St. Martin of Tours Episcopal Church
Kalamazoo, Michigan
Early last week I bought a new cell phone. As we were waiting for the programming to go through, the sales person, probably because I had my collar on, asked what my church thought of The DaVinci Code. I said that, to my knowledge, the Episcopal Church hadn’t made any statements about it. I went on to tell him that we encourage people to think and to ask questions, so I didn’t see any problem with it. In fact, if it made people think about what they believe, if it led to conversations about faith or religion, I would see it as a positive.
I had to go back to the store 3 or 4 times to get things the way I wanted on the phone, and each time he asked something about the movie – What did my clergy friends have to say? Did people at my Bible study say anything about it? (I spent so much time with him getting my new phone settled, he almost had my schedule memorized!) He eventually talked about the message he was getting from his church – that the movie taught false truths about Christianity, so people shouldn’t go see it.
What is it about this best-selling work of fiction that is so bad that the anticipation of the movie opening would receive so much negative criticism before anyone had even seen previews? While I watched the movie on Friday, I paid attention to what seem to be the three major areas of contention: consideration of the divine feminine, the age-old question of Jesus’ humanity vs. divinity, and the thought that Jesus may have had a love life.
The divine feminine, the sacred feminine, is the idea that the godhead just might include more than masculine traits. This, too, is not a new thought. There are many Christian and Jewish theologians who have, for years, called us to recognize that we limit people’s concept of God if we only use male pronouns. For years people have pointed to the wisdom writings where God, who is all wisdom, is recognized as feminine. Sophia, wisdom in Greek, is a feminine name. The wisdom writings are passionate and powerful… although rarely heard. There are several other feminine images of God in our scriptures, too – like where God is described as a nursing mother. And there is always the idea of the Trinity being the divine family – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, where the Holy Spirit of God, ruach, is the Spirit that gave birth to creation. Gave birth: Father, Son, and Mother, if you will. We cannot possibly ever fully grasp who God is or know all there is to know about God. As soon as we think we have a good picture of God, we have to admit that we’ve put God into a box, limited how we see God, limited our concept of who God is. And so we have to begin over, working to expand our picture of God yet again. The DaVinci Code movie doesn’t dwell on the idea of the divine feminine as much as the book does, but it does touch on it. What is the problem, I have to ask, if some people choose to explore the concept of adding a feminine side to our Creator?
The book and movie also invite the fear or disapproval of some religious people of considering only Jesus’ humanity, thinking that if we make him too human, he will no longer also be considered divine – and then, I think they’re saying, that the church would fall apart. If Jesus was only Jesus (a man, a teacher, a good person) and not God, faith is for naught, they say. Well, my friends, the questions of Jesus’ humanity and divinity began early in our history and disagreements continue to this day. One of the things pointed out in our Lenten book study (on Why Christianity Must Change or Die by Bp. John Shelby Spong) was that even the writers of the Christian scriptures saw the answer in different ways. Wars have been fought over it. Today we agree that Jesus was the Messiah, but we disagree about how and when the human and divine natures were manifest. If the pre-Easter Jesus was human and the post-Easter Jesus was divine, how does that threaten our faith? I personally find that the humanity of Jesus, and the fact that a fully human Jesus could be so faithful to God and so loving of all of God’s creation, gives me much more hope and motivation to try to live a faithful life than if Jesus were trying to live a human life while being divine. Disagree with me if you will, but again, what is wrong if some book or movie makes us think about it?
And the last criticism of The DaVinci Code, the one I’ve heard most often – that the idea that Jesus could have loved someone in a personal, intimate way (Mary Magdalene, for example) makes him less of a good person – is, I think, absurd. The issue is not just love; if we’re honest, it’s sexuality. Many people, for some reason, need to believe that Jesus, to be free of sin, had to be free of sexuality. I believe that sexuality is a gift from God, a wonderful gift. Our marriage liturgy was specifically written to acknowledge that we believe that sex is not just for procreation, but for “mutual joy” and the up-building of both people. Augustine saw sex as sinful and his beliefs have influenced the Church for centuries, but that’s not what our tradition professes and it’s not what Judaism, the religion of Jesus, professes either. What is the problem, I have to ask, if Jesus had a wife? What in the world difference would it make? I’m not saying he did – we don’t know. Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t. But how would his message have been lessened, been made less effective, just because of who he loved and how he loved them? Would he have loved the world less if he loved her more?
I am so glad to be part of the Episcopal Church, part of a church that allows me to think and to question, to listen to new ideas, to have my imagination excited and my prejudices challenged. I’m grateful for scriptures, like we heard today, that tell us that God is love, and that call us to live in love. I am grateful that I believe that love casts out fear, that I don’t have to be afraid of loving, that I don’t have to worry about loving too much or loving the wrong people. I am grateful for the joy and excitement I feel when I learn new things, when I play with new ideas, when I consider some new thought. I am grateful for the opportunity and the capacity to love Tom at the same time I love you – and loving Tom, as I think about it, probably opened me up to love more deeply and freely that I did before. I’m also grateful for the opportunity to read books and see movies that encourage me to think yet again about what I believe.
God is alive. Revelation still happens. The Holy Spirit of God – whether referred to as “he” or “she” – is alive and well and working in our world. The love of God doesn't need to be defended; neither do we need to protect God or our church from questions or from new ideas. We can even disagree about what we should believe. The gift to us is the incredible miracle of love that we are privileged to participate in every day of our lives.
So, go read whatever books you want. Go see whatever movies you want. Question God about anything, and question anything about God. Read books, see movies, talk with people, think, and pray about anything you want. Just let love be the guiding principle of your life. That’s today’s message. “Abide in my love,” commanded Jesus. “Love one another as I have loved you.” Love. That’s the message. That’s the way, the truth, and the life. It’s the name of our God; it’s the way of our Lord; it’s the message of our messiah. Love. Love. Love.
Amen.
Mary+
Home ¡ Visit Us ¡ Calendar ¡ News ¡ Get Involved ¡ About Us
- 2010 Nichols Road
- Kalamazoo, MI 49004-3200
- 269.381.3188
- stmartinkzo@sbcglobal.net
Questions? Contact our Rector
St. Martin of Tours Episcopal Church Kalamazoo © All Rights Reserved