCC.

These onerous and odious "freedom" bills are a petty backlash against marriage equality. In the end, they will be ruled unconstitutional (and are already proving to be vastly unpopular) and those who wish to marginalize same-gender loving people will have to find new and more novel approaches to do so. 

One final point: Sauce for the Christian goose is sauce for the non-Christian gander. Will the Christians who assume these new bills give them a blank check to dehumanize same-gender loving people, be as supportive of the laws when Muslim business owners refuse to do business with "Christian infidels", when Wiccan shop-keeps refuse service to anyone driving an Earth harming SUV, when Christian Science teachers won't send your injured child to the school nurse, when Gay Christians won't serve homophobes...If religion is the legal excuse to deny service, then any religion can be used to deny service to anyone...will Right Wing Christians support the law when it is used against them?

Resumes Matter in Politics

I hate to sound elitist (not enough to prevent myself from sounding elitist)...but resumes matter. The people of my homeland (AR) elected Asa Hutchinson (or failed to vote, which is even worse) knowing that he is a graduate of Bob Jones University (founded by someone who was not himself a college graduate for the sole purpose of making sure Conservative Christians wouldn't be "contaminated" by such scientific discoveries as evolution), a bastion of fundamentalism, misogyny, racism, and homophobia. If he has not publicly and repeatedly repudiated his undergraduate indoctrination, then one should assume that his biases are usually in favor of oppressive positions and policies. We must know WHO we are voting for, and, we must VOTE. Otherwise, the foolishness of Mike H and Asa H will be standard fare. Young people tend to be more progressive, but also more disenfranchised from the political process. We have to get our young liberal supporters to the voting booth!!! (even as the Far Right attempts to make voting less convenient)

I understand that in response to public outcry, he has sent the Religious Freedom bill back to the legislature for some clean up work (so, hooray for raising our voices), but it should come as no surprise that without such public protests the onerous bill would probably have been enacted without delay.

Meanwhile, there is more work to do. About half the country now has similar laws that have passed or are being proposed. Freedom of Religion is already guaranteed in this country. We don't need religious freedom laws which are usually nothing more than an attempt to legalize discrimination against marginalized groups of people. 

My response to someone who insisted that his fundamentalist views were biblical and being biblical made them right...he further said his views were unquestionable b/c the bible "teaches its readers to believe it in its entirety."

The bible does not teach the reader to believe it in its entirety because the bible isn't the bible in the bible. the canon of scripture wasn't closed until LONG after the life of Jesus. the bible the people in the NT knew was the Septuagint (Hebrew Scriptures in Greek including the books that Protestants now call the Apocrypha which are part of Catholic bibles)...there is no New TEstament in the New Testament. Anyway, that bible "in its entirety" tells slaves to obey their masters, forbids tattoos, demands a kosher diet and a 7th day (Friday night to Saturday night) Sabbath and assumes the world is flat (with literal corners) and doesn't seem troubled by two contradictory creation accounts (and other contradictions). So, "biblolatry" isn't being more faithful or more devout, just less thoughtful. The doctrine of the Trinity wasn't hammered out until the 4th century (again, long after Jesus) and even if the bible did fall out of the sky fully written, it is beyond weak to say "the bible is true because it says it is."

God must be so much bigger than what ancients said about God (or what anyone says about God). God, "the ground of being" isn't a person, isn't a member of a human religion, and surely wouldn't reject anyone for any reason. Fundamentalism has made religion a weapon of oppression which has done far more damage than good.

Do Real Horror...Not Silly Left Behind Stuff...

It all started for me with Bewitched...following that was Buffy the Vampire Slayer, True Blood, Charmed, American Horror Story (Asylum), American Horror Story (Coven), and every incarnation of Dracula...and as disturbing as some might find my taste in entertainment to be, its still no where near as yucky or ridiculous as the Left Behind Series! If you're going to do dark and edgy, just do it; don't try to make it "religious" by wrapping it in a psuedo-literalistic reading of the ancient and highly metaphorical book of Revelation!!!

The Story (such as it is) of Satan

Q&A with Durrell Watkins (from Sunshine Cathedral's weekly newsletter)

Question: God is perfect. The angels are perfect. Satan was perfect. If heaven was perfect along with Satan how did Satan sin? Why did God allow sin to be known in heaven?

Answer: The first time we see “the satan” (i.e., the accuser) is in the Book of Job. In that story, “the satan” has full access to the heavenly council and is apparently simply doing his (or her) job as an accuser (sort of a prosecutor). It isn’t until much later (and probably as a result of Persian influence) “the satan” becomes “Satan”…the cosmic boogie man who is the cause of all mischief, suffering, and evil.

In the first century, it was commonly believed that difficulties and diseases were caused by evil spirits, and so “Satan” not only came to be thought of as the personification of evil, but as a leader or driving force of supernatural evil entities. Satan as a sort of Lord or Potentate of an afterlife prison called “Hell” is an even later development most vividly depicted in the literature and art of the middle ages and the Renaissance (e.g., Michelangelo’s Last Judgment and Dante’s Divine Comedy).

The story of Satan misbehaving in heaven and getting cast out isn’t really told in any one place in scripture. To form that story, one has to piece together unconnected texts: Luke10.18 (quoting Isaiah14.12, with some license…Isaiah is calling a political ruler “Lucifer”/Morning Star, the planet Venus), 2 Peter 2.4 (referring to angels being chained in “Tartarus”…a term borrowed from Greek mythology), Jude 6 (speaking of angels who did not keep to their proper domain, probably referring to the story in Genesis 6 where angels were said to have seduced humans), and Revelation 12.7-12 (a battle between angels and a dragon, the dragon probably representing Roman imperial power). By taking these disconnected texts and combining them together (and assuming that Lucifer, Satan, and the dragon are all the same character), the story of Satan as a fallen angel emerged. It is a story that developed over time, and one that I do not take literally.

Now, “Satan” is a convenient way of blaming the appearance of evil in our world on “someone.” But let’s also look at the rest of the Satan myth… “in the end” we are told, Satan is finally defeated by the forces of righteousness. What the story illustrates is that evil is not ultimately real. Evil is the absence of or the opposition to Good; but God, the Good, is omnipresent and so for God to be omnipresent means that there is nothing “real” that can ultimately oppose God/Good. A Course in Miracles states, “Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists; herein lies the peace of God.” Nothing can ultimately threaten or oppose what is truly Good. The appearance of evil must eventually give way to the Truth, just as darkness must be expelled the moment a candle is lit. Satan, as a literary figure representing evil, is only a temporary appearance, or illusion, which ultimately  must be banished by the light of Truth, which is that God is omnipresent and God is All Good. Good is what is true, what is real, and what must ultimately be experienced. 

(originally printed in Sunshine Cathedral's The Sun Burst in June 2010)

More Than One Way to be Religious

More Than One Way to be Religious

WRITTEN BY REV. DR. DURRELL WATKINS

“Prophet” Cindy Jacobs recently declared that weather hazards and ecological problems are the result of divine wrath in response to presidential decisions. And without offering specifics, she prognosticated that more calamities are on the way. Of course, it’s a safe bet that something unhappy will happen somewhere. It doesn’t take a great psychic gift to make that guess!

Before this embarrassing statement suggesting that weather is caused by the gods and “bad” weather is the result of divine displeasure I had never heard of Ms. Jacobs, but I’ve heard her kind of blame, shame, and scare theology all too often.

I spend my life building religious community. I offer a message of hope and healing to help people navigate the chances and challenges of life. I try to affirm the sacred value of all people. I work to get people to stand up and speak out for peace, diversity, equality, and justice. That is, in my view, is religion's high purpose.

Religion gives us language and space to celebrate joys, face difficulties, and form human bonds that prove to be the cure for loneliness. Religion is not meant to increase our fears, strengthen our prejudices, or give us enemies to blame for the uncertainties of life.

Hurricanes, earthquakes, heat-waves, blizzards, and even terrorist attacks have all been blamed on liberals, pro-choice politicians, same-gender loving people, and whoever else rightwing extremists might name as the reason for misfortune that they insist is Heaven sent.

I remember at the beginning of the AIDS crisis some preachers claiming that the disease was God’s punishment against people who Christian fundamentalists found to be unworthy of respect or even tolerance. Almost as reprehensibly, many other clergy remained silent as people continued to suffer and die from the then little understood but clearly devastating disease.

I don’t know why anyone would choose to embrace an understanding of spirituality that suggests a deity will send disease or any disaster. Such petty instance that everything unpleasant is proof that a supreme being hates all the people they hate makes religion seem irrelevant and oppressive; it also makes representatives of religion seem more committed to hatred and bigotry than to enlightenment and progress.

As a representative of religion (progressive religion, but religion nevertheless), I very much resent that religion is so often misused and I wish to offer a better, kinder, more reasonable, and more useful understanding of faith.

It is the worst sort of opportunism to use tragedies as a means of promoting hatred and intolerance. The appropriate response to tragedy is compassion, not blame. The best use of religion in times of trouble is to offer comfort, not condemnation. And if we listen to the “better angels of our nature” we will affirm human dignity in the face of chaos rather than using chaos as a weapon to further dehumanize those we may not understand or like.

We are each entitled to our own understanding of the Sacred, of course. But I, as a religious person, will have no deity that would not bless same-gender love, that would send storms to punish many just to torment a few, or that would send rather than heal disease.

But thankfully, there are other understandings of the ultimate reality that many of us call “God.” Some of us believe, teach, and experience the divine as a comforting presence, an urge to do good, the capacity to love, forgive, and share, and a deep desire to bring peace, hope, and healing to all people.

We are each entitled to our own understandings, but I for one will always choose those that build up rather than tear down, that heal rather than hurt, and that affirm diversity rather than demand division. I just wanted another religious voice to be heard today.

Durrell Watkins holds sociology and theatre degrees from Henderson State University and Goddard College, respectively, as well as a Master of Divinity degree from Union Theological Seminary and a Doctor of Ministry degree from the Episcopal Divinity School. He is the author of Wrestling with God without Getting Pinned: Old Stories, New Thoughts, & Progressive Spirituality (Outskirts Press, available at Amazon.com), and is the Senior Pastor of the Sunshine Cathedral in Fort Lauderdale (www.sunshinecathedral.org).

All Hail the Weather Deities

The fundies and right wing crazies have blamed earthquakes, hurricanes, and even terrorist attacks on divine retribution, saying God was punishing cities or countries that valued diversity and civil liberties. Now, a hurricane is heading for the GOP convention, and of course many of those right wingers hide out in the GOP. It is so tempting to use their rhetoric (even playfully) to suggest that God is out to get them; but let's not. Let's take the high road, if for no other reason than to show we have a more intelligent understanding of meteorology than that. The gods don't send bad weather to show displeasure. Weather just happens, and if we happen to be in the the flood plane or tornado path or near a fault line, we'll just get caught up in nature's drama. Of course they were idiotic to blame disaster on people they don't like; let's not be as idiotic.

Stop Gay Bashing for Jesus

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qCz-MO0PRg&list=UUi1vfps751gSRdDZIIzhkvw&index=1&feature=plcp

Stop Gay Bashing for Jesus

Take 11 minutes to watch this discussion and then share with your friends.

Is Christianity the One True Religion (12 minute video)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KelbEBJZA3Y&list=UUi1vfps751gSRdDZIIzhkvw&index=1&feature=plcp

Judgment Day

Q&A with Pastor Durrell

Question: I hate to admit it but the recent hoopla about May 21 being "Judgment Day" has really unnerved me. Do you believe that May 21 is Judgment Day? - N.F.

Answer: Life is filled with uncertainty, surprises, and unanswered questions. Part of being sentient beings is to wrestle with the complexities and ambiguities of life. However, some individuals (as well as some political, social, and religious organizations) lack the emotional and spiritual maturity to accept these simple realities. And so they pretend to have answers that can't be known in an attempt to feel more in control than they ever could be. This is one of the symptoms of the pathology known as "fundamentalism."

The problem with treating life as if it were so easily and completely predictable is at least twofold: (1) Such a view is delusional, and; (2) such a view is incredibly selfish. It suggests that in all the vastness of the universe, our sense of power, control, or importance is what matters most. Such a view could hardly help us live into our potential nor could it improve the condition of our world.

I honestly haven't paid much attention to the "Judgment Day" propaganda, but I do know that history is full of doomsday predictions that never came to pass. And I must admit having less than positive regard for ideologies that suggest a special class of people can escape the trials and difficulties of life by being beamed to another world mere hours, days, weeks, or months before the rest of creation is destroyed by some horrific force attributed to divine wrath. I think a more realistic understanding of life could probably be found at any given comic book convention.

Now, we certainly have the capacity to do great harm to our planet. Weapons of mass destruction, environmental neglect, even random natural disasters could possibly cripple our earth home, but none of that is inevitable, nor is any of that predictable. The bible isn't a crystal ball, religion isn't a substitute for living life, and whatever else God is, God must be more than a safety net for those who belong to the "right" club.

So, I fully expect that May 21 will be full of opportunities, challenges, rewards and disappointments much like every other day is for most people. And even if I am wrong, that still doesn't change how I would live my life. There is a legendary story about someone approaching St. Francis while he was gardening. The person asked St. Francis what he would do if he knew the world would end in an hour. St. Francis said, "I would finish my gardening." That is the example of mature faith.

I have no idea what will happen on any given day in the future, but I trust that whatever happens, God is with us and hope and joy will always be available to us no matter what else may be happening. And if you are reading this after May 21, then, well, case closed.


This was from the May 22nd "Sun Burst", the weekly newsletter of the Sunshine Cathedral. The online version of the Sunday newsletter is emailed out on the previous Thursday each week.

Pat Robertson Just Goes Too FAR

Pat Robertson should be so ashamed of himself. Really, Pat? A seismic disaster is b/c an entire country made a deal with the boogie-man? Could he REALLY be that superstitious? Not to mention being so unkind toward desperate, hurting people. There must be medication that can help this dillusional soul...

On the Death of Jerry Falwell by Rev. Durrell Watkins

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 15th, 2007

The Reverend Jerry Falwell died early this afternoon, according to http://news.bbc.co.uk. Falwell was a conservative activist, a Christian fundamentalist, and an opponent of the pro-choice movement, gay rights, and religious pluralism.

As a progressive and pluralistic Christian and a social liberal, I found myself holding views very different from most of Rev. Falwell’s stated positions. As a gay man and queer activist, I not only disagreed with many of Falwell’s views, but found myself feeling threatened and targeted by them.

However, in spite of differing opinions and life paths, I am reminded by Reverend Falwell’s death that life is fragile and short. The fragility and brevity of life should teach us that there is little room for grudges and hatreds and whereas Reverend Falwell preached and promoted views that I found offensive to my dignity, the truth remains that we are all part of the One Life, we are all connected within the Web of Existence, and we are all part of the same human family.

Therefore, we acknowledge that there are many people who love and respect Reverend Falwell and they must be saddened by his unexpected demise. We wish them comfort during this time of bereavement. And for Mr. Falwell, the energy of his consciousness will continue to evolve and journey forward; let us wish light and joy for his continued journey.

May Divine Love bless us all, reminding us of our unity, our common Source, and our sacred value.


Reverend Canon Durrell Watkins, MA, MDiv
Sunshine Cathedral
www.sunshinecathedral.org