Good Friday 2020: “God lets himself be pushed out of the world on to the cross.”

Ah Golgotha, accursed Golgotha!
The Lord of glory must shamefully perish here,
The blessing and salvation of the world
Is put on the cross as a curse.
From the creator of the heaven and the earth
The Earth and the air will be taken away
The innocent must here die as guilty,
That touches my soul deeply;
Ah Golgotha, accursed Golgotha!

English Translation by Francis Browne

• • •

Susan Sontag, who suffered for years from the cancer that eventually killed her, wrote this: “It is not suffering as such that is most deeply feared but suffering that degrades.” Here in a few words is a fundamental insight with which to view the crucifixion. If Jesus’ demise is construed merely as a death — even as a painful, tortured death — the crucial point will be lost. Crucifixion was specifically designed to be the ultimate insult to personal dignity, the last word in humiliating and dehumanizing treatment. Degradation was the whole point. As Joel Green describes it, “Executed publicly, situated at a major crossroads or on a well-trafficked artery, devoid of clothing, left to be eaten by birds and beasts, victims of crucifixion were subject to optimal, unmitigated, vicious ridicule.” And so, as Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote, the meaning of the cross lies not only in physical suffering, but especially in rejection and shame.

…Crucifixion as a means of execution in the Roman Empire had as its express purpose the elimination of victims from consideration as members of the human race. It cannot be said too strongly: that was its function. It was meant to indicate to all who might be toying with subversive ideas that crucified persons were not of the same species as either the executioners or the spectators and were therefore not only expendable but also deserving of ritualized extermination. Therefore, the mocking and jeering that accompanied crucifixion were not only allowed, they were part of the spectacle and were programmed into it. In a sense, crucifixion was a form of entertainment. Everyone understood that the specific role of the passersby was to exacerbate the dehumanization and degradation of the person who had been thus designated to be a spectacle. Crucifixion was cleverly designed — we might say diabolically designed — to be an almost theatrical enactment of the sadistic and inhumane impulses that lie within human beings. According to the Christian gospel, the Son of God voluntarily and purposefully absorbed all of that, drawing it into himself.

[In] Bonhoeffer’s words, “God lets himself be pushed out of the world on to the cross.”

• Fleming Rutledge. The Crucifixion: Understanding the Death of Jesus Christ
(pp. 78-79; 92-93)

Watch Our Good Friday Service

Maundy Thursday 2020: “Remembering” means present and active

Willingly I shall bring myself
To accept the cross and cup,
I drink as my Saviour did
For his mouth,
Which flows with milk and honey
Has made the cause
And bitter taste of suffering
Become sweet through first drinking himself.

English Translation by Francis Browne

• • •

The Passover Seder is ordained in the Torah: “This day shall be for you a memorial day, and you shall keep it as a feast to the Lord. . . . You shall observe the feast of unleavened bread, for on this very day I brought your hosts out of the land of Egypt: therefore you shall observe this day, throughout your generations, as an ordinance for ever” (Exod. 12:14, 17). The Passover is to be observed as a “memorial day.” Biblically understood, this is a world removed from what we usually mean by “memorial.” Memory (remembrance) in biblical thought does not mean “calling to mind.” “Remembering” means present and active. That is the reason for the statement in the Passover Haggadah that it was not our ancestors who were brought by God out of bondage into freedom, but we ourselves. The Seder supper is not a memorial of God’s saving action in the past, but an appropriation of that same saving power in the present.

…Similarly, if we say that the Lord’s Supper is a “memorial,” we do not mean that we are simply thinking about Jesus’ last supper. When we repeat Jesus’ words, “do this in remembrance of me,” in the communion service, we do not simply call Jesus to mind. Jesus is actively present with power in the communion of the people. Disputes about the Lord’s Supper have divided the Christian church, but understanding the biblical concept of remembrance can help us. We are not just thinking about Jesus’ actions in the upper room; we acknowledge that he is present and acting with the community gathered at the table in the present time. The doctrine of the real presence of Jesus in the Lord’s Supper can be understood in this way by everyone, from the most sophisticated person to the simplest.

• Fleming Rutledge. The Crucifixion: Understanding the Death of Jesus Christ
(pp. 217-19)

Wednesday in Holy Week 2020: “The crucifixion of Jesus was the most secular, irreligious happening ever to find its way into the arena of faith.”

O man, thy grievous sin bemoan,
For which Christ left His Father’s throne,
From highest heaven descending.
Of Virgin pure and undefiled
He here was born, our Saviour mild,
For sin to make atonement.
The dead He raised to life again.
The sick He freed from grief and pain.
Until the time appointed
That He for us should give His Blood,
Should bear our sins’ o’erwhelming load,
The shameful Cross enduring.

Translation by Catherine Winkworth

• • •

…We are on safe ground to argue that the crucifixion of Jesus was the most secular, irreligious happening ever to find its way into the arena of faith.

The space thus opened up for irreligion at the very heart of the Christian message clears the way for all kinds of people in a way that the various forms of gnosticism simply cannot do. In gnosticism (including Christian gnosticism such as that in Corinth) there is always an inner circle, there is always a spiritual elite. Gnosticism promises mysteries that only the illuminati can fathom. It subtly or not so subtly suggests that “the capacity for being redeemed” is a condition for redemption. By contrast, the Christian gospel — when proclaimed in its radical New Testament form — is more truly “inclusive” of every human being, spiritually proficient or not, than any of the world’s religious systems have ever been, precisely because of the godlessness of Jesus’ death. In fact, the “word of the cross” is far more sweeping in its nullification of distinctions than many by-the-book conservative Christians are willing to admit. The Christian gospel, in slicing away all distinctions between “godly” and “ungodly” (Rom. 4:5), spiritual and unspiritual, offers a vision of God’s purpose for the whole human race, believers and unbelievers alike, so comprehensive and staggering that even the apostle Paul is reduced to temporary speechlessness (Rom. 11:36).

• Fleming Rutledge. The Crucifixion: Understanding the Death of Jesus Christ (p. 54)

Is the Coronavirus Evil?

Is the Coronavirus Evil?

Back on March 17th, Daniel Harrell, Christianity Today’s editor in chief, ran an article addressing this very question.  Harrell served ten years as Senior Minister of Colonial Church, Edina, Minnesota, and for 23 years before that as preaching minister at Park Street Church, Boston, Massachusetts. It is a really good article in my opinion.  He addresses several concepts that I think are spot on in the relationship of Science and The Faith that I like to write about.

First off, he deals with the theological concept that God’s good creation has gone bad.  This is the notion that the fall of Adam has corrupted every aspect of creation.  That is a distinctive Augustinian notion that the earlier Church did not hold to, nor does the Orthodox Church hold to now (see here for example).  Harrell says:

“But unless God’s creation defies every characteristic of biological reality, bacteria and viruses are not bitter fruits of the fall, but among the first fruits of good creation itself. If the science is right, there would be no life as we know it without them. God makes no mistakes, and bacteria and viruses indeed are mirabilis (from the Latin meaning remarkable, or even amazing or wondrous, adjectives frequently used to describe creation) and part of the plan from the start.”

Harrell cites an earlier article by microbiologist Rebecca Randall on “Why Zika, and Other Viruses, Don’t Disprove God’s Goodness” also a read well worth your while.  The scientific fact is that death is a requirement for organic life to exist at all.  And as Christians, we believe that death is essential for eternal life to exist as well.  As Romans 6:9-11 says:

9 For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. 10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.  11 In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus.

Christ’s death wasn’t God’s Plan B- he was “the lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev 13:8).  As the Orthodox say, “Christ trampled down death by death”.

Another excellent point Harrell makes is that creation has been given a certain freedom to be itself by God.  Just as love cannot be coerced, so God endowed us with freedom to reject him, we can

“…extrapolate this logic to nature (from whence humans are made) and you might deduce, theologically speaking, that nature has been endowed with a similar freedom. The sea that inspires can also flood. The ground that stands firm can also quake and give way. The microscopic organism that serves life can threaten to take it away.”

This makes more sense to me, both theologically and scientifically, than the notion that God is micromanaging every event in the universe, including who get sick and who doesn’t.  Compare Harrell’s article to a recent one by John Piper where he said:

“Jesus has all knowledge and all authority over the natural and supernatural forces of this world. He knows exactly where the virus started, and where it’s going next. He has complete power to restrain it or not,”

Piper’s theology, while maybe strictly true, leads to the attitude of  some pastors to open their churches to service despite medical advice to the contrary .   The fact is that a highly contagious virus will spread when the opportunity is provided, not “God is greater than the coronavirus.”  There was a good reason Jesus didn’t throw himself off the temple (Matthew 4:5-7), and there is a good reason to avoid crowds during a pandemic.

As Rodney Stark detailed in his book, The Rise of Christianity: How the Obscure, Marginal Jesus Movement Became a Religious Force in the Western World in a Few Centuries (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1997), during a plague in AD 251 that swept through the Roman Empire decimating the population, the church father, Dionysius, in his Easter letter around AD 260, wrote a tribute to the believers whose heroic efforts cost many of them their lives during the plague.

Pagans tended to flee the cities during plagues, but Christians were more likely to stay and minister to the suffering. According to Dionysius: “Most of our brother Christians showed unbonded love and loyalty, never sparing themselves and thinking only of one another. Needless of danger, they took charge of the sick, attending to their every need and ministering to them in Christ, and with them departed this life serenely happy.”

Dionysius added: “The best of our brothers lost their lives in this manner, a number of presbyters, deacons, and laymen winning high commendation so that death in this form, the result of great piety and strong faith, seems in every way the equal of martyrdom.”

Many of those Christians suffered the natural consequences of exposure to the plague — they got sick and died – nevertheless, they ministered to their neighbors, loving them as they loved themselves. Our attitude during this pandemic should be the same, we should love our neighbors as Jesus loves us, but we should also take every reasonable precaution.  I think that is the best course of action, both theologically and scientifically.

 

Hope in the Midst of Despair

This has been a season of grief.

On Friday I wrote about many of the reasons why I as grieving related to the pandemic that is sweeping the world.

Today (Sunday) I grieve as I remember that 10 years have passed since Michael Spencer was taken from us way too early.

This coming Friday many of us will be sitting in darkness as the Good Friday story is read to us, and we remember the suffering of our Saviour and Lord.

As I was sitting and thinking as to what I would be writing today about the passing of Michael Spencer 10 years ago, one word came to me: “Hope”.

Michael Spencer offered hope.

For those of us who were wandering in some sort of spiritual wilderness, Michael stood as a beacon. Not the sort that would show us the way out, but a light of comfort that told us that he was right there with us. We were not alone. He understood what we were going through. He could relate to the struggles we had, the fears we had, the frustrations we had.

In other words, he embodied Jesus to us.

In a moving tribute to Michael Spencer, his long time friend David Head wrote:

[W]hat made Michael’s ministry so compellingly powerful was his willingness to share his brokenness, flaws and struggles. He never tried to convince us that he had his act together. He refused to take the easy road of cultivating an on-line image that was heroically certain. He went to the boundaries of safe and predictable faith and stepped over. He was Jacob wrestling with the angel of the Lord through the dark nights of his soul. He expressed his tears & laments, questions & screams at God, fears and failures, doubts and an ambiguity that left you wondering how faith would possibly survive that moment.

A first encounter with that depth of honesty was scary. It left you feeling like a voyeur, with access to something intimate you weren’t supposed to have. But then something happened. Michael’s courageous honesty about the beautiful messes of his own journey with Jesus gave permission for thousands of us to own our own mess with Jesus. To realize that our brokenness, flaws, struggles, fears, and doubts are a part of the normal Christian journey. Because they are a part of life and you do it—all of it—with Jesus. Reality means you confess before God, friends, family and even our churches, “ I’m a mess…and I’m with Jesus.” One person said “Michael that put words to my own struggles in ways I wished I could but couldn’t. I know I’m not alone in this. His gift is putting himself out there so that we can see and read and shout “Yes! Exactly! Someone understands!”

Many have come and gone from this site over the years. Michael was there for all of them. For the first 10 years of Internet Monk he was there in person. For the last 10 years he continued to encourage by the vast reservoir of the writing and thoughts he left behind.

It struck me, though, that Michael never intended this site to be a destination. His choice of words to describe the site are appropriate: “Journeys in the Post-Evangelical Wilderness”. The wilderness is not a destination. It is something that you endure on your way to a better place. Many have moved on to other, perhaps better places. Some never made it out and are still searching for that elusive place of worship where they will “fit in.” Still others, like Chaplain Mike, Mike the Geologist, Daniel Jepsen, and I have remained behind. Not necessarily because we are trying to find a way out, but because we want to offer hope to others who are looking for light in a dark place.

And ultimately that was was Michael Spencer was all about. A man who offered hope.

On Michael’s passing 10 years ago I wrote:

[F]irst and foremost, Michael was about the Gospel, the Good News of Jesus Christ. This was what was closest to his heart, and what drew me to him. His concern was that in all the many things that the church was doing, the gospel was being obscured. This was his greatest concern, and to what he paid the most attention in his writing. He regretted that so many people got the wrong idea from the “Coming Evangelical Collapse”, that more than anything it was a call to action, a call to return to the first love of the good news that God has given us.

In going back to my first thoughts about grief, we see that each of these items has a corresponding hope.

We have hope in knowing that the scourge that is currently crossing the earth will eventually end. Never has there been such a concentrated effort around the world to defeat a human enemy.

While I grieve the passing of Michael Spencer, I take hope in knowing that he continues to impact lives through his writing. Others read what he has written and have hope too.

As for the despair of Good Friday, I will leave it up to Michael Spencer to comment on that from this post he wrote for Easter, 16 years ago.

I’ve always felt that Passion plays of every sort missed out on what must have been going on in the hours after the death of Jesus. We need to meditate on the utter, complete, abject devastation and disappointment the disciples would have been feeling right now.

Modern critics of the Gospels, such as the Jesus seminar gang, make the same mistake. I heard J.D. Crossan say, “When I read (the resurrection accounts), I’m reading hope, not history.”

Hope? What hope? A man who never met a corpse he couldn’t raise, a disease he couldn’t cure, a storm he couldn’t calm, is lying cold and dead. His power vanished before their very eyes and he was crushed like a bug. All the talk of who would sit on his right and who would be the greatest…how absolutely stupid it all would seem now. Can anyone imagine the disciples having the Lord’s Supper today? It’s absurd. Everything was crushed, and there was no hope, only despair.

The assumption that the disciples were standing by the windows waiting to see Jesus is bizarre. The resurrection came blasting out from under a planet-sized boulder of hopelessness.

Perhaps we sometimes forget that Christianity doesn’t teach that despair and doubt are alien to faith. The prelude to Easter faith was the darkest, blackest kind of doubt and unbelief. The songs of Easter are growing out soil that’s devoid of any reason to sing.

The apologists who believe the evidence for the resurrection is compelling need to remember that the greatest argument against the resurrection is the simplist: This just doesn’t happen. Death is final.

We are carrying around in us, and with us, a message of hope that’s laughably ridiuclous. Faith really is comedy. God refuses to play by the rules. He raises Jesus and gives us life in Jesus’ death and resurrection. And we get to give it away, any way we can.

I’m so glad the resurrection hope isn’t theology, but miracle. Absurdity. A divine joke on all of us. There is no depth we can go to- not even the depths of hell and the grave- where we can escape from God’s laughter at our certainty it’s all over. If you want to figure it out, write a theology or pen a convincing apologetic, knock yourself out. God raised Jesus from the dead. He opened a window in your hell and my grave and said, “You’re free to leave. The rules don’t apply anymore.”

I trust you see the beauty in it. Theology, religion, the bland pleasures of the world- none of them can reach into death, despair and the grave and rescue me. I regularly need rescue from such places, and I’m pretty sure the time will come when trusting what God did to Jesus will be ALL I can believe.

So be it. Let the laughter begin in the least likely places.

Michael Spencer was, at his very core, a man of hope in the midst of despair.

As usual, your thoughts and comments are welcome.

Ten Years Ago Today: In Memoriam

It is thus, if there is any rule, that we ought to die–neither as victim nor as fanatic, but as the seafarer who can greet with an equal eye the deep that he is entering, and the shore that he must leave.” (E. M. Forster)

Ten Years Ago Today: In Memoriam

Dennis Michael Spencer of Oneida, Kentucky died at home on April 5, 2010 after a four-month struggle with cancer. He was 53.

Spencer was born September 16, 1956 in Rhinelander, Wisconsin. He graduated from Kentucky Wesleyan College in Owensboro, Kentucky and The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville. Spencer served as youth minister and pastor in several Kentucky Baptist churches before becoming the Campus Minister at Oneida Baptist Institute in 1992, where he ministered the past 17 years.

Spencer was also widely known in evangelical Christian circles for his web site, “Internet Monk: Dispatches From the Post Evangelical Wilderness” (www.internetmonk.com). The site was also home to his podcast, Internet Monk Radio. His book, Mere Churchianity: Finding Your Way Back to Jesus-Shaped Spirituality, will be published in September by WaterBrook Multnomah.

Spencer was preceded in death by his parents, S.L. and Dorothy Atherton Spencer of Owensboro and a sister, Peggy Spencer Head, also of Owensboro. He is survived by his wife of 31 years, Denise Day Spencer; his children, Noel Spencer Cordle of Oneida and Clay Spencer of Lexington; and a brother, Dr. B.E. Spencer of Louisville.

Lenten Brunch Lite 6: April 4, 2020 — Lentiest Lent Edition

Lenten Brunch Lite 6: April 4, 2020
Lentiest Lent Edition

Comments now closed.

A bitter wind blows through the country
A hard rain falls on the sea
If terror comes without a warning
There must be something we don’t see
What fire begets this fire?
Like torches thrown into the straw
If no one asks, then no one answers
That’s how every empire falls.

A Season for Lament

What a day. I grieved to hear an Ontario grocery store worker mourn her soulmate, only 49, who worked his last day at Superstore on March 16, just a week and a half ago! Now he’s dead. For stocking groceries. We owe our grocery store workers SO MUCH!

I ache for the fear of the airline attendants who are given no PPE and who are, in no small numbers, testing positive, including one now in ICU. We owe them SO MUCH as they work to bring home stranded Canadians from all over the world.

I grieved over that young man, a wonderful nurse, in New York City who just died. His sister is heartbroken. His last text to her was that he was coughing, and then a ❤️. We owe our scared yet BRAVE healthcare workers SO MUCH!

I grieved with the woman crying over no longer being allowed to visit her senior mother — a mom to 3 nurses! — in hospital, dying alone. So many beloved parents and grandparents, having to die alone. Yesterday, it was a veteran of World War II, adored by his grandkids… – Debra Esau Maione (March 28th)

I am grieving today. In fact, I have been grieving for much of the last two months. It was nearly two months ago that I offered my first thoughts on this crisis. On February 7th I wrote:

A week from then the number of deaths will be in excess of 1300. A month from now, 5600. Two months from now, 16,500. I hope these numbers are inflated, but I don’t believe they are. By contrast, SARS killed around 800 people total.

Instead of taking two months, 16,500 were dead after just 45 days. We are still not at the two month mark, and as of yesterday we had passed 1,000,000 cases and 50,000 dead.

I have been grieving, not just for those who have died, but also for the many, many more who will still die. Did you realize that more people have died in the past week than have died in the entire rest of the pandemic? And did you realize you could have made the same statement the week before that, and the week before that, and the week before that?

A friend posted February 7th:

Optimistic news re coronavirus – the plot of total cases passed the inflection point on Feb. 4. Watch for total cases to effectively level off at ~50,000 around Feb. 20.

I grieved, because I knew that there were going to be many more Chinas.

I have been seeing similar comments recently about the status of countries in Europe. Some of them accurate, many of them premature. And I grieve because we are still in the beginning stages of this, and the areas of the world that are least able to cope with this are starting to see their number of cases beginning to climb.

I grieve especially for Africa, the land where my family has its historical roots and where I spent my teenage years. I grieve for what is coming for them. If we look at places like Italy, Spain, France, and New York and are grieved how bad things have been there, imagine my grief for Africa where things are going to be much worse.

I grieve for other reasons too: For those who have lost jobs, and for those who will potentially lose homes. I grieve for our current homeless who are vulnerable at the best of times and especially vulnerable now.

In my time of grief, what really upsets me is the clichés that I have heard from well meaning Christian friends. Chaplain Mike listed many of the common ones in his sermon last Sunday:

  • God will never give us more than we can bear.
  • When the Lord closes a door he opens a window.
  • As long as we’re in God’s will, we will be safe.
  • If God brings you to it, God will bring you through it.
  • God will put a hedge of protection around his people.
  • This is just our cross to bear.
  • God allows bad things into our lives so that he can turn it into good.
  • God has given you this trouble to test your faith.
  • God is trying to teach us something through this trouble.
  • With God, everything happens for a reason.

What particularly upsets me at this point in time is this one:

  • God is in control

I won’t get into a discussion of that theological thought in the post, but will note how this thought runs contrary to scripture.

We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one. – 1 John 5:19

Chaplain Mike pointed out that when Jesus arrived at scene of Lazarus’ death, “not once does Jesus answer them with religious platitudes.” Notice what happens instead:

When Jesus saw her weeping, and the Jews who came with her also weeping, he was greatly disturbed in spirit and deeply moved. He said, ‘Where have you laid him?’ They said to him, ‘Lord, come and see.’ Jesus began to weep. – John 11:33-35

Chaplain Mike went on to say:

Here is a primary answer to our human brokenness in times of trouble. We are not alone. The Son of God himself stands beside the grave with us and weeps. The Son of God himself feels our sorrows, our bewilderment, our anger, our sense of lostness. We are not abandoned in our grief. This is what we need most. Not explanations, not platitudes, not pep talks. A friend beside us to reassure us, to put his arms around us, to comfort us.

That’s what we need in this life. That’s why Frederick Buechner wrote his now famous words: “Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don’t be afraid. I am with you. Nothing can ever separate us. It’s for you I created the universe. I love you.”

This is also what I need these days. I feel like the prophet Job, who, while mourning the loss of his family and everything else he has, has well meaning friends come up and offer poor advice. It is not what he needed then, it is not what I need now. Instead, come sit beside me in silence. Let me know that you care. Avoid theological debates that are just going to get me upset.

Exactly six years before I wrote my first post on the Corona Virus, I wrote these thoughts on “Job’s kids” on Internet Monk.

Sometimes life is tougher than we can manage. When I see others in that place I need to learn to sit and listen, and not be so quick with the clichés. I also have to be willing to take off my own mask and admit to others when I am having a miserable day, or week, or month, or year. For some “life is tough, and then you die.” I find it really hard to call that “good.”

I will conclude with these thoughts shared by N.T. Wright this week:

“Be gracious to me, Lord,” prays the sixth Psalm, “for I am languishing; O Lord, heal me, for my bones are shaking with terror.” “Why do you stand far off, O Lord?” asks the 10th Psalm plaintively. “Why do you hide yourself in time of trouble?” And so it goes on: “How long, O Lord? Will you forget me for ever?” (Psalm 13). And, all the more terrifying because Jesus himself quoted it in his agony on the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Psalm 22)…

It is no part of the Christian vocation, then, to be able to explain what’s happening and why. In fact, it is part of the Christian vocation not to be able to explain—and to lament instead. As the Spirit laments within us, so we become, even in our self-isolation, small shrines where the presence and healing love of God can dwell. And out of that there can emerge new possibilities, new acts of kindness, new scientific understanding, new hope…

As usual, your thoughts and comments are welcome.

A Theory of Everything (That Matters): A Brief Guide to Einstein, Relativity, and His Surprising Thoughts on God by Alister McGrath- Part 9, Chapter 7- God and a Scientific Universe: Towards a Christian Reading of Einstein

A Theory of Everything (That Matters): A Brief Guide to Einstein, Relativity, and His Surprising Thoughts on God by Alister McGrath- Part 9, Chapter 7- God and a Scientific Universe: Towards a Christian Reading of Einstein

We are reviewing Alister McGrath’s new book, “A Theory of Everything (That Matters): A Brief Guide to Einstein, Relativity, and His Surprising Thoughts on God”.  Chapter 7God and a Scientific Universe: Towards a Christian Reading of Einstein is the last chapter in the book.  McGrath notes that by any standards, Einstein was a brilliant thinker.  But he wasn’t right about everything.  His views on quantum mechanics are now generally regarded as wrong.  McGrath also notes some problematic social views, such as his reflection during his 1922 tour of Japan, China, Singapore, Palestine, and Spain; that some races were biologically inferior to white European observers (Einstein, The Travel Diaries). I was surprised to read that but it seems that even geniuses have a hard time rising above the views commonplace within their social circles.

McGrath, as someone who writes both as a specialist in the historical and intellectual aspects of science and religion and a Christian theologian, wants to ask the question, “What can those who think seriously about their Christian faith learn from Einstein?”  McGrath has no intention of forcing Einstein into a Christian mold- clearly he wasn’t a Christian, or an atheist for that matter.  He was just Einstein.  It is reasonable to respect his intellectual integrity while at the same time asking what Christians might learn from him, and how his ideas might feed into wider Christian reflections on a range of important themes.

Many times Christians aim to defend the reasonableness of their faith in the light of the challenges and new questions raised by the development of the natural sciences.  One instinct that some Christian apologists follow is to point to the scientifically inexplicable and interpret this as evidence of the need to invoke God to give a coherent account of the universe.  The phrase “God of the gaps” is widely used to describe this approach.

Einstein was in agreement with Oxford theoretical chemist, Charles A. Coulson, who gave what is generally seen the definitive rebuttal of “God of the gaps” in his 1956 work, Science and Christian Belief.  McGrath says:

Coulson saw this inadequate way of thinking as contracting the area within which God might be known in the first place and impoverishing the intellectual vision of God in the second.  This “is a God who leaves Nature still unexplained,” while sneaking in “through the loopholes’ of the laws of nature”.  God was rather to be seen not in gaps that were unexplained but in the grander observation that human beings were able to make so much sense of reality.  The capacity of science to explain itself requires explanation – and that means finding a “bigger picture” that makes sense of this observation…

… Einstein thus had little interest in explanatory anomalies or gaps in our understanding, except insofar as these might open the way to the emergence of a richer theory (in much the same way as the anomalous behavior of the planet Mercury, which was inexplicable within a Newtonian framework, could be accommodated by the notion of the gravitational warping of space-time).

This naturally leads us to ask which forms of Christianity might encourage such “big picture” thinking.  Some ways of understanding Christianity do not see this as an integral aspect of the faith.  Many forms of Pietism, for example, hold that the Christian’s sole responsibility is to focus on a personal devotional life rather than to become preoccupied with intellectual issues.  Others would suggest that Christianity is primarily a religion of salvation and that a concern with offering an explanation of our world does not feature prominently (if it features at all) in the New Testament.  I get that here in the comments occasionally – someone will object to all the scientific “mumbo-jumbo” – and assert the only important thing is to get “souls saved”, so stop wasting time with mere intellectual arguments, etc.

While I agree that Christianity does indeed encourage a “discipleship of the heart”, there is also an obligation to develop a “discipleship of the mind”.  After all, Matthew 22:37 says, “Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’”  That view was certainly held by writer C.S. Lewis, whose personal journey from atheism to Christianity resulted from his judgement that Christianity offered a better vision of reality.  John Polkinghorne, Cambridge quantum physicist turned theologian, is another Christian thinker who believes “meta-questions” which “arise from our scientific experience and understanding but which point us beyond what science by itself can presume to speak about.”  Einstein himself remarked that “the eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility.” (Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, p. 292) McGrath says:

An intellectual bridge can be constructed between Einstein’s idea of a “superior mind” disclosed in and through the order of the universe and the more specifically Christian vision of God.  Einstein is here the starting point of a journey that leads from impersonal transcendent order to the Christian idea of a personal God, disclosed both in the created order and especially in and through Christ.

Complex relationships are often best envisaged using metaphors, which can act a powerful cognitive tools to help us make sense of our world.  As McGrath has noted in this book, perhaps one of the most influential metaphors used in Western culture to frame the relation of Christianity and the natural sciences is that of “conflict” or “warfare”.  Yet often in these blogs we have often talked about an alternative metaphor which I believe is more productive in the science-faith conversation – that of the “two books”.  McGrath also brings this metaphor to the forefront of his book.  He quotes Sir Thomas Browne in his 1643 work Religio Medici (The Religion of a Physician) as one of the clearest statements of this approach:

There are two books from whence I collect my Divinity; besides that written one of God, another of His servant Nature, that universal and publick Manuscript, that lies expans’d unto the Eyes of all: those that never saw Him in the one, have discovered Him in the other.

So how does this metaphor of the “two books” help us bring Einstein into the conversation about science and faith?  McGrath says that Einstein points us to the book of nature, highlighting its mystery, its elegance and order, and his deep sense of religiosity in its presence.  A Christian could then set Einstein’s reading of the “book of Nature” alongside her own reading of the “book of Scripture” and find that its features were brought into sharper focus as a result.  This is not to suggest that Einstein is a Christian or that he offers a Christian reading of the natural world.  The point is that he offers a reading of the natural world that resonates or chimes in with the Christian faith.  McGrath says, for example, think of Einstein’s many references to a “mind” behind the universe – as, for example, we see it in his expression of a “firm belief… in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of experience”.  For Einstein, this notion of a “superior mind” was the essence of his “conception of God”.  McGrath says:

Einstein realized that both the objective and subjective realms are important and that they need to be affirmed and held together.  Perhaps he himself never found a synthesis that entirely satisfied him, but he certainly provided a road map for those who wish to explore the matter further.  A theory of everything that matters engages both or objective and subjective concerns, linking them together in a coherent whole.