A Prophet Rejected?

Writing this blog has motivated me to read and think about scripture this Lent in a way I haven't done in a long time. Each day, I find the day's readings on the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops's website. As I read and reflect each day, I frequently find myself mentally referring back to my theology coursework at Fordham University—none more frequently or powerfully than a course called "The Real Jesus," taught by Sister Elizabeth Johnson, a Sister of St. Joseph who was empowered to earn her doctorate following Vatican II.

So imagine my surprise when I learned this evening that a committee within the USCCB has attacked Sister Johnson's scholarship, accusing her of violating Church doctrine, stating that her 2007 book, Quest for the Living God,

"contaminates the traditional Catholic understanding of God, which arises both from revelation and reason and which has been articulated by the Fathers and the Scholastics, especially Thomas Aquinas, and taught and professed by the Church, with Enlightenment deism."

Without consulting Sister Johnson, without notifying her, without giving her a chance to respond or explain, the committee discounted her work and, in so doing, threatened "50 years of contemporary theology," said Johnson's department chair, Dr. Terrance Tilley of Fordham's theology department.

I'm not a theologian or a scholar, so I can't adequately examine this issue in writing, as much as I'm tempted to try. But I will offer a few words on Sister Johnson's scholarship, and what it has meant for my faith and spirituality. 

As I recall (it's been 16 years, so bear with me!), Sister Johnson's "Real Jesus" course systematically examined each of the four gospels, identifying what could be considered most historically accurate versus what might more likely have been human convention (if still divinely inspired). The course helped me to understand the historical factors that drove each of the four evangelists in their writing, and how each one's particular voice and message reflected a unique view of Jesus and/or the audience that he wanted to reach.

It was a theology class, not a "religion" one. But having a better sense of who Jesus was as a man enhanced my own faith more than I can say. Sister Johnson's scholarship brought me to an intellectual and spiritual place where I could finally say that I had a personal relationship with God. And while this relationship has intensified and diminished in waves over time, it remains part of the fabric of my life. My understanding of God and my identity as a Catholic Christian changed and deepened thanks to Sister Johnson's work.

I also learned something about how the Catholic Church came to define its doctrines and dogma, particularly concerning the nature of Jesus. In truth, I've forgotten most of the details. But what I took away and still hold onto is a belief that what the Church holds to be true about Jesus Christ was defined by human beings at particular points during history. I don't doubt that these individuals and groups were inspired by God, by their own scholarship, and by their faith.

But I believe that inspiration didn't end during the Enlightenment, or with Aquinas, or the councils, or Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. It certainly doesn't end with the homogenous Church hierarchy and the committees they anoint to examine these issues. Brilliant scholars like Sister Johnson are shedding new light on the life, work, and words of Jesus Christ as written in the New Testament, and on the ways that Christians throughout the world follow his teachings. Isn't it possible that there is more Truth to be told? Isn't it possible that Sister Johnson and theologians like her are presenting an understanding of God that, as the bishops would say, arises from reason and revelation?

I repeat: I don't claim to be a scholar, and I acknowledge that my examination of this issue is incomplete. But as a spiritual seeker, I see this as another disheartening moment when the church seems more eager to circumscribe its message than to invite people to share in it.

We live in a culture where powerful people seem to find intellectual debate less and less palatable. Reading the gospels as I have been in these last few weeks, I'm struck by how much teaching Jesus did in the context of answering questions and engaging in debates with the Pharisees and scribes. They sought to silence him. What was the result?