Volume 3 Issue 2: Fall 2009

RELIGIO

The Undergraduate Journal of Christian Thought at Duke

April 2009 November 2009 1 Volume 3, Issue Volume 3, Issue 2

IT’S FOR YOU.

Duke Chapel PathWays Summer Internships and Fellowship Year Summer Interns (undergraduates) and Fellows (recent graduates) work in a variety of placements based upon their faith, values, and gifts.

Placements include churches, non-profit organizations, and social enterprises Stipend, housing, retreats, and guided theological reflection are provided.

Information Session and Reception: Thursday, Nov. 19 from 7:45p - 9:00p. at the PathWays Home at 1115 West Chapel Hill Street For more information on Duke Chapel PathWays internship and fellowship opportunities, please visit at www.chapel.duke.edu/pathways or email Keith Daniel at kd1@duke.edu

RELIGIO

November 2009 Volume 3, Issue 2

The Struggling Bride Individualism in the Body of Christ Peter Farmer p. 5 The Church as Community, Narrative, and Tradition Jenny Denton p. 8 Perspectives: A Call to Unity Amy Wigger p. 10 Perspectives: One Body, Many Members Dan Thielman p. 11 Global Aid at the Cost of the Gospel?

Lauren Linn p. 12 Stop Flirting and Get a Room: Why Join a Local Church?

Matt Gay p. 15 God and the LGBT Conflict: Finding Common Ground Michelle Sohn p. 18 Should Evangelicals Evangelize?

Greg Lee p. 20 Jesus is What a Feminist Looks Like Katie Anderson p. 23 The Quest for the “Est” Ronnie Booth p. 28 “The Church is a Whore, but She is my Mother” Sam Zimmerman p. 30 Allegiance to the Spirit of the Original Church Harrison Hines p. 33

ALSO INSIDE: Where God is Working in My Life: Personal Accounts from Three Duke Students p. 26

1

“The Church‟s One Foundation” Samuel Stone

2

Note from the Editors We are pleased to bring you the sixth issue of Religio, “The Struggling Bride.” Religio began in spring 2007 as a way for students to read, write and reflect on their Christian faith.

This university is founded on the premise that knowledge and religion, eruditio et religio, are fundamental to the development and formation of all persons. Our mission is once again to bring Christianity into dialogue with the learning of this university. This project is ecumenical in its nature, and we draw upon people from a diverse range of Christian traditions and fellowships on campus.

This journal is part of a larger initiative called “The Augustine Project,” seeking to establish journals of Christian thought at college and university campuses across the nation.

The journal is a grateful partner of Pathways, a ministry of Duke Chapel that helps students discover their calling through programs of theological exploration and vocational discernment.

Scripture often depicts the Church as the bride of Christ. A favorite hymn proclaims: “From heaven he came and sought her to be his holy bride; with his own blood he bought her, and for her life he died.” Despite the sacrifice, she is, however, imperfect: “Amid toil and tribulation,” the Church has experienced schism, heresy, and war. The Church has always wrestled with itself, breeding a rich and textured Christian tradition. From the disagreement between Peter and Paul of the first century, to the schism between the Eastern and Western churches in the eleventh, to the Babylonian captivity of the fourteenth, the Reformation of the sixteenth and the culture wars of today, fierce battles have raged across theological fields and inside faithful congregations. Strife has left its mark. Though some conflicts resolve in new and clear missions, others confuse and corrupt the Church.

Our authors this semester consider, among other topics, the importance of the local church, differing views on homosexuality, the place of denominations in the unified body of Christ, the role of evangelism in development work, and feminist theology. The Church is large and complex. So are the debates around these issues. We recognize that the Church is both an ancient and also a living institution; there are no simple answers to the questions raised in these pages. Struggle is central to growth, and by presenting examinations of struggle in the Church, we hope better to understand the character of Christ‟s bride.

Religio is now accessible online at www.duke.edu/web/religio. You can view this issue and our archives at this site. If you are interested in writing an article, submitting photography, or joining our staff, please email us at religio@duke.edu.

Peace, Gregory Morrison

Chrissy Booth

Trinity ‟11

Trinity „10

3

Editors Gregory Morrison and Chrissy Booth Publication Manager Matt Gay Copy Editor Harrison Hines Staff Advisor Dr. Adam Hollowell

Religio is a member of the Duke University Undergraduate Publications Board.

Cover Photography by Michael Gay

Material in this journal is either original, published with permission or used pursuant to the fair use doctrine. The use of any copyrighted material pursuant to the fair use doctrine or otherwise is not intended to represent the views or opinions of the original producer of the work. Additionally, no work or image published herein may be copied or reproduced without the express written consent of the journal.

4

Individualism in the Body of Christ Peter Farmer, Trinity „11

Duke‘s ecclesial heritage is difficult to escape. A simple survey of the gothic chapel that dominates the campus landscape will evidence this legacy.

Or perhaps some have had occasion to read the plaque located just in front of the chapel, or hear the chiming of the bells each day at five o‘clock. Even the University‘s motto, Eruditio et Religio, speaks to its church origins and appreciation of faith. While Duke has largely transitioned into a secular university, it preserves many of its ties to the church and Christian community. The Duke Christian community is remarkably thriving and vibrant. It is a diverse community that provides support and encouragement for numerous students on campus. Alongside the multitude of intellectual challenges that one encounters here on campus (not excluding those pertaining to the Christian faith), the Christian community incorporates a dimension of spiritual challenge as well.

Personally, I have been blessed to be part of such a community and witness my own faith develop in unexpected ways through the supportive body of Christians on campus.

However, there is a culture of self-absorption in this Christian community. And despite our best efforts to avoid it, this lifestyle of self-absorption pervades and dominates all aspects of university life, Christian and non-Christian alike; this ambition is the overarching theme that drives and motivates our campus. The opportunities and aspirations that universities such as Duke afford are consuming—and why wouldn‘t they be? After all, most of us are here to gain knowledge and intellectual capital. The fact that Duke students want to advance themselves is not an entirely bad thing, even if it involves a certain degree of selfishness. Many Duke students will go on to help other people and improve the communities in which they live.

To be fair, this sort of egoism is not endemic to Duke‘s campus; an egocentric life is the norm for modern society. From an early age, the value of ―self improvement‖ is instilled in many of us. We are indoctrinated to

Michael Gay

5

always keep our own best interests in mind and to ―pull ourselves up by our own boot straps.‖ Self-sufficiency is the preferred modus operandi of our world, and indeed, those that are too selfless are marked as strange if not foolish.

But at Duke, this sort of navel-gazing—this ideal of self-sufficiency—is fostered and encouraged to an extreme.

At Duke, much of what we do, we do for ourselves, by ourselves. Our schedules are perpetually filled with events and activities that are self-directed: study time, work, sleep, exercise, and entertainment. Even activities that would qualify as altruistic or charitable are often driven, to some extent, by selfish motives—anything can be a resume booster. Confined within the unique culture of academia, it is easy for students to lose perspective of the world that surrounds them.

As a Christian, I cannot ignore the ways that this egotism has spilled over into the community of Christ. In a community that has no place for ego, is it biblical to consider ―our schedule‖ as ours (1 Cor. 6: 19 – 20)? How has our selfishness detached us from God and the people with whom we live?

One of the ways that Christians embrace this selfish ethos is our participation (or lack thereof) in the Church. This fact is unfortunate, but true: some churches have become increasingly self-centered communities. Altered and modified to cater to the desires and whims of the larger culture, the Church has, in some cases, become a reflection of our selfish lives. As Christians, we have embraced the rationale of our world and our university, and have come to understand the church in a transactional sense. In other words, our first question about church is often, ―What am I going to get out of this?‖ or, ―How does my church meet my needs?‖ But the church‘s primary concern is not the fulfillment of individual needs. The question that we should be asking ourselves is, ―How is my church, as a community, faithful to God?‖ Sunday morning worship has become a passive enterprise characterized by accommodation of felt individual—not communal—needs. Many of us arrive on Sunday morning expecting to be fulfilled by exciting worship, or a clever and witty sermon, and when those expectations are not realized, we claim that our ―needs‖ are not met.

More importantly, can anyone—even within the body of Christ—be trusted to wisely discern what they ―need?‖ Perhaps we should heed the word of the Apostle Paul: I appeal to you therefore, brothers and sisters, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your minds, so that you may discern what is the will of God—what is good and acceptable and perfect. (Romans 12: 1 – 2) Notice that neither Paul, nor the priests, nor any other specific member within the church discerns the will of God; the ―brothers and sisters‖ of the community, the collective Body, discern. Life within the church consists of more than singing songs and listening to sermons. When the church gathers, we testify to the resurrection and power of Jesus Christ, and we testify to the glory and honor of God. As human beings, we have been created to glorify, worship, and enjoy God. But we have been called to do so together! Our individual lives should point to our union in the Body of Christ. Especially at a place like Duke, we are content to be impressed by our own accomplishments and achievements. But we are rarely amazed that when we gather on Sunday, we enter into communion with our creator, the almighty and eternal God. Not only do we reject corporate worship if it doesn‘t meet our perceived needs, we also reject engagement with our brothers and sisters in Christ. We want to dictate the terms of our personal salvation without the distraction of others. This notion of individualized Christianity has become popular in numerous churches. Many Christians have isolated themselves, maintaining a ―personal relationship‖ with Jesus and living ordered, sterile lives in which they don‘t have to deal with other peoples‘ untidy problems.

Some believe that others only get in the way of our ―personal relationship‖ with Jesus. We are reluctant to share our lives with others, especially those people that live and think differently than us.

6

These sorts of people are deemed the responsibility of our ministers and elders. They are often avoided— even ignored—despite the fact that Jesus came for exactly such as these. God‘s glory and goodness is revealed by the fact that he chooses to use broken people to redeem the world (1 Cor. 1: 27). What‘s more, our egoism and pride have convinced many of us that we are not ―messy.‖ We have been deceived into thinking that we don‘t need help. Perhaps we are so willingly deceived because to admit that we need help would mean to admit that we are dependent, a label that absolutely terrifies the average Duke student.

As a result, we have hijacked the Gospel of Jesus Christ and have attempted to shape it into the mold of our selfish lives. We want the Gospel to be a self-help strategy, a regimen for our individual lives. We would have the Gospel fit neatly into our ―to-do‖ list. Does this sound familiar? At Duke, we fall victim to this foolishness every day! In our failed attempts to save ourselves, we have lost the ―good news‖ of the Gospel: We are in need of a salvation and Jesus Christ is our capable and loving savior!

Michael Gay

The Body of Christ is one of the most important ways in which we engage in a relationship with God. By participating in each other‘s lives we are doing more than simply enriching our earthly relationships. As Christians, our participation within the Body comprises an essential component of our relationship with God (Matthew 25: 40). The people of your church provide more than just accountability, they give you life!

These people, the Body of Christ, help you and me to take part in, and restore, a relationship with God. They pray for you, they teach you, they discipline you, and they love you.

It is humbling to admit that we need both a savior and each other. It goes against what we have been taught.

And it certainly does not fit into our paragon of self-sufficiency. Most Duke students are hesitant to admit their need for any kind of help. For Christians at Duke to take seriously the call to be the Body of Christ, we have to realize that every person we walk by on the plaza is in need of God‘s grace, just like us. God uses us, imperfect and broken vessels of his grace, to redeem each other. For this reason that Paul says: If then there is any encouragement in Christ, any consolation from love, any sharing in the Spirit, any compassion and sympathy, make my joy complete: be of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility regard others as better than yourselves.

Let each of you look not to your own interests, but to the interests of others. Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus . . . (Philippians 2: 1 – 5) Ultimately, our pride hinders us from a life of faithfulness to God. We delude ourselves into thinking that our individual story is the story. And in our delusion, we have failed to recognize the glory and the richness of the story of Christ. How often we settle for our own selfish lives, when through Christ we are offered a part God‘s narrative. As Christians, we are called to reject our own lives so that our identity might be hidden in Christ (Colossians 3:3).

Through the church we are made into something more powerful than any individual Christian—we are transformed into the living and real image of Christ.

Peter Farmer is a junior religion major from Johnson City, Tennessee. He is involved in Reformed University Fellowship and Pathways Lilly Scholars. In his free time he enjoys hiking, camping, and being outdoors.

7

The Church as Community, Narrative, and Tradition A Reflection on Hosea 2:6-9 Jenny Denton, Trinity „12

Our generation is marked by an unprecedented struggle for complete selfdetermination. Look at modern advertising slogans: ―Obey your thirst,‖ ―Have it your way,‖ ―Where do you want to go today?‖ We seem to be most reverent of individuality and self-determination and most offended by rules, institutions, and individuals that challenge those things. We want more choices and less responsibility.

Christian Smith, a sociologist of religion and culture, interviewed hundreds of college students and reported that he found them articulate on every subject except morality.

Now we are isolated from traditions of morality and character, ―free‖ to define them as we will. Sure, these abandoned communities and traditions have scarred records, but in abandoning them have we really set ourselves free?

In the book of Hosea, God the Father depicts His people as a prostitute wife. He buys her freedom, marries her, and loves her even as she runs away from him. Perhaps this passage feels abrasive for the same reason Church, tradition, and morality feel abrasive. Perhaps we assume some tradition, be it the Church or T -reqs, has coerced us into union, poised to snatch away our autonomy any day. How dare this God of the Old Testament hedge our way with thorns!

That‘s just like the Church to build up walls and prevent people from finding their own paths—paths that would lead us to the ultimate truth

“Therefore I will hedge up h

And I will build a wa

So that she cannot f

within if only we were allowed to take them. We flail about every time we

She shall pursue h

find our way ―hedged up with thorns.‖ We cry out against religion because

But not overta

we think it hinders our way and prevents us from running free.

If there is a God, he has surely let us run free. We are free to run away time after time, and we are free to construct within our dorms and lives kingdoms of autonomy. In so few words I cannot argue for a return to the Church—I will leave that to wiser men and women with more knowledge, rhetoric, and lyricism than I. In fact, I‘m not interested in arguing at all. If you are tired of fearing thieves of independence, stumbling upon

And she shall se

But shall not f

Then she shal I will go and return to

for it was better for me t

thornbushes, and being blocked by walls, consider what I have to say.

Hosea 2:6-

Consider stories. Narrative is more than an element of English class. To limit narrative of the self to our own short life-span is to miss out on much of who and why we are. Again, I am not one to argue for a specific narrative, but as both Christian Smith and I have found, most college students hardly consider their story at all. Who are you and how do you fit in? You were born into the midst of a vibrant narrative—in what kind of story do you find yourself?

Consider community. We can learn a lot through books, but community is the experiential element in the

8

Robert Ryan

class of life. It is within communities that we are forced to engage, and by engaging, we discover what it is to be human.

Within community, we begin to discover who we are. Consider deeply investing in a community, be it a church or a team or a family. You do not have to do this alone.

Consider tradition. Longstanding community carries with it the experience of a multitude; the value of such a

her way with thorns,

all against her,

resource is worth considering. Perhaps you detest the traditions of your parents or have seen nothing but hypocrisy sitting in the pew next to you your whole life. You‘ve heard enough of the answer ―because this is the way we‘ve always done it‖ and you‘ve seen

find her paths.

enough rituals devoid of meaning. I will not refute these experiences—I‘ve had plenty

her lovers

myself. But perhaps there once was meaning in the now-present void, perhaps there is a

ake them,

freedom that does not come from complete self-governance. In a culture that puts such a

eek them

find them.

ll say,

Looking at this passage from Hosea may lead some to see an angry, jealous God trying to box people in and force them back into his grip. Still, it is hardly a narrow escape to run from a God who refuses to make us stay with him. I have run towards what I thought

my first husband,

then than now.”

-9

value on the unique individual, it is probably most humbling to consider tradition.

was freedom and only found loneliness, confusion, and despair. When I read this passage, I see how God could appear to be a jealous, angry God, but my experience translates these as words of comfort and love. They are the narrative spoken by the Church, a lifegiving community and tradition. Inside and outside this Church the conversation has for too long focused on Heaven and Hell. There is a place for

that, but there is a place for the present too. We must once again become members of community, part of a tradition, and articulate in our narrative.

Jenny Denton is a Trinity sophomore from Durham. While her friends all seem to be Pratt or pre-med, she just considers herself prelife. This year some of her favorite things at Duke are Von der Heyden, Pathways, the Chapel‟s vespers service, Reformed University Fellowship, the Refectory, cycling, and Dean Wells‟ ethics class (the wellspring of most of the ideas in this essay.)

9

A Conversation on A Call to Unity Amy Wigger, Trinity „13 How does the world know who the Christians are? Jesus says they are to ―be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me.‖ (John 17:21) Sadly, the modern Church is anything but one. There are over 30,000 Christian denominations in the world today. Christians continue to splinter into factions over thousands of disagreements about doctrines, pastors, and ethical issues. Christians have more in common than in conflict, but in all the fuss, we have forgotten the Biblical call to unity, fellowship, and family within the Body of Christ.

The body of Christian believers is unlike any other group of people on the planet. We are more than people who share common interests, politics, or ideas. We have come together not to believe a truth about the world, but to believe the Truth of the world. We have come not to pay homage to ruler of a country, but to the Ruler of the Universe. We have come together not only in fellowship, but also in bonds that are insoluble and indelible. The body of Christian believers is the Body of Christ.

Unlike the transitory institutions that humans create, the Church is a supernatural institution created by Christ. The people in the Church are eternal. We walk this earth with potential saints. The Church is the only institution that shall continue into eternity. All the debate, all the confusion, all the silly nitpicking shall cease, and we, the Church of Christ, shall remain. In heaven, there will not be denominations; the Church shall be fully united in the revealed glory of God. God never intended for the Church to be divided. Division is a product of the Fall. God, Man, Woman, and Creation were in perfect harmony before the Fall. After the Fall, the husband and wife are turned against each other, man must battle Nature, and the relationship between God and Man is so damaged that the Son of God must be brutally sacrificed in order to rectify it.

This man-made division within the Church is our fault. No denomination is blameless. Rarely do irreconcilable differences drive us away from each other. More often than not, we stubbornly refuse to humble ourselves and live in love. We are not ―striving to preserve the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace.‖ (Ephesians 4:3) We are merely striving. We are like the Pharisees who want the seats of honor at the banquet.

We find it easy to make a new church that agrees with what we think, and then we may close our minds forever to other churches. When we do these kinds of things, we are not acting with the love of God: we are being selfish. Perhaps the most telling sign of our selfishness is that we neglect to ask ourselves whether what we do in our church is for the glory of God. The Church should reflect the will of God, not the wills of humans. Much of the division within the Church stems from the clash of human wills.

Luckily, God can work through our division. Human boundaries cannot hinder His movement. While we should love our fellow Christians who adhere to denominations other than our own, we must never come to tolerate the division in the Church as the norm. The fact that God can work through different denominations does not mean that denominations are necessarily good.

God can work through sin. The terrible sin of crucifying Jesus Christ brought about the greatest good for mankind. That does not change the fact that it was terrible. Although God can work through division, it is not natural for Him to do so. There is no division within the Trinity. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one. The same Father created all. The same Christ died for all. The same Holy Spirit comes upon all in baptism. In this way, Christ sanctifies the Church. We do not make her one: He does.

Some would say that without denominations within the Church, diversity and individuality would be stifled. However, only through membership in the Body of Christ can we discover our true selves. Our places in heaven were there long before we existed. When God created us, He bestowed upon us a multitude of talents meant to build up the whole Church. As St. Paul mentions in 1 Corinthians 12, we all have different roles to play within the Body of Christ. Unification into one Body does not mean that we will cease to have different roles. We are one out of many because He makes us one; He unites us and binds us and sanctifies us.

Many non-Christians do not understand why we are divided. It (rightly) seems contrary to our whole belief system. For an outsider looking in, it seems as though there should not be many things important enough to break fellowship. The love of Christ should be enough to unite us all. I speak from experience; only within the past four years have I become a Christian. One of the things that always turned me off to the Christian faith was the amount of division within it. Our disagreements should not be stumbling blocks for others who are seeking God. Christianity is an invitation to enter the divine life of God and become His adopted children through the sacrament of baptism. In that family, there are no lines of division. We are the children of God. Let us love one another because He loved us first. So why should we be one? Perhaps the better question is this: why are we unwilling to be one? Let us ―be perfect, as [our] heavenly Father is perfect.‖ (Matthew 5:48) Can we not put our differences aside for the sake of Him we love in order to become a more perfect and holy people?

10

Amy Wigger is a Trinity freshman who is considering double-majoring in the humanities. She is involved with the Newman Group, InterVarsity, Pathways, and IM Soccer. In her free time, she enjoys watching movies that she has already memorized and drinking hot tea.

n Denominations One Body, Many Members Dan Thielman, Trinity „12 We hate when a pastor reads embarrassing Scripture that seems at odds with Christ‘s love; talk about weeping and gnashing of teeth. ―Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‗Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey‘‖. (1 Samuel 15:3) Gnash, gnash, gnash. We gnash because we feel like hypocrites, and 1 Corinthians 1: 10—17 is definitely a grinder: separation within the Church. Christians love to punctuate theology by inventing terms and creating groups. Yet Paul contends that names divide: ―I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name‖.

Basically, name-parading creates denominations. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, ―denomination‖ is ―the action of naming from or after something; giving a name to, calling by a name.‖ The Church appears as a living monument of our propensity to define and conquer. The conundrum: Christians frown on pharisaical separatism, but are obligated to stand their ground. I contend in this essay that denominations do not compromise the message of God; they reflect the variety of people within the Christian faith, prevent more fragmentation in an already broken Church, and ideally protect Christian doctrine.

First, we must recognize that the Church consists of such a vast number of people that it could not exist without subdivision. Most pastors in the United States would be terrible at preaching to Chinese farmers – not because of poor training, but because most American pastors do not speak Chinese. Though this may seem facile, note that Paul‘s statement to the Corinthians is, ―[let] there be no divisions among you, but...be united in the same mind and same judgment‖. Cultures, languages, and styles of learning are all essential differences that can be addressed without changing the Christian message. If different churches end up with different worship structures and languages, and if they place importance on different parts of Scripture, denominations actually simplify inter-Christian dialogue by enumerating points of variance. Any blanket statement against denominations must first be able to reconcile God‘s diverse creation with Christians‘ limited ability to communicate.

Denominations also protect against the most errant weapon since the dawn of language: well-articulated, stupid people.

Paul says that such pedagogs are dangerous, and says ―For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power‖. ( 1 Corinthians 1:17) When denominations are well founded with many believers, they are difficult to sway with slick words, so long as they focus on what they know is true. For example, in a contemporary Baptist Church, a Christian might sing songs and dance without caring what people think. The focus of the service is to establish a personal, strong connection with God –– and no one can shake that. In an Anglican Church, Christians might partake in corporate prayers, recite the creeds and receive communion weekly, kneeling together in front of the table.

This emphasizes a connection between Jesus and the Church as a whole. This denomination in particular is well founded on years of tradition, and will not be swayed by eloquent devangelists. Any attempt to unify all styles of worship would fail: the focus would inevitably shift with the leadership, worshippers would be in constant disagreement, and unsatisfied Christians would find no available option. In such strife devangelists thrive, and denominations provide the stability required to stave them off.

Denominations also are protectors of Christ‘s message. Thanks to those clever folks at the council of Nicea, Christians have been able to avoid several nasty heresies and stick to the Canon. No matter how Christians bicker or berate, the Bible stays at the core of our values, and Jesus at the center of our worship. Two perspectives seem to arise from this: that denominations accuse others of being wrong, or that denominations are positive that what they know is right. Though both are valid interpretations, I choose to emphasize the latter - that is, we may highlight what we know provided we do not discard that which we do not understand. And that is how, 2000 years later, the same Gospel is still being preached.

Denominations are not a mockery of Christian unity. The universality of the Bible is truly a testament to our unity. Without the specialization of Churches, many Christians would struggle to have full fellowship with one another. The Church may include schism-making, finger-pointing pastors, and equally many lunatic heretics. However, done correctly, church variety mimics the diversity of believers so that we might all, ―be united in the same mind and same judgment‖.

A closing verse: ―For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another‖ (Romans 12:4-5).

Daniel Thielman is a sophomore at Duke majoring in Mathematics with a minor in Spanish.

He is excited for a chance to be able to write for Religio, and finds that writing about a topic is one of his favorite ways to learn about it. He would like to thank his mom, dad, and family for their help in writing this paper, and he also thanks Religio for giving him this opportunity. He hopes to glorify God through this essay.

11

Global Aid at the Cost of the Gospel?

Lauren Linn, Trinity „11

On Thursday, April 3, 2008 former British Prime Minister Tony Blair addressed a crowd at Westminster Cathedral declaring, ―Old boundaries of culture, identity and even nationhood are falling. The twenty-first century world is becoming ever more interdependent. In this world, religious faith, crucial to so many people‘s culture and identity, can play a positive or a negative role. Either positively it will encourage peaceful coexistence by people of faith coming together in respect, understanding and tolerance, retaining their distinctive identity but living happily with those who do not share that identity. Or it will work against such co-existence by defining people by difference, those of one faith in opposition to others of a different faith.‖

The world is becoming more globalized by the day, from our economies to the fight for human rights to the ever-expanding world of aid organizations. The merging of societies across cultural boundaries leaves members of the Christian Church asking, ―Where do we fit in the larger picture as the lines between societies become more blurred?‖ This is especially puzzling when the idea of working with other faiths is taken into consideration.

Members of the Christian faith, as followers of the gospel, cannot evade the precepts taught in scripture. The debate, however, does not arise out of the sense of duty set forth to the Church. The debate arises in how to carry out the charge. Interfaith organizations are becoming more common. Some Christians worry that works through interfaith organizations, which provide a more neutral platform from which to distribute aid, diminish the role of the gospel. In working with various faiths, are Christians sacrificing the gospel to appease governments that may not have allowed humanitarian aid to enter their country otherwise? Is the Church sacrificing an opportunity to spread the gospel in corners of the Earth where ears have not yet heard the good news?

As a follower of Christ raised on values taught in the scriptures, I first thought it necessary to place myself outside of the Church body to find the ―true‖ answer to these questions. Unable to find answers, I realized that removing myself from the Church was the wrong course of action completely. Thinking as a follower of Christ was exactly the perspective from which I should approach these questions, if not the only from which I could find the real answers.

Being inside the box, instead of looking outside of it, brought about a new set of revelations, as though someone switched on the lights in a dark room. First, if Christians are to model themselves after Christ, how dare they ignore the plight of the destitute, ill and forgotten?

At no point did Christ abandon his children. He has instructed his followers to do the same.

12

From the English

Reformation to the Church‘s influence in politics, Christians hold varying views concerning monumental issues. Today, the Church must evaluate its role concerning humanitarian aid in affiliation with other faiths. When Christ walked among the nations, he distinguished no man higher than another. In fact, he was here for the destitute and incorrigible peoples. According to Christ and his Holy Word, as written in James 1:27, ―Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.‖ I find his decree to be most telling in the book of Matthew, chapter 25 verses 34-46: as the Father sits on the throne in heaven he tells those before him, ―for I was hungry, and you gave me food to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in; naked, and you clothed me; I was sick, and you visited me; I was in prison, and you came to me.‖ When those before him asked when they performed such acts of kindness, he answered them, ―Most assuredly I tell you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.‖ When read in full, this scripture demonstrates that in bequeathing all we have to the broken, we are giving unto Christ. Therefore, the Church must assist the less fortunate.

As I realized that spreading the gospel did not have to be sacrificed when working with interfaith groups, the light in my little box continued to grow brighter. No one can prohibit an individual‘s ability to bear witness to eyes that have not seen and ears that have not heard the good works of Christ. Interfaith missions provide an opportunity to spread the love of Christ. Working with multiple faiths enables access to more areas of the globe than does working as a single faith. In some developing countries where there is no dominant religion or religion is associated with violent radicals, working in an interfaith setting may allow easier access.

While evangelizing to the underserved, Christians are also given the opportunity to witness to those alongside whom they work. For many, this concept may seem taboo to discuss.

However, this idea is also an argument for why the Church should work with interfaith organizations. As followers of the Word and the belief that it is the follower‘s duty to be a witness, why would believers reject the opportunity?

If Christians are to model themselves after Christ, they must engage in activity that does not make distinctions among individuals or group, just as he did during his time on Earth.

13

Is witnessing in an interfaith environment simple? I began to ask myself if Christian aid workers could witness with ease when working in an interfaith setting. My uncertainty, and the fact that the light was starting to get dim again inside my ―box of perspective,‖ prompted me to have lunch with Dean Wells. Finding the answer to my questions became not only a necessity for this article, but also took on a level of personal significance. If I were a Christian humanitarian worker in an interfaith setting, would I be able to witness and spread the gospel effectively?

Over a cup of soup at The Refectory, I spilled all of my questions to the Dean of Duke Chapel. The answers he provided were so simple and full of truth that I left lunch full and satisfied. I first asked Dean Wells how believers could provide humanitarian aid while spreading the gospel of Christ. His simple reply was, ―Are not humanitarian works the gospel itself?‖ As he referenced the book of Matthew—over which I had previously pored—my thoughts were confirmed, as well as the decrees of Christ: Christians are here to help the distressed. Dean Wells asked me, ―Was it not St. Francis that said, ‗Spread the gospel at all times; when necessary, use words?‘‖ If Christians show the love of Christ through aid and basic conversation, are they not spreading the gospel?

―Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.‖ James 1:27

As I continued my discussion with Dean Wells, I felt I found the answers to all of my questions. Dean Wells expanded upon the roles of Christian aid workers, especially in interfaith settings. Suddenly, I was thrown off my high horse. He asserted that, as Christians, administering aid and the good will of Christ did not suggest that we nourish with food, water, and words alone. Instead, our goal should be capacity building. ―Jesus would not have given himself for a short time, for is he not a God who stays with us for all eternity?‖ He asked me, ―What we must ask ourselves is how we can enable these people [we are helping] to continue to prosper.‖ The answer to his questions must be addressed on two fronts.

First, Christian volunteers must enable people to prosper for their time here in the natural. Secondly, they must enable those being served to prosper in the spiritual. Dean Wells asserted, ―I know it is cliché, but we cannot give them a fish, we must teach them to fish.‖ In essence, we cannot give aid and pull out of a region. Giving the destitute long-term resources to curb their poverty or illnesses enables them to prosper on Earth. Should witnessing cause them to become believers, they are given the tools necessary to flourish for eternity.

All in all, it is hard to argue against working with interfaith organizations for the sake of reaching the world‘s forgotten populations.

Christ has not forgotten anyone. As believers in the gospel, Christians are to live their daily lives as witnesses to his mercies. We should not choose to travel a path with others unlike ourselves if it causes us to squander occasions to spread good will and the gospel of Christ.

Mr. Blair was correct; cultural boundaries are becoming less distinguishable as the world is becoming more interdependent. Religious faith must become a leader in this everchanging world, a leader that inspires and acts in accordance with the will of God. In so doing, religious faith can play only a positive role in a world in much need.

Lauren Linn is a junior in the Trinity School of Arts and Sciences, majoring in History with minors in Political Science and Religion. She is a Robertson Scholar and an active member of Zeta Tau Alpha and Campus Crusade for Christ.

14

Stop Flirting and Get a Room: Why Join a Local Church?

Matt Gay, Trinity „11

In his preface to Mere Christianity, the novelist and lay theologian C.S. Lewis likens ‗mere‘ Christianity to a hall out of which doors open into different rooms, symbolizing different denominations expressed in visible churches. He claims that the purpose of his argument is to lead readers to this hall, but maintains that the proper place to stay is within the rooms: ―But it is in the rooms, not in the hall, that there are fires and chairs and meals. The hall is a place to wait in, a place from which to try the various doors, not a place to live in. For that purpose the worst of the rooms (whichever that may be) is, I think, preferable.‖1 Lewis argues that the Christian should stop flirting and to choose a room, despite its flaws and despite the overwhelming amount of doors in the house.

Allow me to pose a provocative, albeit Biblically sound, claim to you: if you buy into the truths and promises in the Gospel, but are not a member of a local, particular church, you may not be a Christian. I am not saying that in order to receive salvation you must point to your name on some church registry in Durham. Echoing the cries of the Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century, I believe justification is by faith alone, by God‘s grace alone, through Christ alone. However, I challenge those subscribing to a type of Christianity that fails to honor a commitment to a church. Contemplate what one suggests by claiming to be Christian who does not give himself to ―the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood‖ (Acts 20:28). To say that you are a Christian means that you have been united with Christ along with other believers in faith and confession of Jesus as Lord and Savior. Entering into the family of a visible church illustrates what Christ has made you: a child of God and a member of the body of Christ. As Paul makes clear in the beginning of his first letter to the church in Corinth, ―to the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ‖ (1 Corinthians 1:2). When God calls a person into fellowship with His Son, He also calls him to be a part of the body of Christ, expressed in His visible church.

Some may object to this claim, thinking that surely Paul must mean here what theologians have termed the ‗invisible‘ church, the universal church existing throughout time and space, not divided by race or nationality. Certainly the Bible indicates the notion of a universal church existing through the ages. However the Bible also speaks of the visible church expressed in local congregations, such as the church we hear about in the end of Acts 2, which reads, ―the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.‖ This leads us to a more compelling question: what is a church? Does it only imply all Christians throughout time?

The main Greek word for church (eκκλησία, ekklesia) is almost always used to define a local, particular expression of the visible church. Ekklesia, taken from the two words ‗ek‘ meaning ‗out‘ and ‗kaleo‘ meaning ‗to call‘ essentially means a ‗calling out.‘ Thus, we can define a church as an assembly of the covenant people of God who have been ‗called out‘ by God‘s grace to glorify him and enter into fellowship with his son. Take two examples from the Gospel according to Matthew that use ekklesia to imply a visible church: ―And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my ekklesia, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it‖ (Matthew 16:18). Jesus institutes the church as a visible entity in which ministry happens on this Earth. Additionally, the church is envisioned as a visible congregation that handles discipline: ―If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the ekklesia‖ (Matthew 18:17). Jesus commands church leaders of a particular congregation, not the universal church, to discipline their flock. Further, we read about particular congregations in Paul‘s

15

letters to Ephesus, Corinth, and Thessalonica. Jesus intended that part of being a Christian means involving oneself in a local church.

Perhaps you will agree that when God calls a person to Himself, He calls him to fellowship with others in the body of Christ. You may realize that the Christian life should be viewed as participating in a corporate community rather than an individual endeavor of personal piety. So you think to yourself, ―I am involved in a great college fellowship on campus with like-minded Christians who want to glorify God, serve others, and grow in our understanding of the Gospel. Is my campus fellowship a church?‖ To answer this question, I would encourage you to look at how historic Christianity has viewed the church.

In the third-century, Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage in North Africa, pictured the church as a mother: ―She is one mother, plentiful in the results of fruitfulness: from her womb we are born, by her milk we are nourished, by her spirit we are animated. He can no longer have God his Father, who has not the Church for his mother.‖2 Note that this language appears throughout the Christian tradition, from Augustine and Anselm to Martin Luther and John Calvin. For example, John Calvin in the Institutes of the Christian Religion states that ―the Lord has promised his mercy solely in the communion of the saints‖3 and looks to two marks to determine a true church: ―Wherever we see the Word of God purely preached and heard, and the sacraments administered according to Christ‘s institution, there, it is not to be doubted, a church of God exists.‖ Calvin considers the pure preaching of the Word of God with its right administration of the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord‘s Supper to be the measuring stick of distinguishing a church, for they are the means of grace, which are made effective by the work of the Holy Spirit.

College fellowships specifically reach students and are inherently limited in their mission. Few claim to be the church, and in fact almost all of them urge or require staff leaders to become members in local churches. A college Christian fellowship is essentially a missionary subset of local churches responding to the Great Commission ―to go and make disciples of all nations‖ (Matthew 28:19). I think college fellowship groups are great. I would even recommend that you join one during your time at Duke. The campus fellowship in which I participate is a place of comfort, joy and hope for me as I wrestle with what the Bible says about God‘s love for sinners in Jesus. However, while the Bible commands you to serve the church, it does not command you to join a college fellowship. In other words, campus ministries are fruitful if they fulfill the purpose of guiding students to join a local, particular church. We must ask ourselves, is the purpose of campus ministries to perpetuate that campus ministry or to pursue the purpose of the visible church: to provide you with an assured faith in Christ?

By looking at three reasons found in Scripture, I hope to persuade you that belonging to a local, particular church offers you great hope and assurance.

1. Redemption in a visible church The most fundamental claim of the Christian faith is that God, in his sovereign love, accomplished our redemption in Jesus Christ. The Father sent his only son as a substitute to atone for our weak and failing efforts in order that we might enter into a right relationship with our Father in Heaven. Christ did not die for mere individuals; he died for the body of Christ. ―Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her‖ (Ephesians 5:25). Redemption presupposes that the church is central. In light of the image of the bride of Christ, if we try to picture Christ apart from his church, we are guilty of divorcing Christ from his bride. If we say that we love Christ and we know that Christ loved His church, should we not also unite ourselves to the body, which Jesus purchased with his own blood? God‘s design of loving the church and giving his son up for her is an unfailing promise. He ―will make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and present her to himself as a radiant

16

“Membership in a local, particular church should be seen as a gift of entering into Jesus‟ commitment to bring about everything Jesus has promised to give you.”

church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless‖ (Ephesians 5:26-27).

2. Confession in a visible church Without the church, how do we know what to believe? Can we just read our Bibles on our own time and follow Christ the way we want? In John 10, we see Jesus as a shepherd laying down his life for his sheep. Jesus continues this shepherding work by appointing elders to shepherd the flock. Speaking to Peter along with all of the other disciples, Jesus says, ―on this rock I will build my church‖ (Matthew 16:18). Peter writes to other elders ―as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed: shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight‖ (1 Peter 5:1). It was God‘s plan to carry out the work of his son by entrusting gifted men called by God to teach you and care for you: ―And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ‖ (Ephesians 4: 11-12). God intended for the pure teaching of the Word of God to be given by those who are gifted by the Holy Spirit to teach the Word. Hearing and responding to the faithful teaching of the Word and the faithful administration of the Sacraments are how we are to know what to believe.

3. Growth in grace in a visible church Apart from life in the church, you are in danger of being ―hardened by the deceitfulness of sin‖ (Hebrews 3:13).

The doctrine of the church that arose out of the Protestant Reformation is expressed in the Westminster Confession of Faith and states that apart from the visible church, ―there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.‖ Without the church, you have no basis for assurance or confidence in your salvation. Involving yourself as a member of a church, you are availing yourself to make use of the resources for your protection and nourishment. Although there is no ‗ordinary possibility‘ of salvation outside the church, this does not mean that God cannot work in extraordinary ways, for God is sovereign and his will is perfect. The same authors write, ―God, in His ordinary providence, makes use of means, yet is free to work without, above, and against them, at his pleasure.‖ However, it is foolish not to avail yourself of the ordinary way in which God works—through his church. Why should you become a member of a local, particular church? Because the church instituted by God and revealed in His Word is the primary instrument by which Jesus works to grow and disciple his family. The issue of church membership is not meant to threaten you or to be a hurdle to jump through in your Christian life. Membership in a local, particular church should be seen as a gift of entering into Jesus‘ commitment to bring about everything Jesus has promised to give you. To ignore the Church ignores not only the way Jesus has promised to take care of you, but also the way in which he is at work in his world.

His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, according to his eternal purpose, which he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord (Ephesians 3:10-11).

1.

Lewis, C.S. Mere Christianity. New York: HarperCollins Publishers 2001. xv.

2.

Cyprian. On the Unity of the Church, ed. Roberts, Alexander, Eerdmans Publishing Co. (Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1991): 1.6.

3.

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Ford Lewis Battles, Library of Christian Classics: (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960): 4.1.20.

Matt Gay is a Trinity junior majoring in Biology. He enjoys reading, traveling, and playing his guitar. He is involved with Reformed University Fellowship, Pathways Lilly Scholars and is a member of The Church of the Good Shepherd (PCA).

17

God and the LGBT Conflict: Finding Common Ground Michelle Sohn, Trinity „11

In the midst of the national Don‘t Ask, Don‘t Tell and gay marriage debate, I feel compelled to finally write about a subject that has caused much grief in the lives of many Americans. Most of all, I feel compelled to write about the divide between Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) allies/ activists and the Christian church. It is easy to draw the two camps as two separate circles and not as a Venn diagram with an overlapping middle.

Some claim that being a supporter of the LGBT community makes you a ―bad‖ Christian. At the same time, LGBT community supporters cry out for a separation between ―Church and State‖, implying that Christian values are incongruous with LGBT equality. Most, I believe, struggle with how to grapple with the two circles. As someone who has thought about this subject extensively, I would like to share some theological logic about LGBT support.

My words will probably never change the people who believe that LGBT rights and Christianity are opponents and that even debating the issue is heretical. However, I hope this will provide some insight for the people who are searching for common ground between the two.

First, I would like to discuss the popular theological rhetoric: God made man and woman. He made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve (this was an especially witty argument continually made by a pastor of a church I used to attend), and thus same-sex relationships are ―unnatural‖ and ―sinful‖. These slogans are often portrayed as central foundations to the Christian religion. I fear that many have not actually asked themselves why this is so. Indeed, perhaps the biggest moral failing of the Church through the ages and today is the discouragement of asking, ―why?‖ Jesus Christ himself urged us, ―Why can you not judge for yourself what is the right course?‖ (Luke 12:57).

The simple answer to the question ―why?‖ is that God made man and woman to be ―fruitful and multiply‖ (Genesis 1:28). This simple answer however has large, often problematic implications for gender roles. The procreation answer means that the sole purpose of life is to procreate and to not have children is sinful. It is safe to say that only very extreme traditionalists consider a committed monogamous couple without children to be ―sinful‖. Depending on how you view things, maybe you do think that choosing not to have children is the greatest sin because it is indeed the sole purpose of life. If you believe in ―be fruitful and multiply‖, I would add that in the New Testament, Jesus often used the word ―fruitful‖ to symbolize good people who increase and multiply in terms of bringing people to the Word. He was not talking about being ―fruitful‖ in the procreative sense. Unless you believe in Dan Brown‘s The Da Vinci Code, you know that according to the Bible, Jesus Christ himself did not procreate and did not have children.

So if you do not accept the procreation rhetoric, what else is there? There is of course the idea that love is only possible between a man and a woman. A more popular argument in the conservative media is that ―marriage should only be between a man and a woman‖ (sometimes these words are followed by, ―that‘s just how I was raised‖). Let‘s examine this for a moment. How do we know that love is only possible between a man and a woman? What intrinsic characteristic based on sex alone makes only this kind of relationship possible? Is it because God made man and woman together to naturally complement each other and form healthy sinless unions?

I find it a little disconcerting that, when talking about LGBT issues with extreme conservatives, that they tend to automatically clutch Genesis 1:27 to their bosoms and never refer to what happens shortly after in Genesis 3: the fall. We know the story. Serpent tricks woman. Woman tricks man. They are exiled from Eden. Though I wouldn‘t argue that men and women together naturally form unhealthy and sinful partnerships, we cannot continually point to Adam and Eve as the greatest example of heterosexual unions overpowering all.

Let‘s move onto another popular argument; the argument that anything but heterosexuality is a sexual sin.

Indeed, most conservative churches have acknowledged the existence of ―homosexual urges‖. Some say that acting upon those urges, not simply experiencing them, is a sexual sin. Now, I have heard same-sex relationships compared to everything dirty and nasty in the realm of sexual relations. They has been compared to pedophilia (subsequently,

18

it‘s often ignored that most pedophiles are ―heterosexual‖), bestiality, incest (Thanks Obama and Holder), and adultery. In case you are tempted to go along that route of comparison, allow me to clarify ―same-sex relationship‖. I am talking about a romantic relationship between two consenting unmarried human adults who bear no familial relation to one another. So that rules out incest, bestiality, and pedophilia. But what about adultery?

Let‘s take a Biblical look at the issue. It‘s important to remember that even evangelicals call themselves Christians. Looking at the New Testament, Jesus Christ did not say a word about samesex relations. He did say a word about adultery: "You have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, that whosoever looks on a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart‖ (Matthew 5:27). He also said, ―nothing that goes from outside into a man can defile him…It is what comes out of a man that defiles him‖ (Mark 7:18).

What do those verses have to do with each other? The verses ―It is what comes out of a man that defiles him‖ (Mark 7:18) and ―But I say unto you, that whosoever looks on a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already…‖ (Matthew 5:27) complement each other very well. Christ is saying that the sexual acts themselves are not sinful but the intention behind them. I don‘t think even an ultra-conservative will argue that sexual intercourse itself is a sin. In fact, I think most branches of this religion will agree that intercourse is a beautiful celebration of a committed, healthy, and loving relationship. What ―comes out of man‖, how one ―looks on a woman to lust after her‖; the intention behind those acts determines the morality or immorality of the act. So sex itself is not a sexual sin. The intention behind engaging in sex can be a sexual sin.

Thus, while conservative and extremist churches may paint same-sex relations as horrible sexual sin all the time and heterosexual relations as a sexual sin only some of the time, I believe there is no difference. If the intention is to celebrate intimacy in a committed and loving way, then intercourse (no matter the sexual orientation of the two people involved) is not a sin.

This, of course, brings us back to the procreation argument that sexual intercourse should be reserved only for the intention of procreation. I tend to lean towards the belief that the greatest intention behind engaging in sexual intercourse is love and commitment rather than mere procreation. If procreation was the greatest purpose and intention behind intercourse, then what would be the point of having love or commitment? In order to be good parents and to have a good relationship, love and commitment between two individuals must be in place. I hardly think sexual orientation matters when it comes to developing love, commitment, and equal partnership as an example for posterity, especially considering the fact that divorce rates in this nation are abysmal.

Finally, I will talk about the biggest problem most conservative Christians have with same-sex relationships and marriage. A huge fear is that if same-sex relationships are not condemned, then the Church will have nothing to stand on. If we allow same-sex relationships, then for what should the Church stand?

Allowing and supporting same-sex relationships and rights need not paint such an apocalyptic future for Christianity. Here, I will use a surprising verse: ―The Sabbath was made for man, not man for Sabbath‖ (Mark 2:27).

Jesus said this when he was accused of not keeping the Sabbath by picking grain during the Sabbath. His simple reply was radical in his time and, to an extent, is still radical now.

Christ meant that the central foundation of Christianity is human, not dogma. Taking care of the ―widows, orphans, and the poor‖ and loving our fellow human beings are much more important commandments to keep than traditional rules of eating or cooking. I‘m not implying that such traditions are irrelevant or do not matter. I‘m simply stating that loving one another matters the most. Love for humanity over the Pharisees‘ dogmatic traditions is precisely why Jesus Christ healed the blind on the Sabbath. It‘s why he talked with ―sinners‖ and holy wise men alike. Perhaps it explains Jesus Christ‘s favorite name for himself: Son of Man. Michelle Sohn is an English major at Duke University. She is a strong supporter of LGBTQ equality.

19

Should Evangelicals Evangelize?

An Augustinian Critique and Suggestion Greg Lee, Ph.D Candidate One of the most defining characteristics of contemporary American evangelicalism – and to many the most offensive – is a commitment the name suggests: a concern for evangelism. Derived from the Greek word for ―good news,‖ evangelism characterized the early church, from Peter‘s first sermon in Jerusalem to Paul‘s missionary activities throughout Asia Minor. The chief New Testament account of the activities of Jesus‘ disciples after his death and resurrection begins with this command: ―You shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth‖ (Ac. 1:8). Contemporary evangelicals imitate the early church by defining themselves as ―witnesses‖ for Jesus, called to take the gospel to far-off places – or at least their dorms. They may not follow Paul‘s lead to local synagogues or the Areopagus, but they do initiate evangelistic conversations, organize outreach events, and generally try to demonstrate to others the difference Christianity has made in their lives.

Evangelicals are often encouraged to pursue this mission through ―friendship evangelism.‖ Under this model, Christians are to befriend non-Christians and earn their trust with the eventual purpose of drawing them to the faith. Since Christ is the greatest of blessings, it is said, sharing him with others is an act of love, but one best received in the context of an established relationship. There is some logic in this position, yet many Christians feel conflicted about the practice, and for legitimate reasons. Perhaps the most troubling concern is that such a model for friendship tends to encourage reductionism and disingenuousness. According to this objection, friendship evangelism defines people primarily according to whether or not they believe in Jesus, with little respect for individual particularity.

Since conversion is the chief goal of interacting with others, Christians assume a posture of presumptive moral superiority over them. Moreover, the very practice of beginning a friendship for ulterior purposes vitiates the possibility of a meaningful relationship, precisely because the relationship is not founded on trust.

Ultimately, this can lead to the instrumentalization of the other, whereby non-Christians are treated as a means toward an end –racking up spiritual merit, assuaging a guilty conscience, group legitimization, or some other self-serving goal.

Conversion of Saint Augustine

This objection does not rely upon total caricature. One thinks, for instance, of the way evangelism can take the form of a business model. Say you begin with just ten Christians, and each reaches one person this year. If all these Christians, including the new converts, do the same the next year, and the next, and the next, the number of Christians will increase exponentially, and within thirty years, over five billion people will be confessing the name of Christ – not a bad percentage of the world population from a starting team of ten. But each person‘s job is quite manageable: just convert one friend a year. I have heard such exhortations several times, and have always been struck by their lack of cultural sensitivity, their superficial understanding of conversion, and their can-do hubris concerning one finite person‘s ability to effect fundamental change in another.

20

One helpful critique of this discourse comes from a rather ironic source: a fourth-century North African bishop named Augustine of Hippo. Augustine is an unlikely candidate for such appropriation for many reasons: besides his hard-line position on predestination and his role in developing the idea of original sin, Augustine‘s final solution for dealing with Christians he considered schismatic was to enlist imperial force against them. Medieval thinkers would later use his work to assert the church‘s authority over civil government. Most pertinently, Augustine was notorious for the suggestion that Christians should ―use‖ other humans, a position that continues to fuel scholarly confusion and debate. Yet Augustine remains one of the most influential figures in the history of Western Christianity, and certainly the most important theologian both Catholics and Protestants claim their own. He is widely recognized for his magnificent abilities as a storyteller, on fullest display in his most famous work, Confessions, and his greatest work, City of God, both classics of Western (and not just Christian) literature. And his entire theology may be understood, in one way or another, as a series of sensitive and creative reflections upon love. He deserves a hearing, warts and all.

Augustine‘s perplexing remark arises in a handbook he wrote on biblical interpretation called De doctrina christiana (On Christian Teaching). In its opening chapter, Augustine distinguishes between two kinds of activities he calls enjoying (frui) and using (uti). Enjoying means pursuing something and finding satisfaction in it for its own sake, and not for any ulterior end. Using is associated with intermediate goods that are directed toward objects of enjoyment but are not themselves the final resting place of desire. On Augustine‘s terms, then, human activity is teleological, oriented toward purpose and direction: one boards a ship for the purpose of traveling, and one travels for the purpose of going home. Augustine also asserts that the only appropriate object of enjoyment is God – a seemingly unproblematic theological claim, until one realizes that this would by implication make even human beings objects of use. But how can we use humans when they are created in the image of God, and Jesus said the greatest commandments are love for God and neighbor?

Rowan Williams, now Archbishop of Canterbury, explores this question in an insightful little essay called, ―Language, Reality and Desire in Augustine‘s De doctrina.‖ On his reading, the distinction between enjoyment and use corresponds to another distinction Augustine draws between things (res) and signs (signa). Augustine defines res as that which has its own integrity and existence apart from its role in signifying something else. A signum is, of course, a thing, but its purpose lies primarily in its reference to some other res. Smoke signifies fire, and words are the preeminent signs of our thoughts. Since God is summa res, the ultimate source and referent of all things, there is a sense in which everything else is comparatively signum. Indeed, Jesus is the ultimate sign, so defined by his self-emptying, perfect representation of God that his existence cannot be conceived independent of this signification. All creation should therefore be understood Christologically, as a world of signs pointing toward the perfect signum, Christ, who in turn points to the perfect res, God. Within this framework, Augustine‘s suggestion that humans are to be used adopts a different valence. For his point is surely not that other people exist for our happiness, but that our love for them must be rooted in a confession that we ourselves do not constitute ultimate reality. Defining God as the only end of all things also helps us to avoid the idolatry of others. As Williams explains with characteristic grace, ―The language of uti is designed to warn against an attitude towards any finite person or object that terminates their meaning in their capacity to satisfy my desire, that treats them as the end of desire, conceiving my meaning in terms of them and theirs in terms of me. ‗If you settle down in that delight and remain in it, making it the end and sum of your joy, then you can be said to be enjoying it in a true and strict Augustine‘s De Civitatae Dei

21

sense,‘‖ Augustine says, ―and no such cessation of desire is legitimate in relation to finite objects of love.‖ Yet Augustine does more than warn against resting in finite things; he also denies the possibility of finding complete rest during this earthly existence. Augustine is fond of comparing the Christian life to a journey: we long to return to the patria, the homeland where we will be united with God, but we are ever in via, ever restless, ever longing for that which will quench our deepest desires. The path and end of this journey are Christ: we travel along the road by faith in the humanity of Christ, but our goal is to reach his divinity, where we will see God face to face, no longer straining through a mirror darkly, blocked by opaque signs from transcendent beauty. Augustine describes our condition in startling terms in Confessions, when he admits after his own partial journey of self-discovery that he remains radically opaque to himself – a mystery, an enigma. Only in the heavenly city will we experience our eternal reward, where, as Augustine describes it in City of God, the very thoughts of our minds will lie open to each other.

Such a perspective resists the kind of closure and absolutism that can so often characterize our posture toward those who do not share our religious views. In our desire for certainty, we may chafe at the suggestion that our narratives are incomplete or limited in perspective; doubt and dialogue sound like code words for compromise. Indeed, Augustine is no relativist either, and he betrays an evangelistic impulse: since he holds that love for God is our greatest good, he also believes that the best way for us to love our neighbors is to encourage them to love God, too. Yet it is precisely his convictions concerning creation, fall, and redemption that animate his opposition to the idolatrous quest for finality in this world, and his warnings against pride and manipulation in relationships.

Augustine‘s appeal to the vulnerability of God in Christ reveals to us the possibility of entering into friendships where both parties expose themselves to the dangers of exploration, learning, and surprise.

With such vulnerability comes humility, and with humility love. And it is by our love, Jesus promises, that the world will know we are his.

Gregory Lee is a Ph.D. candidate in the Graduate Program in Religion. His academic interests include Augustine, Calvin, and the history of biblical interpretation, and he teaches a course called “Contesting the Christian Bible.” He is a member of Blacknall Presbyterian Church (USA).

22

Jesus is What a Feminist Looks Like Katie Anderson, Trinity „09 I looked up from the podium, glancing at the sea of faces before me. I had just shown an intimidating crowd of seasoned academics multiple slides of naked, anorexic women in performance art. Smiles radiated with approval as the sound of their applause graced my ears. I felt accomplished, awestruck at the depth of inquiry I was able to flesh out over the span of one school year.

My honors thesis combining Art History and Women‘s Studies examined the effects of advertising images of women on perceptions of female beauty and sexuality. Countless hours of my senior year were spent (happily) slaving away as I made it my mission to understand more fully my experience as an undergraduate woman at Duke. Thrust into an intense social scene my freshman year, I struggled to make sense of what I perceived to be unhealthy behaviors of many of my female peers, which discouraged independent thought and attention to balanced bodily wellbeing. I struggled to make sense of this conduct, including excessive promiscuity and alcohol consumption, as well as self-inflicted starvation. Why did Duke‘s best and brightest young women, as well as so many others nationwide, seem to be caught up in a culture of selfdegradation? While writing my thesis, I attempted to answer this question by immersing myself in the work of feminist artists for nine months.

After all my hard work, I still sensed a lack in my conclusions. Suddenly, it hit me – what did God think about all of this? What was God‘s stance on the behaviors I observed, the roles of women in society, and the convictions of feminism?

I had been a fervent Christian for the past few years, yet the methodology for my thesis was secular. How could I neglect to entreat the opinion of the One whose guidance shaped the basis of my very existence? While seeking God was always first on my priority list, I had somehow managed to divorce my spiritual walk from such a crucial turning point in my academic journey.

I became more fully aware of this missing link upon attending an international Christian women‘s conference in London only a few days after the presentation of my thesis. Thousands of women of incalculable ethnicities and denominations gathered in collective worship of Jesus were a beautiful sight to behold. Empowered by verses such as Acts 2:17, when Luke declares that God‘s spirit will inspire His daughters to prophesy in the last days, these women emanated an infectious energy as they boldly declared God‘s love, healing power, and value of womanhood. The authenticity, integrity, and brilliance of the female preachers awakened me to a new category of role models to which I had never been exposed—one that contrasted the hollowness of the sexed-up, superficial celebrity women I was conditioned to emulate as a teenager.

My favorite female preacher took the stage. While I expected another enlightening oration to leave her lips, her words left me dumbfounded: ―Now ladies, I want to be clear: we are NOT a feminist movement. We don‘t hate men. We don‘t want to BE men. No, no…we are women of the Most High God.‖ I practically jumped out of my seat in protest: ―Wait a minute!‖ I cried in my head, ―How can you dismiss feminism with such disdain? Isn‘t feminism the reason you‘re able to vote, and to stand at the pulpit? What about all of the struggles and sacrifices our foremothers endured, so that our generation might have more opportunities for a fruitful life?‖ My heart pulsed in confusion. The infamous, anti-woman comment I read repeatedly in Women‘s Studies texts resounded in my mind: ―A woman preaching is like a dog dancing on its hind legs; one marvels not at how well it is done, but that it is done at all.‖ Shouldn‘t sexism in statements such as these be labeled a sin rather than the very movement that enabled women to uphold positions of church leadership? Through my thesis research, I studied the vast history of women‘s oppression worldwide. However, I had not yet learned how secular feminism influenced the Church, or how women have historically been subjugated because of orthodox Christian teachings.

Most scholars agree that ―first wave‖ feminism began in the nineteenth century and early twentieth century in Britain and the US. This movement focused on equal contract and property rights and later on women‘s suffrage. ―Second wave‖ feminism was propelled by French philosopher Simone de Beauvoir‘s detailed analysis of women‘s oppression in The Second Sex (1953). Betty Friedan followed soon thereafter with her book The Feminine Mystique (1963), showing that advertisers manipulated the emotions of women to maintain their roles as housewives. Freidan showed that women found their identity, purpose, creativity, and even sexual joy through consumerism. As women became more aware of their subordinate role in society, they began to demand equal rights to men, including the ability to enter the work force and contribute to the public sphere.

At the same time, many women in the Church questioned their ―divinely ordained‖ submission to men, exclusion from church leadership, and confinement to the home. One result of this was a ―biblical feminist‖ movement emerging from the newly formed Evangelical Women‘s Caucus (EWC) in 1973, which proclaimed that the Bible teaches the equality of women and men when interpreted correctly. Among many other assertions, biblical feminists contended that the incarnation (the embodiment of God in human flesh as Jesus Christ) accentuated Jesus‘ common humanity with other human beings, rather then his maleness. They cite that the original biblical texts written in Greek use anthropos, meaning human, to refer to Jesus. On the contrary, the word aner, meaning male, is never used to describe Jesus, but does denote other men

23

in the New Testament, such as Joseph in Luke 1:27. Biblical feminists conclude that, since Jesus was God incarnate, this use of language corroborates the idea of God existing without sexual identity. Additionally, the de-emphasis of Jesus‘ maleness signifies identification with women as human beings.

Many of the problems confronting biblical feminists stemmed from the patriarchal assumptions of most traditional Christian theology, which have endured since ancient times. Patristics (the study of early Christian writers) shows that the Church Fathers justified the suppression of women throughout history as not only a reflection of their inferior nature, but also as retribution for Eve‘s ―responsibility‖ for sin. Woman was seen as embodying a part of man that had to be repressed and controlled by reason to prevent another fall into sin and disorder.

Other early Christian theologians (all male, mind you) echoed these sentiments, which were in turn endorsed as truth by their respective communities. For instance, Saint Thomas Aquinas, a thirteenth century Roman Catholic priest, believed woman to be inferior in mind, body, and morality, even in her original created state preceding the Fall. As such, she was, by nature, subservient to man, and her sin deepened her subordination. Aquinas found this problematic, however – why would God have created woman at all, since she was innately defective and would taint His perfection? After much contemplation, he concluded that woman was only included as a part of God‘s creation because of her ability to procreate – this alone was her reason for existence. Well, ladies, thank goodness our ovaries save us!

Unfortunately, things didn‘t change much with the insurgence of the Protestant Reformation in the early sixteenth century. While Martin Luther conceded that Adam and Eve would have been equal in God‘s original creation, he contended that Eve lost this equality when she fell to temptation. Like Aquinas, Luther held that woman‘s inferiority to man is an expression of divine justice, and any revolt or grievance regarding her lesser status is a refusal to accept God‘s righteous judgment. In Lectures on Genesis, Luther states: ―woman…is like a nail driven into the wall. She sits at home…the wife should stay at home and look after the affairs of the household as one who has been deprived of the ability of administering those affairs that are outside and concern the state…in this way Eve is punished.‖ Ouch.

It is no wonder that Christian women challenged the persistence of such conjectures as second wave feminism boosted their selfconfidence, awakening them to their own potential to flourish as autonomous, competent leaders outside the home. If they felt exponentially happier and fulfilled in perceiving themselves to be strong, intelligent, and complete human beings in Christ, was this not what their beloved Lord intended?

Did not Jesus Christ come so that, as John 10:10 proclaims, all people may have life more abundantly, and does this not include celebration of the full humanity of each individual? Women recognized that the idea of men representing ―authentic humanity‖ in classical Christian theology was a source of their own marginalization. This seemed to distort and contradict the Imago Dei theological paradigm, which asserts that all human beings are created in God‘s image and therefore have inherent value.

Katie Anderson

24

The need to promote the full humanity of women forms the foundation of feminist theology.

This theological approach gained prominence when women began to mistrust established presumptions regarding their lesser status. Feminist theology rejects the divinity of any assumption that denies, abates, or misrepresents the full humanity of women. In contrast, anything that does advocate the full humanity of women is an accurate reflection of the divine. While the conjecture of full humanity (the aforementioned Imago Dei) traces its roots to classical Christian theology, the act of women affirming this principle for themselves as subjects was revolutionary. Feminist theology turns the patriarchal assertion of male humanity against or above female humanity on its head, branding the orthodox Imago Dei archetype an instrument of sin in stark contrast to

its true function as an instrument of grace.

Michael Gay

Despite the vast history of male theological chauvinism, feminist theology deems it wrong for women to profess their own victimization and simply blame men in typecasting sexism as a form of historical evil. Women cannot devalue male humanity while asserting their own.

Instead, all individuals must ceaselessly strive for a broadened definition of humanity that is inclusive of men and women of all social groups, races, and socioeconomic classes. As such, women should lambaste all forms of chauvinism, not just those of men.

Perhaps Christian feminists derive the most hope to this end from the ―Christus Victor‖ model, an identification with Jesus‘ resurrection (rather than his death) in which he rose victoriously over evil by exonerating humanity and triumphing over death. As we feel united with the victorious Christ, we can both enjoy God‘s love in our own individual salvation while simultaneously working alongside Him to defeat systems of oppression. In doing so, we are propelled by the hope that, in establishing God‘s new creation on earth as displayed in the life of Jesus, evil will be vanquished and all will live in harmony. Belief that Jesus ―lived the life we were supposed to live‖ proves excellent fodder for us to actively aspire for social justice.

We can conceptualize Jesus as a person who opposed the patriarchal system of his time. He espoused the liberation of subjugated peoples by stripping himself of the male rights and privileges his society would have afforded him. In particular, Jesus‘ subversive inclination toward treating women as full human beings directly challenged the normalcy of sexism, redefining it as evil.

Feminist theology not only strives to empower women and eliminate sexism, it also seeks to create a more inclusive definition of humanity. In order to achieve this vision, one that begins on earth and establishes itself once more in eternity, we must take steps to cure the terrible afflictions of the human heart. As a manifestation of God‘s unwavering love for all people, Christians should be absolutely committed to ending iniquities such as racism, sexism, poverty, and the like. It is this ―love for all people,‖ overflowing from the knowledge our Creator‘s tremendous love for us, which transforms our hearts. Our new being in Christ allows us to see beyond the physical body of each person we meet, viewing him or her instead as a child of God, however different from us. This love must be our ultimate goal underlying every action we take on earth.

As women and men in Christ, we are known and loved as our most authentic selves apart from any system that would deny our humanity. As full human beings in Imago Dei, we are wonderfully made by the One who has given us distinctive personalities for carefully crafted assignments we will fulfill on earth. Accepting and rejoicing in ourselves exactly as God made us, regardless of gender, race, or socioeconomic status, liberates those around us to do the same. We need to look people in the eyes and invite them into intimate human connection in order to ignite the God-thing deep within every human heart, fulfilling feminist theology‘s hope for universal human unity as the body of Christ. Only when this flame is kindled will it burn, burn, burn, our love catching fire in all those we meet, as God‘s new creation in Christ becomes a reality, on earth as it is in Heaven.

Katie Anderson will be graduating from Duke in December, majoring in Art History with a minor in Women's Studies and a certificate in Markets and Management Studies. She has a newfound passion for understanding the intersections between feminism and Christianity, and hopes to use it to empower women to know God and reach their full potential in Christ. Katie plans to work abroad before attending Divinity School and eventually pursuing a PhD. An admitted idealist, she imagines her life as a healthy combination of writing, teaching, painting and speaking about women and Christianity, all while eating lots and lots of chocolate and living on a farm with Kristen Davis (her partner in crime) and their future families.

25

How is God Worki In the midst of senior year craziness, I‘m really encouraged after taking a moment to consider how God is working (amazing how easy it is to miss what he‘s doing). As questions about all aspects of the future never cease, I‘ve seen God reminding me to trust his timing as he‘s met me in my worries. While I still have numbers of unanswered questions, I‘m at peace as I‘m beginning to understand that not knowing some of the answers can actually be beneficial. I‘ve also been reminded of God‘s love for people, especially here at Duke. I‘ve been really encouraged (and convicted) to see how God is challenging our fellowship to reach our peers in new ways, and how, though this call, God has been meeting us to transform our lives holistically towards him.

Ben Wolf Trinity „10

Shannon Skinner Pratt „10

26

When I think of where God is working in my life, so many things come to mind, but all seem to point back to the power and peace of prayer. With a somewhat hectic life, it is often easiest to drop your quiet time with God first in the effort to have more time for the other parts of your life, or to micromanage your time in order to get it all done. God has really been teaching me to come to Him with my ―to do list‖ and ―schedule for the day‖ to ask what He wants me to do with the time that He has given me. Through this process, He is reminding me to rely on Him for every bit of my life at every second of my life. He is also teaching me to seek His priorities rather than my own. I can then have peace in knowing that God is in control of not only my time but also my life and my decisions. Praying also reminds me to seek Him as my goal and my destination. The project that is due or the career plans that need to be made are just steps to Him rather than the goals themselves. Praying that I might entrust my time and energy in God‘s hands constantly throughout the day really refocuses my attentions on God who will use my resources for far better purposes than I could imagine.

ing in Your Life?

Psalm 8:4 What is man that you are mindful of him? The son of man that you care for him?

Right now, God is gently, yet passionately, tugging at my heartstrings to believe with all my being that He is Sovereign, that He cares intimately about me. It‘s easier for me to believe in God‘s Holiness and love when I‘m ―worshipping‖ or in ―place of worship‖, but when the pandering distractions of day to day transactions come into play, I can only function within my narrow abilities and disabilities. I want to love my God. I want to live a life fully surrendered to His power and love. That‘s what I‘m learning—who I am… who I am in light of Him.

Gloria Ahn Trinity „12

This semester I was thrown into positions of leadership on the track team and in Navigators that I did not expect, just as I did not expect the semester to start with a trip to the emergency room after being hit by a car. It did not take the car to make me realize that God has placed me in those organizations to reach people whom I never dreamed of influencing. God has given me friends who hold me to a righteous standard and encourage me as I strive to follow Christ.

Most of all, I have seen God faithfully work things together for those who seek him with their whole heart.

Caleb Duncanson Trinity „12

27

The Quest for the ―Est‖ Ronnie Booth, Trinity „12

In middle school, I was forced to watch The Sound of Music so many times that upon any event of the slightest importance in my life, a small part of me expected the Von Trapp children to pop out of a nearby cabinet and mark the occasion with saccharine harmonies and intricately choreographed dance sequences. Although it could be argued that this movie may be the root of the cynicism that is now deeply embedded within my personality, it did teach me some valuable lessons. I learned that the best way to subdue rowdy children and win the heart of my handsome employer is through song, that sometimes dating a guy with dangerous political associations can turn out alright in the end, and, most importantly, when times are tough, to focus on things that make us happy in order to make it through. I am referring of course to the scene where the frightened Von Trapp children run to Maria during a particularly violent thunderstorm, and she comforts them with a song about her favorite things. While she had rather specific penchants for raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens, we Duke students have our own security blanket that we cling to when we are stressed, lonely, or depressed. It is in these moments, I believe, that we get ourselves into trouble.

So, what is a Duke kid‘s favorite thing? Simple. More than anything else, we love three little letters: est. We long to be and pour our energies into accruing the most est‘s as humanly possible. We take pride in being the best, brightest, prettiest, smartest, skinniest, savviest, and Cameron-craziest people in existence. We even get excited about being named the douchiest. We define ourselves with these est‘s. We crave these linguistic markers of status like a drug. We hunger for significance, and we see these est‘s as the means to achieve it. The problem, however, is that we are at Duke. As such, we usually need not search for more than thirty seconds before we find someone overwhelmingly more adept than ourselves in whatever area we hinge our identity upon at the moment. We hear a lot about Duke students‘ low self-esteem; here is the source. Our self-worth is so intricately interwoven with our accomplishments that any hindrance to our success is a major blow to our self-perception. This system was perfectly adequate for most of us in our preDuke lives as we could attain some form of worldly status with relative ease. This being the case, the issue of our self-worth being based on a vastly inadequate foundation was not made palpable until we entered the Duke culture.

Fortunately, as Christians, we are at least intellectually aware of the true basis of our self-worth. The only reason we humans have any significance whatsoever is because God loves us. We are infinitesimally minute specks existing within a terrifyingly immense and glorious universe, yet He loves us and traded the life of His Son in order than we might know His love. Nothing we can ever do, attain, or label ourselves as matters in the least, as any worth that we have is due to the majesty of Christ. 2 Corinthians 3:4-5 says, ―Such confidence as this is ours through Christ before God. Not that we are competent in ourselves to claim anything for ourselves, but our competence comes from God.‖ Christ lifts the crushing burden of proving ourselves to the Creator of the universe and allows us to experience a peace and security that can only be found in Him. This freedom also makes it possible to support one another through the storms of life in which we feel we will drown. This support is meant to be manifest through the fellowship, one of the supposed defining characteristics of the Church.

28

In the collegiate setting, the Church materializes in the form of the campus ministry. Although different in format and personality, the various campus ministries exist for a common purpose: to provide the fellowship that each of us so desperately needs so that we may, in turn, show Christ‘s love to those that have yet to experience it. Ideally, campus fellowships should provide a respite from the exhausting cycle of status-scrounging that permeates all other aspects of our Duke existence, but alas, we are imperfect creatures.

Our very natures render campus ministries highly ineffective. The quest for est is so deeply buried within our subconscious definitions of personal identity that we unwittingly allow it to seep into our Church body and saturate our interactions. We begin to desire importance within the Christian body instead of taking satisfaction in the significance given us by Christ. The result is a sort of ―righteous‖ hierarchy that assigns weight to individuals based on their ability to act in accordance with the particular bureaucratic and organizational tastes of a certain ministry. This method of identification quickly transforms into a twisted way of judging the ―spiritual quality‖ of individuals. What emerges is a pseudo-caste system of sorts that leads to three principle issues: Those at the bottom of said structure (those that do not match the ideal profile of the organization) suffer from a deep sense of inferiority and therefore an extremely low view of their self-worth.

Those at the top develop an insecure pride that subconsciously convinces them that the maintenance of their privileged but tenuous position is worth nearly any cost.

The body as a whole is unable to truly love itself due to the stifling prevalence of value-assigning, status-based structure.

The combination of the first two issues gives birth to the third, which in turn creates a ripple effect through the Duke community at large. If we cannot love each other within the body, then we certainly cannot love anyone outside of it.

Furthermore, if we do not live the principles we espouse, we make hypocrites of ourselves. I John 3:18 teaches that we are to love ―not with words or tongue but with actions and in truth‖. Our craving for self-importance is stopping us from actively loving each other.

I am not saying that the existence of structure within ministry is bad. The Bible speaks frequently of the importance of leadership within the Church. I am also not asserting that this circumstance is due to calculated, volitional action. The real dangers to our walk with the Lord are the influence of those aspects of our nature that are buried so deeply that they are almost undetectable. It is the intention with which we view things that makes the difference. Allowing our desire for distinction to dictate our attitudes towards a campus ministry perverts the purpose of leadership and the ministry in general. If we begin to attribute our self-worth to the approval of an institution instead of on the grace of Christ, we are never going to gain what we seek. In the end, we are only hurting ourselves. We can cling to those things in life that so quickly fade away and thereby distort the establishment that is meant for love and fellowship, or we can accept the eternal significance that can only be offered by Christ.

Ronnie Booth is a Trinity Sophmore majoring in History and Religion. She attends the Summit Church and is involved with Campus Crusade for Christ.

29

―The Church is a Whore… But She is My Mother‖ Sam Zimmerman, Trinity „12 Church.

The word alone conjures a multitude of thoughts and emotions. For some, images of giant spires reaching toward the sky, organ music, and homilies fill their heads. For others, images of modern amphitheatres packed with people singing praise in the musical fashions of the day are the first to enter their mind. Yet still for many others, different images come to mind. The painful memories of hypocrites and liars, the morally bankrupt and the elitists, create images of the Church that are quite distant from the imperatives of the Sermon on the Mount. Our Church is responsible for the Crusades and Missionaries of Charity, for the Spanish Inquisition and St. Francis‘s sermons to the birds, for bowing to a tyrannical Hitler and for standing boldly against him. How can this disparity exist? How do we reconcile the Church of the Inquisition with the Church of Acts?

Saint Augustine (354- 430), a father of Western Christianity who added the foundational doctrines of original sin and just war, once said of this qualified universal, ―The Church is a Whore……. but She‘s my Mother.‖1 The different faces of the Church have been present for a very long time. From Ananias and Saphira to the selling of indulgences, Augustine‘s statement on the condition of the church has explained that the Bride of Christ is both adulterous and loving.

The Church as a Whore: The Church is adulterous. She has and continues to sell herself to the surrounding culture. We have toned down the discipleship of Romans 12 to quaintly accommodate first the Pax Romana and presently the American Dream. We have quietly dialed down the demands of the path less traveled so that we can, as Derek Webb puts it, ―have one hand in a pot of gold and the other in your side.‖2 Whether it be politically, economically, or socially, the demands of persevering discipleship have been forgotten and dropped for the handsome ideals of the apples around us. The American Church has left Christ‘s self-sacrificing love to become a bastion of political power. Economically, Christianity has become synonymous with hip t-shirts and gated communities. As emergent church theologian Shane Claiborne notes about the current social dynamic, the higher a person‘s frequency of Church attendance, the more likely he is to be sexist, racist, pro-military action, and generally in favor of the expected cultural norms of the day.3 Last, and most poignant of all, she has been divided: one beautiful Bride of Christ split into a harem of churches. When Christ gave Peter the key to heaven for the Church he was to build, He only gave him one key. All future denominations and offshoots of the original form were still meant to exist within one Church. It was one key for one Church; not one key for each preference-based variation.

Dietrich Bonheoffer, a German theologian in WWII Germany, witnessed his church adulterously run from Christ into the hands of Hitler‘s Nazi Germany. After watching his church fall, Bonheoffer wrote that it was the practice of ―cheap grace‖ that allowed the German Church to be so swiftly swept up into Hitler‘s Aryan dreams. For Bonheoffer, this is precisely what causes the Church to be both the bride of Christ and the servant of man. Bonheoffer defines cheap grace in this way: " the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline. Communion without confession. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ."4 Even while Bonheoffer awaited his execution by the Gestapo, he continued to envision a Church that was also the bride of Christ. He saw a Church that still embodied Christ‘s teaching and fostered His love.

This is why St. Augustine adds that ever-so-important clause to his statement: but she‟s also my mother.

The Church as a Mother:

30

Saint Augustine viewed his mother as the highest of saints. To Augustine, she was of the highest virtue, and he worked tirelessly to emulate her. After his mother, St. Monica, kicked Augustine out of her house, she chased after him to Rome and then to Milan. So when Augustine adds the clause, but she‟s my mother, he‘s envisioning the Church as his mother: always trusting, continually persevering, forMonica, Saint Augustine‘s Mother

ever hopeful, and eternally faithful. His Church is a saint.

The Church has remained faithful to the narrative of Jesus throughout two millennia. In the Dark Ages, when education and communication were greatly inhibited, monks worked tirelessly to tediously copy the Christ‘s story and thereby preserve the message of salvation. The Church faithfully kept a theological tradition of 2,000 years. With this theological tradition, the Church works to remain faithful to the Gospel, and through this theology we interpret Scripture. Thanks to a faithful Church, Christ‘s story has been mediated upon and emulated for thousands of years. She is the vessel in which God has chosen to carry the Gospel. Like Mary, the mother of Christ, the Church is the vessel by which new life in Christ is brought forth.

Peter Farmer, Trinity „11

The Church operates within seminaries and divinity schools that educate and deepen our walks with Christ. The Church offers a community that praises and scolds our developing character. The Church provides a place for us to practice and experience forgiveness and grace. The Church has recorded the prayers and hymns of the saints that help us express our shared experience. The Church supports our mission trips and service projects. It is through the Church that God has revealed all these wonderful gifts. Most importantly, it is through the Church that God has given us the means to experience life.

The Church has presumed these duties with a truly astounding diligence; this diligence is most easily forgotten and soon overshadowed by the next big thing rolling through our society. In an age steeped and suffocating in freedom, the Church as an institution has been easily forgotten. We quickly forget that the Church helped bring down the Apartheid of South Africa, helped stop wars in Chile and Argentina in 1978, has given billions of dollars to charity, set-up schools that have educated the leaders of the developing world, contributed significantly to the development of medicine and agriculture, and performed countless other benevolent actions.5 Like a rebellious teenager, or like Saint Augustine, we forget the one who has always been there for us: our mother, our Church.

Paradoxically, the Church that fosters Bonheoffer‘s cheap grace also breeds cheap grace‘s counterpart, costly grace. "costly grace confronts us as a gracious call to follow Jesus, it comes as a word of forgiveness to the broken spirit and the contrite heart. It is costly because it compels a man to submit to the yoke of Christ and follow him; it is grace because Jesus says: „My yoke is easy and my burden is light.‟" 6 For Bonheoffer, who witnessed his national Church blend with Hitler‘s Nazism, the Church still was his mother.

The Church, through the likes of Brother Lawrence, Saint Francis, the Desert Fathers, and the rest of the communion of saints, reverberated the Gospel throughout two millennia. The Church was home to costly grace as well. True to her covenant, the Church was fully entranced with Christ.

Through Bonheoffer‘s analysis of cheap grace and costly grace we see that the Church‘s ability to display the Gospel is directly related to her faithfulness to Christ. While the traditions of the Church have weight, it is only through their faithfulness to Christ that they have the power to transform and renew, the power of the Gospel. Just as Mary‘s faithfulness made possible the advent of Christ, so also the Church‘s faithfulness creates opportunity for new life in Christ. So we see that, without the Gospel, the ladder of the Church‘s tradition soon fades into tedious self-glorification. With faithfulness however, the Church‘s tradition enables and encourages the living discipleship Christ demands.

In this way, the Church has been both adulterous and true to her vows. This is a Church that is full of hypocrites and liars, because we are hypocrites and liars. We are the roots of that adultery. Conversely, it is only through Christ that she has been so loved. Christ‘s faithfulness to His bride has kept her righteous. He sacrificed Himself for her, to make her holy, radiant, and without stain or wrinkle.7 So when we encounter the Church, we encounter the Gospel: the crossroad of Man, polluted with sin, and God, pure and glorious as the whitest snow. Isn‘t she beautiful?

1. The works of Saint Augustine: a translation for the 21st century, page 154 2. Derek Webb‘s Song: Wedding Dress 3. Shane Claiborne‘s Irresistible Revolution

5. Tony Campolo. Letters to a Young Evangelical.

6. Dietrich Bonheoffer. The Cost of Discipleship. 45.

7. Ephesians 5: 25-27

4. Dietrich Bonheoffer. The Cost of Discipleship. 44.

Sam Zimmerman is a sophomore majoring in Mathematics and Philosophy. Some of his more practical activities include IM Soccer, Haitian Student Alliance, The Duke Science and Religion Discussion Group, Pathways Lilly Scholars, and CRU. When he‟s not doing that stuff, he‟s wandering around, putting out the vibe and eating nutella.

31

Allegiance to the Spirit of the Original Church Harrison Hines, Trinity „12

Just as it has been from his beginning, the chronological breadth of man‘s discernment is bound by the first day he takes breath and the last. His vision, it seems, carries an incurable impairment that prohibits him from understanding the greater scheme of Life beyond the slim sliver of time he has been allotted. What else is the aim of history but to teach men about the mistakes made hundreds of times past so as to avoid them in the future? And yet history will tell that humanity is a difficult student. Every century, a new war is waged for the same reasons as before, whether justified or corrupt. Rulers rise, economies fall, and still this Life continues upon its eternal course. The Christian church, at least regarding its social malleability, is trapped within the mortal flow of ―time‖ to which we men are confined. With each generation, the church strives to reorient itself in the new cultural framework of whichever people group it is situated. This shift and change is necessary and good, but also dangerous to the aims of Christianity. With each redefinition of what is culturally accepted and attractive, the church must take incredible care to never exchange the gospel of Christ for cultural compatibility. For this reason, the church as revealed in the Holy Scriptures must be our immutable model, our hallowed standard, to which we pledge uncompromising loyalty. As individuals, if we can wholly believe in and abide by this example, then our separate ministries and church divisions cannot help but bring glory to the King we serve. This singular devotion, this steadfast determination to remember the Spirit of the original church is not possible with these time-bound eyes we possess. For this reason, we blind men must walk by faith, and not by sight. 1 Regardless of any contemporary notions of how it should exist or how it ought to look, the church today is a divided assembly. Whether by ocean, across theological creeds, along socio-economic lines, or due to other earthly circumstance, God‘s people are prone to division.

This divisive tendency is as old as the faith itself. The Apostle Paul vehemently combats a particular separation born from idolization of one man over another within the Corinthian church. 2 All throughout the book of 2nd Samuel, David is forced to watch God‘s chosen people divide along corrupt political lines and destroy the unity that brought them into the Promised Land.3 Even Jesus, the great divider, gave his one and unique Spirit to all his followers that they might be guided into all truth, regardless of personal differences or disagreements. 5,4 The church clearly has unity anxiety.

Today, our divisions take the form of different international church congregations, not to mention our personal ideologies. Truly, Christ‘s bride is inclined to physical self-segregation.

One must understand—even embrace— these historical divisions, yet not be fooled into believing that they delay the coming Kingdom of God to Earth. Indeed, divisions and denominations have come into conflict among themselves numerous times over the course of history, but this does not reflect the merit (or lack thereof) of partitions in general. These partitions belie a great and all-important truth concerning the body and its constituents. As with man, the church is not simply the composition of its many parts and members.

The church has a Spirit. This is not a Spirit in the same sense that each man has a spirit through which he communes with the invisible God, no, because this Spirit encompasses a multitude of men.

This Spirit is a kind of guide, a communion with divinity, both the path of righteousness as well as the lamp that lights it; it is the essence of Christ‘s gospel dwelling within all his followers, and it does not

Above all else, we, as followers of Christ, must be solely and wholly loyal to the Spirit in which the church was formed and by which it is guided today.

32

vary.6 The Spirit of the Church crafts its members as a watch maker might a watch and guides this process of division. Each part has a different form and purpose, but all are empowered by the same source to a common end.

There is an intimate and yet distinct relationship between the different parts of the body from which the church is composed and the Spirit that unifies them. Paul writes on the church having many members to create one united body in 1 Corinthians 12, explaining ―The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ.‖7 He recognizes that, though there exists only one true gospel which begat a single church, there is—and should be—division, at least in pure terms of functionality, between its members. Within Pauline theology, the church as the bride of Christ is held together primarily and principally through Jesus. During an era of social stratification, what else but the good news of the Lord could unify Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female?8 Truly, devotion to the same message and majesty of Christ brought their lives together for one concerted endeavor to worship God. Grasping this characteristic of the early church of unity in diversity and recognizing its drastically colored blend of people and communities and ethnicities and spiritual gifts and social castes, leaves no doubt that the body of Christ has few clean-cut definitions. Visit any two congregations around the world to witness firsthand that the church looks different everywhere. The hundreds of ways Christianity is expressed have almost no cookie-cutter features.

For this reason, above all else, we, as followers of Christ, must be solely and wholly loyal to the Spirit in which the church was formed and by which it is guided today. That is to say, beyond any denominational preference or personal theological convictions, we are described in the scriptures as a body of one mind and Spirit; we must place our faith in this unity. Paul enumerates the total union of the church in his letter to the Ephesians, proclaiming a single Spirit of God over all.9 He is emphatic, even to the point of aggressive, that the church has a kind of oneness that is indissoluble because of its origin in the divinity of Christ‘s gospel.

This ‗oneness‘ is the Spirit of the church and it directs its many members toward a common goal. Because this guide was given unto us by the unchanging Lord, there is no quest in search of God as one might observe within the hearts of men. There is some difficulty in outlining the specific attributes of such a Spirit; the New Testament does not go into much detail about how this ―one mind and one heart‖ leads the body of Christ. Clearly, Christ is the head of the body, but how we respond to his leadership varies by body part. 10 Nonetheless, scripture is explicitly clear on one point: God takes great pleasure in a church that ultimately focuses on its concurrence of divine calling rather than on the particular forms through which that calling becomes manifest. Initially given during the early days of the first church, God lavished his grace on his followers as they live, work, and worship with one Spirit. The writer of Acts says as much in verses 4:32-33: All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all.‖ The unity of the saints was inevitably accompanied by power and grace. It was not their personal ideologies or understanding of the gospel that were highlighted, not even those of the apostles who followed Jesus in his ministry. As previously mentioned, Paul vigorously condemned such adamant glorification of one man‘s message over another‘s. God valued the extreme and sacrificial unity of the believers. This was their symbol of spiritual fraternity, their form of

33

spiritual circumcision. By the love they held for one another, they were to be known through all of time as Christ‘s disciples.11 We must give our unwavering attention to the fact that the entire body is lead by the same holy Spirit, regardless of the individual paths by which this Spirit leads, if we are to truly enter into the fullness of life given

by Christ to his church.

This focus demands a diligence in seeking Jesus Christ in all things, not the mission of whichever ministry or denomination with which we affiliate ourselves. The church today has become an organism saturated with culture, deftly transforming itself in creative and fantastic ways to reach people that would otherwise never encounter the gospel. Such a beautiful ability to innovate and utilize fluid, modern cultural mediums for the transmission of the salvific message of Jesus must please the heart of God. Just as the members of the human body do not have the same functions, the body of Christ must be versatile so as to most clearly embody the gospel in any situation. 12 One congregation deep in Costa Rica may be wedded to Catholic liturgy while another in Wuhan City, China may be forced to worship underground in quiet to avoid persecution.13 The church must be all things to all people that even some may hear the gospel and receive salvation. May the church never lose this creativity. Still, there does certainly exist a fine border marking the realm of inventive evangelism from depraved idolatry. Without a clear focus on the Spirit of the church, there is no check against complete slavery to an ideal or organizational goal, which is pure and plain idolatry. Personal, institutional, or denominational emphases do not themselves perpetrate sin.

Only when a man deifies one of these concepts in his own heart does he become unclean in the sight of the Lord.14 Such idolatry is often subtle because it masquerades as a force of light within men while drowning out the Spirit‘s voice. It is imperative that the vision for the total unity of the church not be lost amidst the hubbub of modernization.

Practically, the preeminence of the Spirit‘s mission over all else entails not only participation, but proactive search. One cannot simply become comfortable following the mission and activities of a certain campus ministry; one must constantly mediate on the unity of Christ‘s body. Humanity is fallen and so are its institutions. All our trust must be placed on the holy texts and the revelations of the Spirit, for all else only leads away from the Lord. Deep, personal study of the Bible must be the foundation of our ministry. Karl Barth echoes such sentiment, stating that true church union can be achieved, ―only by a common effort towards the Head and Lord of the Church - to be realized by a common research of the Biblical Message.‖15 If the direction of an organization begins to deviate from the path laid by the Spirit in the scripture and as revealed through prayer, it is the duty of each individual member to bring the group back to the righteous course.

This Spirit centered message is not new. Thousands before have recognized and highlighted a focus on the unity of the church in one Spirit; thousands ahead will do the same. But this idea, this calling is so magnificently important that it cannot be repeated enough. Though the church is a body constructed with completely different parts carrying out an array of functions, that body is animated by a single Spirit. No function should subvert this fact. We have sworn our allegiance to the gospel of Christ, not the mission of a part of his body. Remembering and relying on the Spirit over all else will bring the greatest fruit to bear in our ministry and in our lives.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

2 Corinthians 5:7 1 Corinthians 1:10-17 See Absolom’s Conspiracy (Ch. 15-18) and the rebellion of Sheba (Ch. 20) Not peace, but the sword; see Matthew 10: 34-39 Spirit of truth; see John 16:13 The unity of the church should be worthy of Christ’s gospel; see Philippians 1:27 1 Corinthians 12:12

8.

Galatians 3:28 9. Ephesians 4:4-6 10. Ephesians 5:23 11. John 13: 34-35 12. Romans 12: 4-5 13. From my personal experience, I can say these congregations are poles apart 14. Just as with food, not what a man ingests in unclean, but what his heart produces; see Mark 7:20-23 15. Gespräch in Princeton II: p. 514

Harrison Hines is a sophomore majoring Chemistry and Religion. He is a part of Campus Crusade, Club Tennis, the Religio staff, the FAC program, Round Table, the Hospital Careers Exploration Program, and the Robertson Scholars Program. He has been blessed to have friends that love to play soccer as much as he does and get together to celebrate every birthday they possibly can.

34

Deliver a Sermon in the Duke Chapel

Sunday, February 7, 2010 A Duke undergraduate student will be selected to preach at the 11:00 a.m. Sunday worship service in Duke Chapel.

All Duke undergraduates are welcome to apply.

Application guidelines can be found at www.chapel.duke.edu/pathways/studentpreacher.html.

The submission deadline is noon on Friday, January 4, 2010.

For more information contact adam.hollowell@duke.edu

35

The Nicene Creed Credo in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem, factorem caeli et terrae, visibilium omnium et invisibilium.

Et in unum Dominum Iesum Christum, Filium Dei unigenitum, et ex Patre natum ante omnia saecula. Deum de Deo, Lumen de Lumine, Deum verum de Deo vero, genitum non factum, consubstantialem Patri; per quem omnia facta sunt. Qui propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem descendit de caelis. Et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria Virgine, et homo factus est. Crucifixus etiam pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato, passus et sepultus est, et resurrexit tertia die, secundum Scripturas, et ascendit in caelum, sedet ad dexteram Patris. Et iterum venturus est cum gloria, iudicare vivos et mortuos, cuius regni non erit finis.

Et in Spiritum Sanctum, Dominum et vivificantem, qui ex Patre et Filioque procedit. Qui cum Patre et Filio simul adoratur et conglorificatur: qui locutus est per prophetas. Et unam, sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam Ecclesiam.

Confiteor unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum. Et expecto resurrectionem mortuorum, et vitam venturi saeculi. Amen

35

We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten from the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of the same substance as the Father.

Through him all things were made.

For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered, died, and was buried.

On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father (and the Son).

With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified.

He has spoken through the Prophets.

We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.

We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Martin Luther on the Church: To me she’s dear, the worthy maid, And I cannot forget her; Praise, honor, virtue of her are said; Than all will love her better.

I seek her good And if I should Right evil fare, I do not care, She’ll make up for it to me, With love and truth that will not tire, Which she will ever show me, And do all my desire

She wears of purest gold a crown Twelve stars their rays are twining, Her rainment, glorious as the sun, And bright from far is shining.

Her feet the moon Are set upon She is the bride With the Lord to hide.

Sore travail is upon her; She bringest forth a noble Son Whom all the world must honor, Their king, the only one.

That makes the dragon rage and roar, He will the child upswallow; His raging comes to nothing more; No jot of gain will follow.

The infant high Up to the sky Away is heft And he is left On earth, all mad with murder.

The mother now alone is she, But God will watchful guard her, And the right Father be.

(Luther’s Works 53:292-293)

For questions or to get involved in the life of the Chapel, contact Meghan Feldmeyer, Director of Worship at Duke Chapel, Meghan.feldmeyer@duke.edu