At Toledo Mennonite Church, we are spending 24 days (starting today, Feb. 9, 2009) together as a congregation studying the Confession of Faith in a Mennonite Perspective, one article at a time.
For more on the Confession of Faith, including a full text, go here.
Here is the summary statement of Article #2, entitled "Jesus Christ". (Link to full-text):2. We believe in Jesus Christ , the Word of God become flesh. He is the Savior of the world, who has delivered us from the dominion of sin and reconciled us to God by his death on a cross. He was declared to be Son of God by his resurrection from the dead. He is the head of the church, the exalted Lord, the Lamb who was slain, coming again to reign with God in glory.
One classic method of doing biblical Christology is to study the names or titles of Christ used in the Bible. What names does this article of the Confession call Jesus?1. Jesus Christ
Those who composed this article of this confession consciously gave it an Anabaptist flavor, by emphasizing:
2. The Word of God made flesh
3. The Savior of the world
4. The Son of God with power
5. The Head of the Church
6. The Exalted Lord
7. The Lamb Who was slain
8. The only Foundation which is laid and can be laid
9. The Messiah
10. The Seed of David
11. Prophet of God's Kingdom
12. Teacher of Divine Wisdom
13. Faithful High Priest
14. King who chose the way of the cross
15. Servant
16. Preacher
17. Healer
18. The only Son of God
19. The One in Whom the fullness of God was pleased to dwell
20. The image of the invisible God
21. Him through Whom and for Whom all things have been created
22. Our Lord and the not-yet recognized Lord of the world
23. The One Who shall be acknowledged Lord of all
24. The Lamb of God Who will reign forever and ever"for example, Jesus' obedience and suffering in his work of atonement, his humility and servanthood as the pathway to exaltation, the believers' experience of Christ in the community of faith, the integration of faith and ethics, and peace as central to the character of Christ."
As has come out in a couple of recent conversations with Sarah, I tend to emphasize the Lordship of Jesus. Jesus is the Resurrected Son of God, the Exalted One, the One given authority over all things, to Whom I owe allegiance. (Even while my allegiance is chosen.) This Lordship is the basis of my anti-imperialist philosophy. And it is the basis of my hope--hope for the salvation of the world and the reconciliation of all things in Christ to God. In a recent study of Ephesians I saw clearly that Jesus' exaltation and authority--and our exaltation with Him--is the basis for our doing the works God has created us, in Jesus, to do. It is the basis for our mission--love of enemy, love of neighbor, proclamation of Jesus' Lordship over a world invaded by sin, injustice, violence, and death, invitation to reconciliation with each other and with God in the new man, Jesus. It is the basis of our spiritual gifts.
What of the humility of Jesus? Jesus is "the king who chose the way of the cross". Philippians tells us to have the mind of Christ in His chosen humiliation to death. What impact does this have on my theology and practice as a Christ-follower?
I think my pacifism must be rooted in Jesus' humility. It couldn't be rooted in Jesus' authority and kingship alone--that could root a kind of Constantinianism--or perhaps Cromwellianism--just as well, by itself.
I want to be pacific in my theological and philosophical discourse (but then, was Jesus? As Julian pointed out on Sunday, Jesus was apparently not afraid to shame his debate partners). I want to be like Jesus in not stopping my pursuit of the Kingdom of God because of resistance from the world and its powers, violent or otherwise. But too often I take the path of least resistance. Procrastination, for example, is much easier than work. And procrastination does not (usually) help me advance the Kingdom of God through my relationships to others. (Well, it depends on how I procrastinate.)
Jesus said, "My Kingdom is not of this world; if it was, my servants would be fighting." I need to go on asking myself: do I succumb to the world's rules as I seek to further the Kingdom of God? Am I even tempted? Do I recognize when I am so tempted?
Here is the summary statement of Article #3, entitled "Holy Spirit". (Link to full-text):3. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the eternal Spirit of God, who dwelled in Jesus Christ, who empowers the church, who is the source of our life in Christ, and who is poured out on those who believe as the guarantee of redemption.
In oneness with Jesus, the Spirit is my Lord and my God, and the Spirit is humble, nonviolent, and stops at nothing for the advancement of the Kingdom. The Spirit makes me, with other Christians, one in Christ. The Spirit empowers the members of the Church to do our work. Our having the Spirit is the sign of God's blessings, promises, and gifts to us. The Spirit is present and working through the members of the Body of Christ most when we are unified. Somehow, we must be unified in our diversity of faith and practice, because I believe the Spirit is present and active in the Church today. I want to see the Spirit in my brothers and sisters in Toledo Mennonite. I want to hear the Spirit's call, and feel the Spirit move me to act and use His gifts, given to me, well. I want our church to be visibly alive, the tangible Body of Christ in Toledo.
------
"Make me a channel of Your Peace."
-St. Francis
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Confession of Faith in a Mennonite Perspective, Articles 2 & 3: Jesus Christ & the Holy Spirit
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
I do plan on responding to your other post; I'm still thinking through a good answer to your challenge, which isn't just yet another general theory (on top of school work, and Amtrak trains breaking down and Verizon phones not sending calls at needed times).
You said, "I want to be pacific in my theological and philosophical discourse (but then, was Jesus? As Julian pointed out on Sunday, Jesus was apparently not afraid to shame his debate partners)." I've been trying to think through this issue myself. It seems to me that pacificism in discourse isn't simply an end in itself (we can all think of times when we have been glad, at least in retrospect, that someone was willing to wisely apply harsh words); rather, it is a recognition of our own lack of wisdom and understanding, or of our position to teach.
Whenever I am tempted to be harsh with another in intellectual discourse, I find that this is either because (a) I want to dismiss their view, because I don't really want to have to deal with the sort of untidiness it would introduce into my thought if it were true (cf. diatribes against views which challenge racism and sexism), or (b) because I am more knowledgable than the person with whom I am talking, and they refuse to acknowledge this (if this is merely perceived, then I take it to usually be a case of a; but sometimes it is clearly the case).
If (a), then I have reason to be gentle in speech, because I should be expanding the limits of my intellectual horizon, as painful as that may be. If (b), then usually harshness gets in the way of actually teaching the other person (I think Paul says something to this effect in one of the Timothys in regard to explaining the faith to heretics). Although I have recently had a discussion which has shaken my faith that people actually do have any understanding at all of rational analysis.... What does one do then?
However, sometimes what is necessary is a performative utterance and not more debating, and this is where Jesus' more caustic remarks comes in. I just personally don't think that I have the wisdom to know when these times are yet.
Post a Comment