EXPRESSING THE INEXPRESSIBLE

To read endnotes, click on the the note number, then click on the to return to your place in the text.

Not too many years ago, a furious storm arose in the Presbyterian Church over a women's conference in Minneapolis that has come to be known simply as "Re-imagining." The conveners' stated purpose was "to re-imagine [thus the name] what belief in God and life together in community means from a Christian-feminist perspective."⁽¹⁾ The conference drew over 2000 participants from 27 countries, 49 states and 15 denominations (including 400 or so Presbyterians).⁽²⁾ For an event occurring in Minnesota in November, more HEAT was generated around the country from such a chilly place than anyone could have dreamed.

Why? Two reasons. One: theological views were propounded during the event that were clearly not Christian. And two: Church money - money that had been given by faithful Christians in the expectation that it would be used to further the work of Jesus Christ - helped underwrite what many viewed as the propagation of heresy. Serious HEAT! Off with their heads!

And, indeed, heads DID roll. One Presbyterian official who had been involved in planning the conference was forced to resign her job after several months of very public attacks. Ultimately, that conference cost the job of the Executive Director of our General Assembly Council who last year was not approved for re-election as much in response to the handling of the Re-imagining controversy as anything.

At our PCUSA General Assembly meeting in Wichita that summer following Re-imagining, the heat outside the convention center (which was well over 100 several days in a row), was nothing compared to the emotional temperature inside. Of the 114 overtures sent by presbyteries to General Assembly concerning issues facing our denomination that year, over 50 dealt with RE-imagining - calls for investigations, calls for financial inquiries, calls for personnel reviews. One Assembly committee was established to deal with nothing but Re-imagining. What was facing the 55 men and women on that panel was not simply what to do about the conference, but the very serious question of whether or not the Presbyterian Church (USA) as we know it would survive.

Public hearings were held. Speaker after speaker, one pro then one con, took their few minutes to either point with pride or view with alarm. Hour after hour they came. Over 100 individuals made their positions known. There was great pain shared - pain from those who went to the conference and were blessed only to come home and find themselves being called heretics; pain from those who could not believe that, in good conscience, Presbyterians would even participate in such an abominable event, much less use church funds to pay for it. There was a great gulf between the two sides. No one knew if it could be bridged. Perhaps the church would split.

Well, as we know, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, it is now 1997 and there was no split. The Assembly committee did a wonderful job of identifying the issues and recommending changes that would prevent such outcries in the future. They affirmed that what we believe and say about God is serious business. "Theology matters," was the phrase they used.

Finally, the committee brought a plea for reconciliation and a call for all who had hurt others to apologize. With passion the committee chair, Dr. John Buchanan (who is currently our General Assembly Moderator) concluded, "...we ask 'critics' of the church's leadership...and 'critics of the critics,' in the name of God, to cease and desist - to allow healing to happen and trust to be rebuilt."

Within minutes, the Assembly, which had started out so incredibly divided that the future of our denomination was in doubt, voted 516 to 4 to approve the committee's report. After several emotional moments of celebration swept the hall, someone moved that the vote be recorded as unanimous, but our Stated Clerk said the only way that could be done would be if the vote actually WERE unanimous - anyway, he said 516-4 was about as close as Presbyterians could ever get to unanimity without being accused of running a communist election.

Do you know what we sang in celebration? The doxology:

Praise God from whom all blessings flow;
Praise Him all creatures here below;
Praise Him above, ye heavenly host;
Praise Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

Wonderful words of praise that hark back to ANOTHER theological controversy, if you can believe that. We recited the fruits of that battle a few minutes ago when we affirmed the ancient phrases of the Nicene Creed.

As you historians know, the Nicene Creed is the first official doctrinal statement of the whole Christian church. It developed from the work of the first two ecumenical councils, Nicaea in 325 AD and Constantinople in 381, gaining final approval by the prestigious Council of Chalcedon in 451.⁽³⁾ In its present form, it is the oldest theological affirmation of the church and is the only creed accepted by all three major branches of Christianity - Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant.

What prompted the councils in the first place was a controversy in the church about our understanding of God (just like the Re-imagining brouhaha). In particular, the issue was how to understand Jesus Christ in relation to God. Some wanted to say Jesus was God in human flesh; others wanted to say that, to be sure, Jesus was special, but not quite THAT special. The dispute was not confined to academic halls or ecclesiastical conclaves. Depending upon who happened to be in power at any one moment in any one place, there were excommunications and banishments. Various theologians had their own followings who were more than willing to take the battle to the streets, and yes, they actually had RIOTS over the issue.

Once things settled down, (and as the chronology indicates, it took years and years), the church said that, mysterious as it might be, the scriptural teaching about Jesus Christ is that he is truly God in the flesh. At the same time, Jesus Christ is fully human - not half-and-half, but 100% EACH! In essence, the creed says that whatever God is, Jesus is; and whatever humanity is, Jesus is that too, in one whole person. We do not pretend to understand all that, because Christ is unique - we have no one with whom to compare him.

The Nicene Creed also expresses our understanding of the Holy Spirit. Christian belief insists that the Spirit is also fully God, the giver and sustainer of life. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. One God, "in three persons," we sing, "Blessed Trinity." And that is what we celebrate on this Trinity Sunday.

Shirley Guthrie, who taught Christian theology to a generation of Presbyterian preachers at Columbia Seminary writes:

The mystery [of the Trinity] is far too central to the Christian faith either to be unthinkingly accepted because we are supposed to, or to be casually shrugged off because no one can explain it. This doctrine is important for what it prevents in the church rather than what it promotes. In short, it prevents us from misunderstanding God.

For example, it prevents us from thinking God is angry at us, but Jesus is our friend. This doctrine helps us understand God by what Jesus does. If you want to know what God is like, look at Jesus...And it also helps us understand that the Holy Spirit is not just here to make us more "spiritual" so that we deny this world and the needs of people, and our own physical bodies. But rather, it's function is to be the presence of God, which is most clearly seen in the work of Jesus...⁽⁴⁾

One would think that, after lo, these many centuries, the issue of our understanding of God finally would be settled. But, as events such as Re-imagining testify, no way, José. Theology matters. I will never forget returning from Wichita in 1994, ecstatic about the nothing-short-of-miraculous outcome at the Assembly, joyfully reporting it to you on the following Sunday, then, in the receiving line after worship, having one of our continually conflicted brethren look me in the eye and say with all seriousness, "I don't believe you." He walked away as I stared at him in stunned silence. As Mark Twain observed over a century ago, Christians preach and teach "love your neighbor as yourself," but often as not, they will cut your throat if your theology is not straight.

There is a well-worn story that, in its most recent incarnation⁽⁵⁾ has a man walking across a bridge one day, and seeing a fellow standing on the edge, about to jump off. The first man immediately ran over and yelled, "Stop! Don't do it!"

"Why shouldn't I?" the jumper asked.

"Well, there's so much to live for!"

"Like what?"

"Well... Are you religious or atheist?"

"Religious."

"Me too! Are you Christian or Jewish?"

"Christian."

"Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?"

"Protestant."

"Me too! What denomination?"

"Baptist."

"Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?"

"Baptist Church of God."

"Me too! Are you Original Baptist Church of God, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?"

"Reformed Baptist Church of God."

"Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915?"

"Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915!"

To which the first man said, "Die, heretic scum!" and pushed the jumper off.

Yes, theology matters. But I rather wish that folks would treat it with a bit more respect than to use it as an excuse for battle.

There is an ancient legend of St. Augustine, who, as the tale goes, also struggled to understand the Trinity. In the midst of his reflections, he went for a walk on the beach. He saw a little boy digging a hole in the sand with a seashell and then running to the ocean, filling up the shell, and rushing back to pour the water into the hole he had made. "What are you doing, my little man?" Augustine asked.

"I'm putting the ocean in this hole," the boy replied. For Augustine it was a moment of revelation as he realized that he had been trying to do much the same - put the mystery of an infinite God into his finite mind.⁽⁶⁾

That is the reality that Isaiah experienced in the temple that day. Here he was, a religious man, to be sure, but no preacher - actually he was a functionary in the king's court, a White House bureaucrat, if you will. It was an unhappy time in the nation's life. The good king Uzziah had died. Uzziah's reign had been a time a great material prosperity. To secure the caravan route along the Mediterranean coast, he had built cities and military outposts, and armed his troops with the most advanced weapons. He had refortified the walls of Jerusalem with towers. His construction of numerous cisterns and military outposts in the desert made widespread settlement possible. Uzziah was a lover of the soil who promoted agriculture. But now he was gone, struck down by leprosy, buried in a field rather than in the royal tombs because of his disease.⁽⁷⁾ It was a sad time.

Suddenly, in the midst of the sadness, Isaiah is confronted with something magnificent. "I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lofty; and the hem of his robe filled the temple. Seraphs were in attendance above him; each had six wings: with two they covered their faces, and with two they covered their feet, and with two they flew. And one called to another and said: "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory." How could Isaiah react? How could you or I react? We would feel very small. "Woe is me! I am lost..."

Isaiah had a vision of Almighty God, the God who had made the universe, the God who hung the sun, moon and stars, the God who had built the mountains and dug out the oceans, the God of all creation. Rather than try to describe the indescribable, to explain the inexplicable, to express the inexpressible, Isaiah told himself he had better just shut his mouth. "I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips;"

Can we learn that lesson? Can we come to the place on our spiritual pilgrimage where we are content to let God be God, greater than any possible human understanding, realizing that even when we, on Trinity Sunday, say "God in three persons," or at any other time when we are about to make some dogmatic statement about God, no matter WHAT we say, we cannot begin to say it all?

I have told you the story before of the little fellow sitting on the floor drawing a picture. Dad asks, "What are you drawing, son?"

"A picture of God," the boy replied.

Dad responds, "But nobody knows what God looks like."

The lad confidently answers, "They will when I get done."

By God's grace, may we then learn one more lesson? If theology does matter, and what we say about God or how we might want even to "re-imagine" God is important, may we realize with our young friend and with Isaiah that SOMETHING MUST BE SAID? Yes, we concede that we are truly EXPRESSING THE INEXPRESSIBLE, but, we cannot keep silent: "my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!... Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, 'Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" And I said, "Here am I; send me!'"

Amen!

1. Christian News, March 21, 1994, p. 1

2. Washington Post, 6/4/94, p. C8

3. For a fuller treatment of the historical background and issues involved see Jack Rogers, Presbyterian Creeds: A Guide to the Book of Confessions, (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1985), pp. 39-56

4. Quoted by Steve Souther, via Ecunet, "Sermonshop 1997 05 25," #126, 5/22/97

5. Jim Oxyer, via Ecunet, "Eculaugh," #4537, 5/7/97

6. Bass Mitchell, via Ecunet, "Sermonshop 1997 05 25," #4, 5/14/97

7. "Uzziah," Holman Bible Dictionary for Windows, electronic edition, diskette, (Hiawatha, IO: Parsons Technology, 1994)

click and send us mail