Pope Francis assures atheists: You don’t have to believe in God to go to heaven... or does he?

There has been a lot of talk about Pope Francis letter to El Republica and how is shows him to be a heretic. This is especially in light of an article that appeared in the UK Independent online under the title Pope Francis assures atheists: You don’t have to believe in God to go to heaven.

Let's set the context for the comments quoted. In the letter Francis writes: 'For me, faith began by meeting with Jesus. A personal meeting that touched my heart and gave a direction and a new meaning to my existence.'

He goes on to cite the scandalous authority of Jesus: 'I would say that we must face Jesus in the concrete roughness of his story, as above all told to us by the most ancient of the Gospels, the one according to Mark. We then find that the "scandal" which the word and practices of Jesus provoke around him derive from his extraordinary "authority": a word that has been certified since the Gospel according to Mark, but that is not easy to translate well into Italian. The Greek word is "exousia", which literally means "comes from being" what one is. It is not something exterior or forced, but rather something that emanates from the inside and imposes itself.'

You can read the whole text on the El Republica site in English. You'll see 'The Independent' didn't summarise very well!

He ends with 'Dear Dr. Scalfari, here I end these reflections of mine, prompted by what you wanted to tell and ask me. Please accept this as a tentative and temporary reply, but sincere and hopeful, together with the invitation that I made to walk a part of the path together. Believe me, in spite of its slowness, the infidelity, the mistakes and the sins that may have and may still be committed by those who compose the Church, it has no other sense and aim if not to live and witness Jesus: He has been sent by Abbà "to bring good news to the poor... to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favour" (Luke 4: 18-19).'

The whole letter is quite long and the summary took part of one paragraph near the end totally out of context. I call that bad journalism.

The History and Future of the World in Two Minutes

Before time as we know it; God existed. He was and always will be in a communal relationship with himself. At some point God created all things and they were good. When He created us as humans He imparted His image into us – to be creative and to live in community with Him and with one another. The enemy was also there at the beginning and he persuaded them to turn away from the intimate relationship they had with God. Death became reality.

But God planned that He would restore creation to a harmonious relationship with its maker. First, He chose the descendants of a man named Abraham to take His message to the entire world. He promised to bless them so that they could bless all the nations of the world. But the world went three ways – some ignored God, some built rules in an attempt to appease God and a very small remnant still lived in community with Him.

Finally He sent His son called Jesus. He was like no other man before Him - He was mysteriously God in Flesh. He commissioned those who followed Him to take His message that God loves His creation and longs for an intimate relationship with us to the whole world. He called His people to live in community, that the world would see Him by their love for each other and those around them. His way was not attractive to those who loved power or wealth and oppressed others and so they killed Him. But this time it was different: Jesus had overcome the enemy. Death itself was dead!

There is an end to the story – a day with Jesus will come back and separate people into two groups, those who will live in community with God and those who will be separated from Him. At that time all things will be restored to God’s original plan.

But still the world goes three ways – some ignoring God, some building rules in an attempt to appease God and a remnant longing and hoping for the time when the end will come; for wholeness, peace and justice. Till that time we, of the remnant, are giving our lives to living out that future reality now.

[This is a response to Stan Nussbaum's challenge --
http://www.gmi.org/services/research/stans-lab/new/the-world-in-two-minutes/]

At last... a breath of fresh air

Sue has been reading a book called 'Authentic Relationships' by Wayne Jacobsen and Clay Jacobsen and she then looked up Wayne's website and found an article that almost entirely expressed my feelings but better put than I could entitled 'Why I Don't Go To Church Anymore: Living in the Relational Church - Part 6'. It felt like a breath of fresh air. Here was somebody expressing almost exactly what I have been feeling in so much better ways than I can.

Here's the core of it:

Where do you go to church?

I have never liked this question, even when I was able to answer it with a specific organization. I know what it means culturally, but it is based on a false premise--that church is something you can go to as in a specific event, location or organized group. I think Jesus looks at the church quite differently. He didn't talk about it as a place to go to, but a way of living in relationship to him and to other followers of his.

Asking me where I go to church is like asking me where I go to Jacobsen. How do I answer that? I am a Jacobsen and where I go a Jacobsen is. 'Church' is that kind of word. It doesn't identify a location or an institution. It describes a people and how they relate to each other. If we lose sight of that, our understanding of the church will be distorted and we'll miss out on much of its joy.

Yes exactly the core. But I think that many people feel threatened by this approach. Maybe I would have done a few years ago. Wayne continues:

So should I stop going to church, too?

I'm afraid that question also misses the point. You see I don't believe you're going to church any more than I am. We're just part of it. Be your part, however Jesus calls you to and wherever he places you. Not all of us grow in the same environment.

The only issue he doesn't address is this - 'I believe I should strongly encourage poeple to go to church and even if you don't I think in general people should'. Now I have a big problem with that. I really don't believe it's right to strongly encourage people to go to church because it gives them a totally erroneous perception of what church is. Since it's not something that can be 'gone to' encouraging them to 'go to church' gives them the perception that its possible. This I feel is dangerous misleading and has led to many of the problems we see in the church today.

There is all the world of difference between encouraging people to go to church and saying something like 'A bunch of us are getting together on Sunday, would you like to come along?' But not taking no for an answer and repeating this ad nauseum is as bad as strongly encouraging or pressuring people to come.

Some people would see this as quibbling with words. Or a different communication style. I think the words are important. Wayne again:

I know it may only sound like quibbling over words, but words are important. When we only ascribe the term 'church' to weekend gatherings or institutions that have organized themselves as 'churches' we miss out on what it means to live as Christ's body. It will give us a false sense of security to think that by attending a meeting once a week we are participating in God's church. Conversely I hear people talk about 'leaving the church' when they stop attending a specific congregation.

But if the church is something we are, not someplace we go, how can we leave it unless we abandon Christ himself? And if I think only of a specific congregation as my part of the church, haven't I separated myself from a host of other brothers and sisters that do not attend the same one I do?

The idea that those who gather on Sunday mornings to watch a praise concert and listen to a teaching are part of the church and those who do not, are not, would be foreign to Jesus. The issue is not where we are at a given time during the weekend, but how we are living in him and with other believers all week long.

In the Evangelical church they used to have a word for them 'backsliders'. And some were. But some may actually be 'frontsliders' ahead of those locked into an inaccurate perception of church.

Recently I have seen some of the emerging church meetings and been thinking more and more this is changing the colour of the icing [frosting] on the cake not changing the cake. Even that is a bad analogy, but I mean that the 'event' is still and 'event' and the focus seems to be on the 'event' rather than the relationship.

Well... we'll see where the journey leads. I'm not sure I'm yet at the place of feeling/seeing/knowing the path I'm walking is right, but I do feel that I have been pushed off the wrong path and now see others walking a similar path and don't feel quite so alone. Maybe when I am more confident that this path is part of the journey for me I will become more relaxed. Certainly not going to Sunday meetings has made me significantly more relaxed and if only I weren't surrounded by a bunch of people who see 'going to church' as important maybe I could see the path more clearly.