Friday, December 30, 2011
It's not a religion, it's a relationship
...offered by JamesoftheNorthwest, a sinner at 11:15 AM [+]
This is an evangelical mantra that many of us know well. But it occurred to me this morning as I posted the homily (see below) that believing in a specific moment of salvation is much more like a contractual relationship rather than a personal one, doesn't it? And yet which group trumpets having a "personal relationship" with God? Doesn't their theology ironically seem to indicate more of a contractual relationship?
Sure, we Orthodox have all the externals of ritual and religion, but at the heart of our theology I'd suggest we have a far more real notion of a personal relationship with God in terms of our salvation which we generally see as a process of growth and maturity. I suppose from an evangelical perspective they might suggest that salvation is a separate component of having a relationship with God and thus would agree that that portion is contractual (i.e. we accept that Christ takes upon Himself the sins and punishment in our place and we are thus saved as we sign the dotted line by praying the sinner's prayer acknowledging all of this). We would not separate any of this, and I think we'd say that the relationship with God is itself salvation and thus is not something we can distill down to being essential a contract anymore that we can say that we have a real marriage simply because we have a state form saying as much.
Just some rambling thoughts I had this morning.
+++
2 comments
"Catching the Christmas Spirit"
...offered by JamesoftheNorthwest, a sinner at 10:56 AM [+]
On Christmas Day, Fr. C asked me to offer the homily. Here is what I had written down prior to delivery.
Some would say I live two contradictory lives. By day I don a white lab coat and engage in modern scientific inquiry by the UV light of a fluorescent microscope. And on evenings and weekends I don a black cassock and engage in ancient religious rituals by the light of beeswax candles. The supposed dichotomy between religion and science is something I deal with on a daily basis…sometimes there is easy reconciliation and other times it can be more difficult. But very often I am able to find some interesting similarities between the work of science and the spiritual life.
I’d like to mention just one that I think corresponds quite nicely with the feast we celebrate today, but in order to explain it to you I need to give a little scientific background of what I’m working on in the lab…so bear with me:
We work primarily with Killer T-cells, which earn their name by killing cells that are infected or perhaps having other problems with the hopes of stopping the spread of whatever problem is happening. This works because T-cells have receptors on their cell surface that will bind to certain “antigens” that it recognizes as being foreign. An antigen can be anything like a small protein – a piece of virus for example. So, imagine I’m a sick cell. What I’ll do is take a piece of whatever is making me sick and bring it out on my surface - as if holding out the reason for my sickness and saying: “Help, I’m sick.” A T-Cell might come by and recognize this and put me out of my misery in order to stop the spread of the disease.
Cancer, however, usually escapes this system because there is often nothing for the T-Cell to recognize as being “foreign.” But, we seek to harness this system by changing our T-cells in order to recognize the cancer cells as being diseased and in need of being killed. We get the T-cells to express on their surface a new and unique antigen receptor that we design which will allow them to recognize the cancer cells. In order to get them to express this antigen receptor we have to get new genetic material into the cell. We accomplish this using a virus which we are able to design and produce. This virus is very built from portions of HIV and behaves just like HIV which as most of us know is very fond of T-Cells. There is a bit of cosmic irony in that if we’d never discovered the horrific HIV, we might never have been able to harvest this technology which has a great deal of promise to end the scourge of cancer. Ponder that one in your free time. Anyway, this virus goes into the T-cell and its genetic material (our “package”) is incorporated it into and becomes ONE with the natural genetic material of the T-cell. The T-cell will then use that DNA like any other part of its DNA and produce the antigen receptor we designed on its surface. This T-Cell is now changed…it is locked and loaded, ready to start killing cancer cells.
Now, you might consider saying that we are “infecting” these T-cells, but really infection has such a negative connotation because it implies that the virus replicates like wildfire and consequently kills the cells causing disease. On the contrary, our viruses are unable to reproduce and we anticipate (and have shown so experimentally) that they will have a powerful therapeutic effect. Therefore, the scientific community does not use the term infection, and instead has preferred to describe this process as TRANSDUCTION. And so we would say that these newly changed T-cells that are ready to take on Cancer have been “TRANSDUCED.”
One day recently I was walking down from the lab to catch the ferry and I saw a sign in a storefront that read: “Catch the Christmas Spirit.” Now, from the perspective of my field of interest, I of course, immediately thought of a viral infection…..sorry I can’t help it. But a few moments later I did ponder: What does the sign really mean? Of course, I think, catching the Christmas Spirit means that I’m going to shop at that store! ….But there can also be a Christian message in it as well, no?
Oh sure we could simply say here that this message means that amidst all the hustle and bustle of this holiday season we should take the time to rest our hearts and minds in order to remember the real meaning of the season. We should remember the “reason for the season.” Yes, we must remember…but I’m going to go a tad further: remembering is simply NOT enough. Now you’ll recall I initially thought about viruses when I saw the sign, and then I considered a more profound Christian meaning….well yes those two were destined to collide in my crazy head.
When we transduce our T-cells, we expose hundreds of thousands of them to hundreds of thousands of viruses, but not all of them end up being transduced and we know this because they never express on their outside, the receptor that will allow them to recognize the cancer – in other words, some are unchanged. Others will express the antigen receptor for a few days, but then lose it – we call this a transient transduction – it doesn’t stick. These were all exposed to the virus, but not transduced….they didn’t catch it…they missed it. You might say: The seed fell on poor soil. Sound familiar? Remembering isn’t enough as surely as simply being exposed to the “Spirit of Christmas” isn’t enough.
In his epistle to the Romans, St. Paul wrote: “Be ye TRANSFORMED by the RENEWING of your mind…” he did NOT write: “Be ye remembering”…but “Be ye TRANSFORMED.”
How does this transformation and renewing happen? What did our epistle today say: “And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, "Abba, Father!" 7 Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.” Do you see? He sends forth the Spirit INTO our hearts! And, indeed, what do we perpetually ask of the Holy Spirit? “Come and abide in us, and cleanse us of all impurity…”
The feast of Christmas is of course the feast of our Lord’s Incarnation in which He integrated Himself and became ONE with our human nature in order to save the world from sin. And indeed His Incarnation precedes and makes possible what we heard in the epistle: the sending forth His Spirit into our hearts and lives, to CHANGE us, to TRANSFORM us, to RENEW us….to “TRANSDUCE” us?
Now, there are three important areas where the similarities of transduction and Christian transformation depart from one another:
First, the T-cells, of course, have no say in the matter of their transduction. Quite the opposite for us and our transformation. We must desire and ask for this infilling of the Spirit, we are not inanimate in the process; we must participate.
Second, with God it’s not a one shot deal. In transduction we do not make any second attempts and instead discard any cells that are not transduced on the first attempt. But God’s love for us has Him ever seeking our openness to Him. And it’s never too late. We say that wonderful prayer over and over again, asking the Holy Spirit to “come and abide in us” because it’s NOT a one shot deal. It’s an ongoing process.
Finally, our “Adoptive T-Cell Therapy”, even if wildly successful will not cure everyone who undergoes it. And even those who are cured we know that we have only delayed death in the end. Again, quite the opposite with God’s “therapy.” It is tried and true and requires no FDA approval. The data is in and the babe in the manger and a risen Lord is the evidence of our salvation and the conquering of death. We need only submit ourselves to His “therapy.”
So yes! Catch the Christmas Spirit…and may it infect us…ahem…TRANSDUCE us thoroughly and change us. And may this transformation be evidenced by the expression (like the antigen receptors on our T-cells), by the expression of life-bearing fruit that overcomes the cancer of sins in our lives and in the world around us.
Be ye Transduced…that’s what it means to “Catch the Christmas Spirit.” That we walk away changed. One or two steps further along in our journey towards Him.
+++
3 comments
Saturday, December 03, 2011
Thank you for dying for me
...offered by JamesoftheNorthwest, a sinner at 7:14 PM [+]
I'm mature enough now (I think...maybe) that I comfortably spend less and less time bashing evangelical beliefs and practices, however lately I've been barraged by a series of proselytizing online advertisements that led to THIS website which suggests that there are four easy "steps to God."
I know little or nothing about the website or the folks (and their theology) behind it, but it certainly seems to correspond well with the most common protestant soteriology. I give credit where credit is due: they are reaching out to people and we Orthodox should do as much - perhaps not in an identical fashion - but it's far too easy to sit in our easy chairs and criticize while we do little or nothing to share the Hope that is in us.
That said, our understanding of that Hope is clearly different than that which is communicated on this website. From our perspective, salvation cannot be summed up so simply and it certainly cannot be "achieved" so simply as with the repetition of this simple prayer. A little walk down evangelical memory lane has brought to the forefront of my mind their emphasis on our Lord's death, while contrastingly we tend to emphasize His life - and in particular His victory over death. As most of us know, in general, evangelicals tend to see salvation only through the lenses of substitutionary atonement which is to say that Jesus "died on the cross to pay the penalty for our sins." If you read this brief account of salvation, there is no notion at all that His resurrection also saves us. It is glossed over almost as a sort of footnote. That's unfortunate and points to one HUGE difference between Orthodoxy and Protestantism.
I wonder if perhaps we would say that an Orthodox sinner's prayer (were there such a thing) would start something more like this: "Thank you for becoming man, living, teaching, enlightening, dying, destroying death by rising from the dead, ascending, and offering to let us share in a deified life with you." That would be somewhat more comprehensive, but it still doesn't tell the whole story. We might say it tells enough of the story, but I don't think the evangelical prayer only tells a tiny fraction of the story.
+++
1 comments
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
...offered by JamesoftheNorthwest, a sinner at 7:49 PM [+]Presently taking a late ferry home. Like those around me I am engrossed with the electronic device in my hand. Except for those who are accompanied by someone, everyone is wholly engaged with either a laptop, a smartphone, a pad of somesort or a kindle-like device.
It makes me wonder what we ever did before all of this? Read books I suppose. Or did we actually take the opportunity to meet and converse with new people?
Should we be concerned about this electronic isolation? How strange it must seem to those who came before us.
+++
4 comments
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Relics
...offered by JamesoftheNorthwest, a sinner at 4:45 PM [+]
It's a natural human thing, really.
+++
0 comments
Wednesday, November 02, 2011
1st Church of Christ in Facebook
...offered by JamesoftheNorthwest, a sinner at 4:57 PM [+]
http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif
Really, isn't as novel as the author leads you to believe. Some folks I know in the PoMo movement have been doing stuff akin to this for quite sometime actually, while others I know in the movement are actually opposed to this - and these would be those typically found in house churches eating organic fair trade granola of somesort. I agree with these latter folks who would suggest that the author is TERRIBLY mistaken to suggest that Facebook is a community. It most certainly is not a community. On the contrary it is a faked community and in fact does a pretty poor job of it.
In my area of science there is what is known as a base pair analogs which are molecules that are similar enough to one of the four real nucleotides as to be mistaken as such by the enzyme polymerase while doing its job of replicating your DNA. When the analog is used, it can stop replication altogether or it leads to a mutation in the DNA sequence that may or may not have very serious consequences downstream - it all depends on where exactly the mutation takes place and whether it changes the Amino Acid and also whether the changed amino acid changes the function of the protein of which it is a part. I'm tempted to call Facebook an analog of community, but only so when people (like Polymerase does a base pair analog) mistake Facebook for community.
Of course to some degree what community is, is up to interpretation and therefore I'm really only stating my opinion and should not phrase that opinion as if it were verifiable fact. That said, I'd like to remind us of two words that share the same root as "community": Commune (the verb) and Communication.
To Commune in the Orthodox sense is obviously intended to reference Holy Communion. Indeed a sacramental life is not one that can be shared in an online "community." For us Orthodox, one can fairly say we are a "touchy-feeling" sort of religion...at least in the sense that physical participation with ALL the senses is required. But even outside of this context to "commune" is to connect with intimately. The word comes from an old French word meaning "to hold in common." It's certainly connected with communication, but seems to take it a step further. One cannot "commune with nature" by watching a screen saver and I'd suggest neither can we commune with one another via Facebook.
Even simple communication is handicapped by Facebook - and not just Facebook but the internet in general. I don't know what it is about people, but it seems when we sit down in fron of our computer screens with the intent of engaging people online we seem to do so with canon fire in mind rather than communing. I've seen people (perhaps even myself) say some of the most rude and obnoxious things online that I sure (or at least hope) they would never have said in a face to face conversation. Facebook and the internet it seems is much better an arena for religious/economic/political arguments than Christian communion of any sort.I've heard studies suggest that a person beyond the wheel of a car becomes 10 times less patient than if he or she were walking. I rather expect that for many people the internet makes them 10 times likely to try to pick and win an argument than if they met someone in a coffee shop.
The other way communication is hampered is that tone of voice, facial expressions, hand and arm movements, and even touching are a critical part of how we communicate and ALL are missing (or at least profoundly hindered) online. ALL. This often allows for wild misinterpretations of what is really trying to be communicated by people sometimes. So not only do you have people being jerks, but other jerks misinterpreting what the other jerk is saying.
How does this communication problem play out in trying to "do" church on Facebook. Well, it should be interesting to say the least.
My advice, FWIW, get up out of bed on Sunday morning and go to church. It will do you good to get out of the house and BE with REAL people.
+++
0 comments
