"If you are a coward by nature, don't worry. We can still use you. You can get down behind the biblical text. You can peek out from behind the text saying, 'I don't know if I would say this, but I do think the text does.'"- Walter Brueggemann (as quoted by Will Willimon)
This has been a go-to concept for me. The longer I have been doing this preaching thing, the more I see in the text that is at odds with modern sensibilities- things so outsized and seemingly indefensible.. commands to kill, commonly accepted actions declared as heinous sin (seafood anyone?), descriptions of awful, awful actions held up as praiseworthy (Psalm 137)... So many texts I’d just rather not preach.
The preacher has two ready choices- either declare it as The Word of God which Must Be Accepted Without Question!, or hemm and haw, apologizing for the text, explaining it away into irrelevance.
The first option leads to rabid fundamentalism, particularly as it often gives no alternative, no interpretive method for sifting the timeless from the time-bound. If the Word says it, we do it. End of discussion. No, you can't ask a question about it... I said "End of Discussion!"
And beyond just the kooky externals that inevitably work their way into the life of a community that lives this way (NO! Of course women can't wear pants to church! The Old Testament forbids it!), something happens inside. Questions are stifled, left unasked (at least out loud), doubt is seen as a sign of lacking true relationship with God and with the text ("You just don't value God's Word!"). And eventually people are divided into two groups- The fully accepting who stay, and the doubters and questioners who leave- and this last group, in their leaving often leave Church and God completely, thinking that if that's what it's all about, then I want none of it.
The other option, explaining the text away into irrelevance leads to the kind of bloodless religiosity that rarely does anyone any good. Church takes on a social function, the Bible is patronizingly accepted as a necessary inconvenience... any religious book would do, this just happens to be ours... and because they are bound together in the same Book, in the losing of the difficult parts we necessarily lose all the rest- the power of God's Word and the Gospel itself.
But there's a third option, one which I use as necessary... and although I've titled this "the Cowardly Pastor" and Brueggemann's quote does nothing to counter the notion, I tend to think that approaching the text this way, especially in our preaching, is actually a courageous choice.
It's courageous because what we are saying to our community is "I don't understand this. I have wrestled with this all week. I have read commentary after commentary and none of the 'answers' offered satisfy. There's no getting around this... this is a hard text." And if any of you have ever preached, you know that the last thing you want to stand before the people and say is "I don't know."
But between asking the community to accept blindly and asking them to disregard casually lies the third option- asking them to wrestle.
This begins when we ourselves wrestle with the text- when we walk shakingly up to a passage that threatens to shipwreck us, to do us in and we stand before it, determined not to give way. Like Jacob wrestling with God, we approach these most frightening texts and say "I will not let you go until you bless me" and we wrestle, as individuals and as a community with the words that we know hold truth and meaning for us, a blessing for us, a communication from God Himself, if only we could understand them.
And so we wrestle. As a community we say, "We know this doesn't sound good, and we're not particularly sure that we really get this..." and we pray, and we ask, and we discuss... and we don't back away. Perhaps understanding comes quickly. Perhaps it comes after many months. Perhaps it never does. But we keep on wrestling.
And we keep on wrestling, because we want, we need to hear from God... and we know that God does not always speak things which we will like, nor does He always speak things which we will easily understand... but He never speaks things which are unnecessary. We refuse to write off His Word. God speaks to us for reasons, His own reasons, reasons which may not be readily apparent, but reasons.
And so we neither say "We just accept it, la la la!" and to hell with those who can't quit manage that mental trick, nor do we say "Well, no matter... let's just move on…"
As preachers, we can stand and say, "No, I wouldn't have said it that way myself, but the text certainly does say it. Now, what will we do with it?"
And then we wrestle.
This has been a go-to concept for me. The longer I have been doing this preaching thing, the more I see in the text that is at odds with modern sensibilities- things so outsized and seemingly indefensible.. commands to kill, commonly accepted actions declared as heinous sin (seafood anyone?), descriptions of awful, awful actions held up as praiseworthy (Psalm 137)... So many texts I’d just rather not preach.
The preacher has two ready choices- either declare it as The Word of God which Must Be Accepted Without Question!, or hemm and haw, apologizing for the text, explaining it away into irrelevance.
The first option leads to rabid fundamentalism, particularly as it often gives no alternative, no interpretive method for sifting the timeless from the time-bound. If the Word says it, we do it. End of discussion. No, you can't ask a question about it... I said "End of Discussion!"
And beyond just the kooky externals that inevitably work their way into the life of a community that lives this way (NO! Of course women can't wear pants to church! The Old Testament forbids it!), something happens inside. Questions are stifled, left unasked (at least out loud), doubt is seen as a sign of lacking true relationship with God and with the text ("You just don't value God's Word!"). And eventually people are divided into two groups- The fully accepting who stay, and the doubters and questioners who leave- and this last group, in their leaving often leave Church and God completely, thinking that if that's what it's all about, then I want none of it.
The other option, explaining the text away into irrelevance leads to the kind of bloodless religiosity that rarely does anyone any good. Church takes on a social function, the Bible is patronizingly accepted as a necessary inconvenience... any religious book would do, this just happens to be ours... and because they are bound together in the same Book, in the losing of the difficult parts we necessarily lose all the rest- the power of God's Word and the Gospel itself.
But there's a third option, one which I use as necessary... and although I've titled this "the Cowardly Pastor" and Brueggemann's quote does nothing to counter the notion, I tend to think that approaching the text this way, especially in our preaching, is actually a courageous choice.
It's courageous because what we are saying to our community is "I don't understand this. I have wrestled with this all week. I have read commentary after commentary and none of the 'answers' offered satisfy. There's no getting around this... this is a hard text." And if any of you have ever preached, you know that the last thing you want to stand before the people and say is "I don't know."
But between asking the community to accept blindly and asking them to disregard casually lies the third option- asking them to wrestle.
This begins when we ourselves wrestle with the text- when we walk shakingly up to a passage that threatens to shipwreck us, to do us in and we stand before it, determined not to give way. Like Jacob wrestling with God, we approach these most frightening texts and say "I will not let you go until you bless me" and we wrestle, as individuals and as a community with the words that we know hold truth and meaning for us, a blessing for us, a communication from God Himself, if only we could understand them.
And so we wrestle. As a community we say, "We know this doesn't sound good, and we're not particularly sure that we really get this..." and we pray, and we ask, and we discuss... and we don't back away. Perhaps understanding comes quickly. Perhaps it comes after many months. Perhaps it never does. But we keep on wrestling.
And we keep on wrestling, because we want, we need to hear from God... and we know that God does not always speak things which we will like, nor does He always speak things which we will easily understand... but He never speaks things which are unnecessary. We refuse to write off His Word. God speaks to us for reasons, His own reasons, reasons which may not be readily apparent, but reasons.
And so we neither say "We just accept it, la la la!" and to hell with those who can't quit manage that mental trick, nor do we say "Well, no matter... let's just move on…"
As preachers, we can stand and say, "No, I wouldn't have said it that way myself, but the text certainly does say it. Now, what will we do with it?"
And then we wrestle.
Your post is honest and realistic....could you offer some suggestions for "how to wrestle" with this sort of textual tension? What is your process and what can you offer for someone who wants to learn how to wrestle?
Posted by: Cynthia | February 08, 2010 at 07:58 AM
I understand what the quote is saying and I have to agree with you assessment of it actually taking someone courageous to admit that "i don't know it all." Sure takes away the idea of "infallibility" "don't argue with me because I have a direct line to God" some pastors want to project. Good thoughts. btw: I came by way of aliens and strangers.
Posted by: Bill (cycleguy) | February 09, 2010 at 05:19 AM
I am overjoyed to see this type of authenticity and honesty in a post about biblical interpretation. I applaud your humbleness. I think if more churches would allow their congregations to be active participants in studying the Word, they'd find that the members may sometimes offer an understanding that they may have not otherwise seen. This is not a sign of weakness, but instead, this wrestling is a sign of great strength. Thank you for sharing.
Posted by: Jessica Gavin | February 12, 2010 at 02:26 PM