Room
1 Peter 2:2-10; John 14:1-14

April 24, 2005


That was the week that was contained a lot of conservative things, and it’s not over yet. Josef Cardinal Ratzinger, the notably conservative director of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, was elected and consecrated Pope Benedict XVI. The Conservative Party is smelling and trying to taste more blood this week in the drama of Canadian politics. Today, the Lectionary readings appropriately assign us with the first part of the 14th chapter of John - and its signature verse “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me” - a pillar of conservative Christianity no matter what the denomination.

Jesus as the way, truth and life becomes an obstacle for Christian relationships with other religions. If it is only by becoming Christian, and a fairly narrow version for that matter, that one can possibly be saved from damnation, there is little room for perceiving the nature of God and living out God’s will in any other way.

Ironically, this same short discourse of Jesus offers a much more open set of possibilities. It didn’t start well, for Jesus is in a heavy conversation with his disciples. Simon Peter wants to follow Jesus wherever he goes, being willing to lay down his life for his teacher. Jesus knows better: you will deny me three times for the cock crows. It is never easy.

“Do not let your hearts be troubled.... In my Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you?” Many mansions, the older versions say, perhaps overstating the case. Of course, mansions in most people’s books are a lot better than even the nicest rooms.

There is not just one room in the parental home. Jesus is pointing to the reality that God welcomes a whole bunch of different people who think about their God in different ways, celebrate in wildly different styles, act out their faith in God through a myriad of approaches to a suffering world. Not all the rooms need necessarily have Christian furniture.

This week we have a new pope, Benedict XVI, the German Cardinal Josef Ratzinger. He is one of the best known Cardinals prior to his election, a very public presence, for he authored a number of books about Roman Catholic doctrine, was the prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, and Dean of the College of Cardinals. Ratzinger is a major league intellectual, earning a doctorate in the 1960’s on a study of Augustine. He was deeply involved in Vatican Council II, but along the way his positions shifted and became more certain and fixed. To say that Cardinal Ratzinger is conservative in his interpretation of the boundaries of Roman Catholicism is no exaggeration. Within the last few years he has categorized much of the rest of Christianity as being “deficient” in theological substance. How many rooms will Benedict XVI let out in his mansion? The office of the papacy, I hope, will work its way on his mind and spirit to open up some extra wings.

It may seem harsh to challenge the new Pope’s agenda before he really gets his feet wet in the job, but the Roman Catholic Church is too important for us in the United Church, mainline denominations and Protestantism in general to ignore or dismiss. There are extremely few of us who do not come out of Catholicism, have family members or close friends who are Catholic. My own extended family is typical, Georgia Methodists who moved to Baltimore in 1918, four girls and two boys. The boys remained Protestant, while all four women married into the Catholic Church in one of the most Catholic cities in North America. At least half of the students in my public school classes were Catholic, and that didn’t count the huge parochial school system every where you looked. In later years I received an M. A. from Catholic University of America in Washington, DC, and am still acknowledged as part of my department’s alumni at conferences. I cherish these colleagues, their work and opinions, knowing that I am one of the few Protestants who is part of their community.

Perhaps the most Protestant of characters in the 20th century was Karl Barth, a Swiss Reformed Church pastor and then university professor of theology. His opposition to the Nazis got him expelled from Germany and he finished his years in Basel teaching and writing his long books that still influence much of contemporary dialogue. You may disagree with Barth, but you cannot ignore him.

Barth had many Catholic colleagues and students and conversation partners throughout his years. He respected them deeply, but, on the other hand, never let Roman Catholicism off the hook. He continually challenged Catholic theology to show its Biblical and Christian foundations, and often found it insufficient.

When Vatican II was on, Barth was invited to attend the last two sessions, but his health prevented him. The Vatican did not forget, however, and in 1966 they invited again the 80 year old theologian to Rome for a special series of private meetings and consultations. This was ecumenical dialogue at its purest, and who knows if the Vatican knew what was coming. Barth was given the royal treatment, met at length with Pope Pius VI and with other leading Vatican theologians. Barth remembered with humour one part of the conversation.

“The Pope had heard that I would prefer to see Joseph, the father of Jesus, as the archetype of the being and function of the church rather than Mary belatedly raised to be queen of heaven. (Pope Pius VI) assured me that he would pray for me, that even in my old age I may be given a still deeper insight into this matter.”

He returned to Basel invigorated and excited, but “as defiantly Protestant as he had been on his arrival in Rome.” Rome benefits most, I suggest, and so does Christianity, from respectful, but defiant Protestants.

In 1957 Barth traveled to Paris to sit in on the defense of a doctoral dissertation by a young Swiss Jesuit, Hans Küng. Küng’s dissertation was on the doctrine of justification by faith in Barth’s theology. Küng concluded that there was no conflict between Roman Catholic and Protestant perspectives in this historically divisive matter. Barth was very pleased and contributed a foreword to Hans Küng’s Justification:

“Furthermore, like Noah from the window of my ark, I greet your book as further clear sign that the flood of our times, in which Catholic and Protestant theologians only ever want to talk either polemically against one another or in noncommittal pacifism if at all, is far from over: the waters are still rising.”

One of the fundamental divergences between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism lies in our perception of divine and in particular human holiness.

Is holiness natural? Is it something in the nature of this world, and if so, can we obtain it, bottle it, control it? Many Christians believe so, that a person can become permanently - in the very marrow of their bones - naturally holy.

But where do we find holiness except in the nature of God? You and I are not by nature holy, except when God reveals Herself to us and renders us holy for the time being. To know God, to experience God’s holiness, is not part of this world’s physiology: it is an event, something that happens when God so decides.

No human being is permanently holy, even though we recognize many a person to have acted in a discernibly holy manner.

The principle of the infallibility of the pope when speaking ex cathedra in matters of doctrine is an example of thinking holiness to be controllable. The First Vatican Council of 1870 proposed the doctrine - 82 cardinals voted against it at first, 55 absented themselves the next vote, but eventually it went through. Benjamin Warfield and Charles Hodge of Princeton Seminary responded in the next few years by declaring the inerrancy of the Bible - the conservative Protestant equivalent in the matter of divine authority.

Hans Küng wrote Infallible? challenging the principle, and in 1979 was removed from teaching Roman Catholic seminarians.

If you are attempting to see God in the Christian context, then Jesus is the Way you have to do that. In order to understand the Christian concept and perception of God, any thought you may have is incomplete without the event of Jesus. That still leaves a lot of rooms to be occupied by God seekers of all shapes, sizes, spirits and minds.

On that same 1966 trip to Rome, Barth met with Cardinal Bea, director of the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, accompanied by long-time friend and doctor, Alfred Briellmann.

Barth got into a theological disagreement with Cardinal Bea and would not let go of the point. He ended up striking his fist on the right arm of his chair with every sentence. Dr. Briellmann started gently kicking Barth under the table, but to no avail. Finally, Dr. Briellmann sided with the Cardinal’s position. Barth looked over at his friend in shock and that defused the argument. Later in the car going back to his hotel, Barth said to Briellmann, “Now I was really worried that even we two could get into an argument with each other: knowledge of God really is only ever just a grace!”

Knowledge of God is just a grace, time after time, and not a possession. It is true that we Protestants are a little bird coping with an elephant, but we should not be apologetic. We need to be defiant Protestants, and the Roman Catholic Church, God bless her, needs our defiance to remain faithful.

Preached by Robert Kitchen
Knox-Metropolitan United Church
Regina, Saskatchewan