Saturday Night Theologian
4 June 2006

Acts 2:1-21

Tucked inside the recently passed Senate immigration bill is a provision that would make English the "national language" of the United States. It is uncertain that this provision will survive the conference committee and be included in a compromise House-Senate version of the bill, if one ever comes into being (which is questionable). It is also uncertain what, if any, effect these words would have on ordinary Americans. If they are more than just window dressing, they are likely to have a negative impact on all those who speak a language other than English as their first language, perhaps even encouraging native English-speakers to discriminate against them. Those Christians who look to the federal government for guidance on matters of morality (i.e., those who like to quote Romans 13, claiming that Christians should always be obedient to the government) may take this new law--if it goes into effect--as license to discriminate in the churches against fellow Christians who want to worship in a language other than English. Of course, many churches are already doing just that. Over the years, I've known of several churches that had an English-speaking congregation that met in the main sanctuary and a congregation that worshiped in a different language that met elsewhere. On the other hand, though they may exist, I've never seen a Spanish-language congregation, for example, with an English-language "mission." These missions all too often remain missions for years on end, never achieving full-fledged church status. Their pastor is subordinate to the senior (English-speaking) pastor, and many members of the English congregation look upon the members of the non-English congregation as second-class members of the church. Recently I've become aware of large, English-speaking congregations that are looking to hire non-English speaking pastors to start mission churches in their areas. However, unlike other staff members who come on board with a full salary and benefits, they expect these ethnic pastors to begin work with little or no pay, holding down a second job (perhaps generously provided by a member of the English-speaking congregation) while attempting to start a new church. Such arrangements smack of paternalism and discrimination, and they do not reflect the situation of the church that was born on Pentecost. On that day, people proclaimed the gospel in many different languages, and no one language was considered better than another. Do you speak Greek? Welcome to the church! Parthian or Egyptian? Come join us! People from all different backgrounds were equal in the eyes of God on the Day of Pentecost. It's time for those of us in predominantly English-speaking congregations today to welcome our brothers and sisters who speak other languages as fully equal members of the family of God--regardless of what the law might say about the English language.

For other discussions of this passage, click here, here, or here.

Psalm 104:24-34, 35b

A report in today's paper says that scientists in Israel have discovered an underground lake in which at least eight completely unknown species of invertebrates make their home. They have evolved in complete isolation from both the outside world and the photosynthetic energy of the sun for several million years, yet they have adapted to their situation with a tenacity that is typical of life on this planet. "O Lord, how manifold are your works! In wisdom you have made them all." The latest incarnation of the creation science explanation for the diversity of life on earth is called Intelligent Design, whose name indicates that life is too complex to have evolved by chance. This approach to evolution (it cannot be called a theory, since it does not provide a testable mechanism for the evolution of new species) is superior in some ways to earlier creation science approaches, for one reason because it accepts the scientific view that both the earth and the universe are several billion years old. As already mentioned, it fails the litmus test of science, because it cannot be tested. However, it also fails the litmus test of theology, because it proposes a God who can be understood by human beings. Beings of such complexity and beauty must be designed, says the argument, because we can't imagine that they could come into existence in any other way. What we're really saying, though, is that God is not smart enough to engineer a universe with appropriate physical properties in which such creatures could evolve without direct divine intervention. In his book Becoming Human, Ian Tattersall writes, "Perhaps we will one day be able at least to admit of a God possessing sufficient majesty and expansiveness to transcend the limits of our own imaginations and experience. But meanwhile, . . . we might do well to look upon the inadequacy of our concepts of God as the truest mirror of those limitations that define our condition." Whenever I hear about new discoveries in nature such as these obscure, cave-dwelling creatures, I marvel at God's wisdom in creating a universe in which such beings could come into existence.

For other discussions of this passage, click here, here, or here.

Romans 8:22-27

Earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, tornadoes, mudslides, forest fires, floods, drought--we call all these events "natural disasters," because they are instances of nature negatively impacting humanity. Imagine that humans were not on the earth, however. Twenty million years ago, would a hurricane in the area that is now Louisiana have been a natural disaster? No, it would have been called a natural occurrence, had there been anyone there to call it anything. Even the meteor impact that killed off the dinosaurs (except for birds), along with about 50% of known species, 65 million years ago was not exactly a disaster. Within a relatively short time, geologically speaking, life on the planet was more diverse than ever, with new species evolving to take the place of the dinosaurs, ammonites, and other recently extinct species. Nevertheless, it is hard for us to think of such events in modern times as anything other than disasters when human lives are lost in large numbers, and from our own unique perspective, they are really disasters. Like many of his contemporaries in Judaism and early Christianity, Paul saw the natural disasters that afflicted the earth as indications that the end of the world was near. "We know that the whole creation has been groaning in labor pains until now," he says. Because of his apocalyptic outlook, Paul saw a connection between the fate of the earth and the destiny of humanity. As the first generation of Christians died out and the world didn't come to a fiery end as many had expected, the apocalyptic expectation of Paul and other early Christians was gradually replaced with the belief that the world would continue for a long time more or less at it was at the time. More significantly, from a modern perspective, the fate of the earth was uncoupled from the fate of humanity in the minds of most people. Today we are reaping the results of the divorce of humanity from the earth, as we pollute, heat up, and overpopulate the planet without recognizing the long-term dangers to ourselves. Ironically, many who do hold an apocalyptic viewpoint, believing that the world will end soon and suddenly, are the least concerned about the tragedy that is unfolding, because they figure that they won't be around for much longer and thus don't have to worry about their impact on the planet. It is time for progressive Christians to look again at Paul's contention that the earth itself is groaning in anticipation of the end. If its groans are simply natural occurrences, which we call natural disasters, then nothing new is happening. If, on the other hand, the earth's groaning is the consequence of human activity or human abuse of the planet, we need to act to correct our poor stewardship. Regardless of whether the world ends tomorrow or whether it lasts another five billion years, the earth's inhabitants, including people who see themselves as God's representatives, are responsible for making sure that we are not the ones causing the earth to groan in anticipation of God's intervention.

John 15:26-27; 16:4b-15

My daughter just graduated from high school, so I've been thinking about the nature of education lately. Much of what we learn in school is lessons from the past. We learn about great events and great leaders in history, we discuss scientific discoveries of the past, and we read the works of influential authors. Christian education in our churches is pretty similar. We study ancient texts, and we talk about what earlier Jewish and Christian leaders thought. That is as it should be. The past is important, for without knowing and understanding the past, we will be able neither to understand the present nor to anticipate and plan for the future. However, it is also important to learn how to be spontaneous, to break out of earlier paradigms and patterns of thought. In today's reading from John, Jesus tells his disciples, "When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all truth." Having access to the scriptures was not enough. The Holy Spirit would teach them things that they needed to know that could not be found anywhere else. It may be true that past is prelude, so the past is important to know, but the past could not prepare them completely for the realities of the present. The same is true today. It is vital to know the past, for we have much to learn from it, but we must also learn how to listen to the Spirit of truth in our own lives. The past provides guidance to us, but it cannot tie us to a certain course of action. Unless we are able to read the signs of the times, to hear what God is saying to us through present circumstances, we will not be able to accomplish all that God has for us to do.

For another discussion of this passage, click here.