A friend sent me an email and asked me about God. Well, indeed, perspectives on God are important.

In Genesis, first book of the Hebrew Bible, composed between 500 and 400 BCE, we read that God created humanity “in God’s own image.” (Genesis 1:27) But periodically over many years, some people have tried to make God in their own image and likeness.

Today, vindictive images of God have been used by Christian Nationalists to control, manipulate and even destroy people.

I don’t understand God as a vindictive and hard-nosed authoritarian. In the New Testament, such an understanding of God does not resonate with the historical Jesus’ understanding of God, as his loving Father.

Unfortunately, some medieval Christian theologians did have distorted authoritarian notions about God, and they passed them on to future generations. Anselm the famous Archbishop of Canterbury from 1033 until his death in 1109 is a good example. Anselm saw God as a nard-nosed judge and taskmaster. Anselm believed that human sin and human disobedience to God, going back to the first humans, had defrauded God of the honor that God was due. That offense to God’s honor, Anselm taught, had to be compensated for and repaired.

Anselm said that God could only be satisfied by having a being of infinite greatness, God’s very own Son acting as a human, repay the debt owed to God and thereby satisfy the injury to God’s honor. In other words, God would only be happy when God’s own Son was tortured and suffered a cruel death. What a strange image of God. Catholic theology has called it the “Satisfaction Theory of Atonement.”

Jesus and early Christians, however, clearly understood God as loving and kind. That is essential. That is where we begin. As my Nijmegen Catholic theological mentor and long-time friend Edward Schillebeeckx OP (1914 – 2009) often said: “Christianity began with an experience, an encounter with Jesus of Nazareth which caused people to discover new meaning and to direct their lives in a new direction.”

The clear message of Jesus was and still is that the Divine Presence is here, with us, and with all of creation. God is not simply “out there” in some far-off realm. The Jesuit philosopher and theologian Karl Rahner (1904 – 1984) stressed, however, that people do not come to know God by solving doctrinal conundrums, proving God’s existence or engaging in an abstruse metaphysical quest. Rahner stressed the importance of Divine mystery as very simply an aspect of our humanity.

Our challenge is to live that Mystery with openness and calm reflection. That Mystery, which defies exact description, is God. Religious doctrines have their place but can never totally explain or define that Mystery.They are symbolic or analogous pointers toward God. When people focus only on the pointers, however, they really miss the point.

As contemporary believers we have to ask how we can develop better pointers that really help point people towards God. We need pointers anchored in all the complex realities and needs of our time, enabling people to believe and deal with human suffering with serenity and courage. Many of us learned about God at about the same time we also learned about the Easter Bunny. As we grew in awareness, our understanding of the Easter Bunny phenomenon evolved and matured. But for many people their religious belief has remained somewhat static and adolescent. 

Divine revelation is not an event that happened once in the past. It is an ongoing and creative process that requires human perception and contemplation. Revelation is a part of reality. We are called to be open, alert, and contemplative. Faith means trust, commitment, and engagement. But too often it is mistakenly understood as simply an intellectual assent to ecclesiastical propositions.

Today, science itself says there is so much we still do not know. It is time to return to a theology that asserts less and is more open to mystery and calm and reflective exploration. This may not be easy for contemporary people so used to getting instant information with a click on a cellphone or checking their favorite website or social network.

The image of a domineering and controlling God is an archaic image. We journey today with a different and more of a traveling-companion God, even if we struggle with descriptive words about God. “No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us.” (1 John 4:12) The true and essential work of all religions, but especially Christianity, is to help us recognize the divine image in everyone and everything.

My concluding reflection this week comes from the priest and theologian Ronald Rohlheiser OMI, a friend who also completed his doctorate at the Catholic University of Leuven: “God lies inside us, deep inside, but in a way that’s almost non-existent, almost unfelt, largely unnoticed, and easily ignored. However, while that presence is never overpowering, it has within it a gentle, unremitting imperative, a compulsion towards something higher, which invites us to draw upon it. And, if we do draw upon it, it gushes up in us in an infinite stream that instructs us, nurtures us, and fills us with endless energy.”

Our perspectives on God are important and worth sharing. For me, God is my traveling companion on the great journey.

  • Jack

Dr. John A. Dick – Historical Theologian

 

19 thoughts on “Perspectives on God”

  1. Thanks John. Two questions:

    Do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God, second person of the Trinity? You refer frequently to the “historical Jesus” but I’ve not read something of yours that explores this fact.

    In light of your beliefs about Jesus, how do you explain the Passion and Death of Christ?

    Thanks!

    Reply

  2. I think you have misunderstood Anselm, and misrepresent the core of his argument in ‘Cur Deus homo’. Yes, he says that God’s infinite justice is infinitely offended by sin, and thus requires infinite satisfaction, but this is just the legal metaphor (drawn from medieval notions of justice and satisfaction) that he is using. But the key theological fact here is in the title: Cur Deus homo. Why is God a human, or why did God become a human? Yes, God’s justice is infinitely offended, but God’s mercy is infinitely giving. And it’s not just a matter of God ‘demanding’ or ‘requiring’ a human sacrifice. God IS that sacrifice. Deus homo. It is God’s infinite mercy that ‘defeats’ the infinite demands of justice.

    ‘He put himself at the mercy of men who didn’t even know the meaning of the word’.

    Reply

  3. Perhaps we must focus on the messengers and the catechetical constructs with which the messengers have worked through the centuries. Messengers have continued to use human language in an effort to in some fashion capture the nature of divinity, an impossible task which arrogant messengers refuse to accept. Consequently, messengers go about the business of finding specks in the eyes of others on a constant basis. That becomes tiresome, especially in Enlightenment and well beyond. Early on, sin and guilt were discovered as motivators, and the promise of “hell” was the container in which they were housed. A different catechetical paradigm might be beneficial. How many young boys who grew into manhood discovered masturbation and were told it was a ticket on the fast train to hell? How many have never gotten over the shame/guilt instilled at so early a stage of formation? How about a different approach? Say, to the young person, do you understand that you live in a host of communities – family, school, neighborhood, friends, and do you understand that the common good of all those communities depends on all members being socially engaged. Masturbation, a neutral act, does have the potential of moving one from social engagement to isolation. Be careful so that this does not become a harmful habit that impacts both you and your communities, i.e. the common good. It is in living in the common good world that you will find divinity and discover your relationship to divinity.

    Reply

  5. Yes God is our mysterious traveling companion on this grand journey to more Great reflection Jack! Bob DeLand

    Reply

  6. Jack,

    Another great reflection. Thank you!

    The newspapers are full these days about A.I. and its ability to elude it’s controls and cover up it’s tracks. Hence the fear that we have created some monstrosity that can do things that normally would be constrained by conscience, such as cruelty and thievery.

    I think of conscience as a shorthand for the Church doctrine of natural law. Is that half-way correct?

    While our concept of conscience is largely normative, our concept of God has ingrained in it both a sense of private yearning and a beyond-the-self reaching out of love and empathy and mercy.

    I have not yet read Pope Leo’s encyclical on A.I. but from what I read in the press, it focusses on consciousness. But consciousness and conscience are not the same thing.

    Perhaps you could clarify these related concepts (conscience, consciousness, natural law) for us in a future reflection?

    Thanks, and keep your reflections coming. They are always a bright spot in the day.

    Rudy.

    Reply

  7. Thanks Jack, and as I read the comments of others who are more qualified than I I thank them as well!Tony

    Reply

  8. That one made even me think a bit. So it’s a winner. Rahner, Schillebecx were great ones, for sure. Thanks for reminding us.

    The original sin idea needs to be revisited at some point as well.

    What kind of deity would operate like that? Not one that I would choose to “adore,” let alone listen to. And where did this idea of infallible teaching ever come from? Gabriel Moran was pretty clear that it is not what is meant by “revelation.”

    You continue to do well. Thanks, as always.

    Reply

  9. Dear Jack,Thank you for this kind, serene, and thoughtful analysis about our definition and relationship with God.  As you do, I find it jarring and disturbing to think of God as simply a justice driven, authoritarian figure whom we must obey or face consequences.  The old testament images hardly encourage a connection with God based on affection and consolation.  To be “good” simply out of fear doesn’t inspire a desire to bond with the Divine.   Your inviting image of a companion with whom one travels through the maze of life really touches the true feeling of consolation, encouragement, and love.  To be in the constant presence of a loving friend warms the heart, gives hope in times of stress, and invites a desire to deepen the relationship.  You have described the God we most need and desire to meet intimately.  Thank you for this beautifully encouraging sharing. Peace,Frank

    Reply

  10. Hello Jack. – note, I could not get the online Comment facility to work…

    What are your thoughts on Catholic Social Teaching- dignity of the human person, the common good, solidarity, and subsidiarity – and for these to be promoted and exercised in programmes in the secular world… ideally at the Local level, with it to be built upon?

    There is a sense of Kairos, with the election of the new Pope and him taking up the Pope Leo XIV name. Pope Leo XIII authored Rerum Novarum (1891) which inspired and initiated the Catholic Church’s Best Kept Secret.

    Our age of the secular desert is right for such Social Teaching, and the exercise of it.

    Best Wishes Michael Byrne

    Reply

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.