Theology of Death
|
The theology of death has to be separated from the politics of death. Ministers are experts on death. They have to face it constantly. Not only ministering to the dying and the family, but creating the funeral summation of the act. Most of the funerals I have been to lately have been pretty flat affairs. The passion does not come from the clergy, but the eulogy. It seems the family has to make their grief meaningful. Is that what a funeral is all about? Those left behind, not the departed. The memory, and the reassurance that it is a good thing for the soul in the end. Soul separation. Dividing the soul from the body, the life. We think that our minds and our consciousnesses are one until the division of death. But what we take with us is not the knowledge but the wisdom of this life. That’s what really counts. That’s what God is looking at. What has the prodigal child learned in his or her time away? Modern society has done a great job masking death. My ancestors in the early 1800’s in England rarely made it to the age of forty. When the first immigrated to Canada, hard as it was, he lived to 78. Today death is hidden in the hospitals, the abbatoirs, on TV and the old age homes. Grandma doesn’t spend years languishing on the verge of death in the spare room. We don’t see dad cutting off the chicken’s head in the back yard for Sunday supper. Few kids die in childhood. We are a life-focused, life-positive culture. We can control death far better than any other culture in history. We have stopped worshipping it like warrior kings used to. Our relationship with death has really atrophied. Increasingly the un-Churched are honest enough not to have funerals, just a wake with the ashes in the room. Re-connecting the Church with the post-modern world has to involve confronting the issue of death. There is a chasm between what the Church represents about death and how secular society feels about it. The Church has had to do an end-run around its historical emphasis on death. Even hell-fire preachers can’t sermonize the way they want to. People hate the negativity, the threat, and will just go to a more positive church. It would cause a drop in customers, and the churn in parishoners is one of the big concerns in the fundamentalist churches in the U.S. How do you keep people in your church, let alone coming back. From a missional point-of-view, death seems like a dead issue. People just aren’t that interested. Underneath, death is a sacrifice of our lives to God. We are no longer a sacrificial culture. So how do you connect with a youth that has no sense of spirit? The fantastic is merely thought of as a computer-generated graphic. A product of the imagination. The mystery of death does not come into the picture. Let alone what it entails. What you see is who you are. Christianity is founded on the death of Christ. If no one is interested in death, how do you sell the message of life? We control pain and death quite fine by ourselves. It does not nag us. So the modern Church competes on the secular turf of promoting life. Too often it is interpreted as the management of life by those who may listen. The most successful churches in the U.S. are those who infuse emotion, passion, enthusiasm, liveliness into their services. Rock-and-roll was condemned by those preachers’ fathers. Today the rock band has replaced the choir. Its hard enough to get people to focus long enough on questions about life. They are too busy living it. How do you create a language of death when the old one has been lost? When death occurs, it is one of the real senses of ‘community’ that the buzzword entails. The hearts broken together and see each other for a moment in the mutual recognition. Perhaps that is why fundamentalists loved the orgy of violence against Jesus in Mel Gibson’s ‘Passion of the Christ.’ It said everything they feel, but are not allowed to say in our pain-allergic society. It could only be said through the language that we most often experience death, the movie screen. Its a real opportunity. Spirit is so low in modern society at the same time death is. How do you talk about one’s soul when it is so hard to define, even in traditionals mileus. What is the soul, as opposed to everything else? Isn’t mind and consciousness the same thing? Isn’t this life just an incubator for the soul? The ‘Care of the Soul’ book series was a big hit with its sensuality in experiencing life. Secular society has forced the Church to separate from its death roots to survive. Without the compass of death, how do you distinguish the soul from the life? The problem is ignored, primarily because even the Church does not recognize the distinction between the two. The life and the soul are one. The body can separate us from God if we don’t cultivate the wisdom of the heart. The mechanics of how the soul gets into the body is unknown. Its thought that it is formed at the point of conception. The miracle of life. We have to distill it from the effects of life events to truly know its presence, to be aware of it. If people are committed Christians, then they will enter into a dialogue with death through Christ. We are here to know death. That was Adam’s choice. But death is a fearful thing. One of the many suspenses that God creates for us. We have to come to terms with it. Who are we if we are just in transition? What does the future hold when time ceases and eternity beckons? We have to focus on the ‘petite mal,’ the small deaths that the traumas of life inflict on all of us. To be born again is to experience a death first. All the lies in your life start to die, and you suffer until you are ‘cleaned out’ and can become the real ‘you’ that God made. That takes a lot of courage, to put faith and trust in God when all you see and feel is pain and destruction when you life has been that bad. Courage and the heart. The soul speaks. What does it recognize? It can’t be sugar-coated. Too much seed lands in the thorns and on the rocks from charletans. That is the community of heart that the Church seeks. Community, the Church, feeling our souls at the same time sensing the Holy Spirit. Oneness, through the broken heart. The truth through the death that Adam chose. Death becomes courage. The soul is the heart. Courage comes from the heart, despite what the mind is screaming about its own security. The muscle, the pump, the drum beat of the heart. Singing and dancing around the campfire before the battle in the morning between one’s heart and one’s mind. What common sense does one follow? Facing death, fighting at the peak of life at death’s door. The warrior imagery that is so out of fashion. Yet that was what Jesus went through at the Garden of Gethsemene. A little closer to Christ. God looks at you and says ‘do you see me? Does death frighten you? I am death as well as life. If you ignore death, you ignore Me.’ God takes courage in the face of one’s own death, particularly in the peak of life. We are a safe, secure, peaceful society. We are allergic to pain and death. We have not known famine or mass death since the Great Depression and World War II. The memory fades. Survival is guarenteed. Few know what true deprivation is. What wisdom is in that? Pain, death and life. Nothing is whole. We deconstruct and analyze everything so that we can control any situation. We really need to think about how nothing is whole in our analytical society. Death left out leaves a gap in our wholeness. It is just a ‘part’ of life. Yet wholeness is reached through the heart, the courage of the heart, through death and rebirth. It is experiential. A discovery of Self. With anti-death as our society’s modus operendi, how can non-linear, post-modern humans ever take the disparate parts of their conceptual lives and piece them together into a whole? It is the foundation of the Jesus experience. |
Comments
Sorry, I didn't actually
Sorry, I didn’t actually mean that Christianity is about escaping death. Clearly at its heart there is victory over death, but what we hope to escape is not death but final destruction - in Revelation’s apocalyptic schema the ‘second death’. My concern from a biblical point of view is this: I think it is mistaken to address the important philosophical and pastoral issues that you raise on the traditional assumption that at death a person’s ‘soul’ (an eternal component of consciousness) departs from the body and goes to heaven (or anywhere else). It is more consistent with biblical thought to say that death (I like the phrase ‘mere death’) is the destruction of the whole person, not of the person minus the soul. We then await the resurrection from the dead.
evil and resurrection
I don’t think it’s fair to say that the problem of evil is a kindergarten question, nor that suffering is always ‘from God’. In Hebrew thought (e.g. Job), God’s relationship to evil is indirect at best, and Job’s questions are never dismissed as childish. Even in the Gospels, Jesus seems to stay away from the claim that God brings evil down on people (at least because of their sin—I’m thinking of the collapsing tower incident). So to say that wondering about God’s goodness in the midst of a holocaust is childish is, I think, quite inaccurate.
Andrew. I whole-heartedly agree with you that Christianity could stand to de-emphasize ‘heaven’ as a pretty place for our souls after they detach from our bodies (as if such a thing were possible). But what about (and I know you’ve touched on this before) ‘Paradise’ (as promised to the thief on the cross)? What about Paul’s talk of ‘being with the Lord’? I’m not sure we need to assume that Paul’s worldview was exactly correct, but when God incarnate promises imminent paradise to a dying man… you just have to wonder. No answers from me… just questions.
Cheers,
-Daniel-
Being in paradise, being with Christ
Daniel, you’re right. These questions have been discussed before:
My argument in COSM is that the NT envisages two corporate resurrections. The most prominent one is the resurrection of the suffering ‘Son of man’ community at the parousia, which equates historically with the vindication of the persecuted church and the collapse of idolatrous Roman imperialism. The second is the final resurrection of all the dead for judgment. I would place Paul’s expressed desire to depart and be with Christ (Phil. 1:23) in the first category, allowing perhaps for a certain divergence arising partly from his rhetoric in this passage, and partly from his rather idiosyncratic desire to imitate Christ in his suffering, death and resurrection (cf. Phil. 3:10-11).
I would regard the promise to the thief as rather exceptional, in effect more a statement about the hope of Israel than about the immediate post-mortem destination of the thief (see the comments on Luke 23:43).
Hinduism
Sun Warrior,
just a couple of quick points on Hinduism. Reincarnation is something that is believed in by Jains, Buddhists, Hindus and many other varieties of religion in the Far East. In all of the societies involved, one has to also look at the nexus between the religion and culture. Hinduism of the Saivaite/Vedantic type is primarily what brought reincarnation to the fore. It is questionable whether the Vedas (the oldest Hindu ‘texts’) contain this concept at all.
The concept of reincarnation was first popularised in close association with the teaching on caste. That historically verifiable fact is now suppressed by most Vedic scholars.This itself makes it suspect for me. Buddhism and Jainism tried to break the concept free of its caste associations and have tried to purify the concept of its social implications.
The actual Hinduism practiced by your typical Indian bears no philosophical relation to what the West has been taught about Hinduism. In popular Hinduism (as opposed to philosophical) the Gods actually exist as seperate beings and the relationship of the believer to a God is very similar to any other relationship between two distinct individuals (Dwaita).
If you study the discourses of Hindu philosophers today, while many of them say that reincarnation is Vedic, in fact they quietly quote from much later works (Upanishads) such as the Bhagavead Gita. In the Vedas it seems quite clear that Agni - the fire god, would consume the body on death (cremation) and transport the soul to something very similar to the Xtian concept of heaven, where there will be bliss and eternal disport with the Gods. Real Vedic Hinduism is actually much closer to ancient Egyptian concepts.
Live to serve : Serve to live
Andrew, just today I was
Andrew, just today I was speaking with a friend about the Jewish mourning process, including the shiva (seven) and the shloshim (thirty). These two stages of mourning are almost the exact opposite of the western way to handle funerals (since you brought up funerals specifically). It is always fascinating and enlightening to consider the Jewish way of doing things and how if often (or more than often) makes a lot more sense than our ways. Here is an in-depth explanation of The Stages of Jewish Mourning… I hope it helps.
re reincarnation
Sun Warrior
One of the things that happens as we talk through our beliefs and question our reading of scripture is that we try to identify some of the cultural accretions that have become part and parcel of our understanding of God’s word but actually do not originate from it. Western culture over the last 2k yrs has indeed produced a lot of excess baggage and one of the very exciting things about the emerging church movement is a conscious attempt to open these questions up once again, even though for some it may feel somewhat dangerous to do. Many of your points are well taken but I am yet to get a feeling of the whole and how it relates specifically to the word.
Your expression of faith in reincarnation is not typical of Hinduism. In Hinduism, reincarnation is considered a fact. What one did in the previous life/lives nowhere figures in Hindu practice. Whatever one did, the result is this current birth. Where one is going to ‘go’ only depends on how well one fulfils one’s dharma (duty) in this life. That accounting is a sum total of one life lived and is called the cycle of karma.
So even for a Hindu, what counts is the choices and actions taken in the present. I bring this up because you seem to imply that for any individual it may take more lives in order to find God. I’m afraid that Hinduism doesn’t teach that at all. One could, in Hinduism, in the karmic cycle, keep going backwards. Practically, considering how much of lower life forms there are seems to indicate that the overall flux is about even or even negative (entropy increases).
In effect the concept of grace is completely absent.
Judaism/Xtianity startlingly emerged while surrounded by polytheism and pantheism in various forms. The struggle to believe only in I AM and no other is a large part of the story of the bible, perhaps even the bible’s most central theme.
Our understanding of death and ‘the afterlife’ may not be very biblical and the questions do need to be asked afresh. But it is a big stretch to posit reincarnation in the mix. Be that as it may, I would not say that God may not choose to make use of reincarnation in the sense that you seem to feel that He does, only that it is not so taught as normative in the bible.
Another area that will be difficult to integrate with Christian theology is your concept of sin. From what you have said in other posts, I think that another rather foundational teaching from the bible is that we have all sinned and fallen short… - therefore needing God’s grace - we need to be saved and that salvation is effected by God only through the death of His Son Jesus.
In the parable of Lazarus and Dives we see Jesus saying in effect that if one does not come to believe in Him in this one life, no amount of extra proof or witness (or by implication more lives) will be of any use. It is a indeed a parable and it’s not wise to be basing heavy theological conclusions on something that may have been structural or incidental, but I think that there is indeed relevant teaching on this very point.
But I am speaking theory while you are explaining your personal experiences. I feel that it would help me a lot to better understand your thinking if more of your ideas were developed with reference specifically to how you read the bible.
Live to serve : Serve to live
choice
All I can say is that I do hope that the bible keeps ‘doing’ what it is meant to be doing to me!
I’m afraid that if you give me a choice between your version of what the world/life is about and the bible’s then I would always select what the bible says and be content to leave the rest to God. I believe that God is revealing Himself to us in the bible. I believe that He is very particular that we should believe in Him and that He is particular.
I may be wrong in some (or many) of my beliefs about what in fact God is teaching me but I do believe that I have forgiveness in Him and that His Holy Spirit will keep contending with my stubborn short sightedness until He achieves what He has set out to do with me. Jesus was an exceptional Guru but He was much more than that too.
God’s grace is mediated to us through Jesus alone. He is the cornerstone. God’s light is shed on us in Jesus. In Jesus we see the love of God. He reaches in and confronts our darkness and says here I AM, follow me! Our darkness is not just a temporary matter of dominant mind suppressing our essential spirit. The darkness is in our souls and in our spirits too and it is sin, the sin of refusing to acknowledge and follow our Lord.
It is the actuality of what Hinduism teaches about who God is (or isn’t) that I do reject. No numbers of reincarnations can change our essential sinfulness. The way out and the way in is only through the blood of Jesus. So, I’m sorry but I would find it difficult to accept as adequate a statement like “God is All” on the basis of which you are building your overall argument.
Live to serve : Serve to live
Death, the soul and new creation
Sun Warrior, I find that, as a matter of biblical interpretation, I have drifted away from the traditional and basically dualistic thought that at death the soul leaves the body and goes to be with God. I agree with much of what you say here and certainly that there is a need to address our culture’s flight from death, but it seems to me that the basic view in scripture is that death is simply death, decay, the destruction of the person - we return to dust.
This has been overlaid with the idea of a resurrection - 1) as a metaphorical resurrection of the people of God; 2) as a literal resurrection from death of the people of God at the end of the edge, as an outcome of eschatological crisis; 3) as a literal resurrection of the Christ in advance of (2); and 4) as a resurrection of all the dead prior to a final act of judgment and the renewal of heaven and earth. I have probably oversimplified matters, but in none of these types do we have the thought of a soul that is released from the body to be with God.
One important implication of this sort of view of death for the emerging church is that it keeps us as part of a created order that is in all respects subject to decay. We are creatures that are born, live, and die, like any others - like the grass of the field. The doctrine of an immortal soul in the end dissociates us from creation - matter decays but our souls go on for ever. I think the biblical vision is of the renewal of humanity as part of a renewed creation.
We face death not with the hope of unzipping the body and jumping as naked souls on to the escalator to heaven but with the hope that God is always creator, has not abandoned creation to decay, will destroy death, will renew creation, and will be present in that new creation in the midst of his people.