This Tuesday, Dean Baker offered a quote from Athanasius in his post. Usually, May 2nd would be celebrated as his “feast” day (meaning a day of remembrance and celebration); but he got bumped. Ascension Day (which is celebrated 40 days after Easter) took center stage yesterday, and that bumped Saints Philip and James. Since they were apostles, that meant they had to have a day in the sun, so they bumped into today, leaving Athanasius with no feast. Who in the world thinks it’s important to monitor all this, you might ask, and why?
Well, it all has to do with what made Athanasius famous in the first place. In the fourth century, followers of Jesus began to struggle over how to capture what is important about Jesus. For one or two centuries, most Christians thought the world would end very soon, so there was no need to define an enduring tradition. That didn’t happen, so Christians began to focus on capturing core truths they wanted coming generations (including us!) to receive. Athanasius and Arius were two participants in wider discussions about how to capture who Jesus was in words. Both felt strongly that the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus were a fulcrum in human history that changed everything, that Jesus brought new possibilities for humanity into being. Sadly, they couldn’t agree about how to describe Jesus himself so as to get this across. Athanasius wanted to emphasize that Jesus was God incarnate, bringing eternal, divine power into our condition. Arius wanted to emphasize Jesus’ true humanity, to underscore that his actions inure to the benefit of all humans.
We treasure apostles like Philip and James because they were first-hand witnesses. Without first-hand witnesses, none of the later saints would have anything to argue about. That’s why the feast for Philip and James takes priority today. I have always found what Athanasius and Arius agreed upon much more significant than their disagreements. The Gospel lesson for this coming Sunday concludes with these words of prayer from Jesus, “Holy Father, protect them in your name that you have given me, so that they may be one, as we are one.” (John 17:11). The spiritual feast Jesus brought to earth is for everyone, and today is a good day to remember that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Interesting reflection on Arius and Athanasius. So, do you disagree with the First Council of Nicea that Arius was promoting a heresy in saying that there was a time when God the Father was when God the Son was not? Do you think that in John 1:1-5, "the Word" refers to Christ?
Dear Perpetua,
I agree with the answers given by the Council of Nicea to the questions they asked. And, I am thankful for the witness of those who have passed that faith on to me (including the author of the Gospel of John). I can say that and also be sad that different questions were not made the focus, thereby keeping Arius in communion. For me, the more important questions do not concern the past of God's Son but the present of God's Son. He promised to be with us even to the end of the age. Are we paying attention to him? Are we living by his new commandment to love one another as he loved us? The first Perpetua pleaded with her companions to do just that as she put aside all fear. I think she got it right.
Dear canon kathleen kelly,
I'm a little confused by your response. It was Arius who insisted on his theology that contradicted the first words of the Gospel of John, and refused to back down.
There is a good reason that one portion of Article 20 of the 39 Articles reads "and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another."
This is so important because all the pieces fit together like a fine multidimensional jigsaw puzzle. When people try to change one little piece, it has effects on all the other parts of the structure, but we can't really tell what the effects will be in advance.
If someone is spreading a reading of one part of scripture so that it is repugnant to another, is teaching a theology that pulls a piece out of the multidimensional jigsaw puzzle, that is exactly where we need to focus our attention and say "Stop!"
And if the people spreading the destabilizing reading won't stop, it is not the one's who defend the structure that are unloving. The ones who are unloving are the ones who refuse to recognize the danger they are creating by undermining the structure, the ones who disregard the warnings of the disaster that will happen when the weakened structure collapses.
Dear Perpetua,
I can only add this to your thoughtful post. The visible church, the institutional church, is not perfect. This is why it strikes me as important to keep those whose views are somewhat dissonant from the center within the fold, so that we can all continue to learn from each other and grow in understanding. We can criticize a view and explain why we think it wrong without breaking communion. I find it meaningful that Jesus fed Judas at the Last Supper. We have nothing to fear in maintaining such openness. God has the salvation of the world fully under control, thanks be to God.
Post a Comment