“the great Western heresy” ?

[Mark Wirtz]

I would suspect that the Presiding Bishop’s heresy remarks within her opening address to the 2009 General Convention would illicit strong feelings with a resounding, “AMEN!” or a nervous, “Huh?” from just about anyone. Her words certainly drew a strong reaction from me, and thus, I took considerable time to study her words. Frankly, I wish she would expound upon her theological statements regarding personal salvation for the sake of clarity. Christian news sources all over the world have reduced her statements that the PB has deemed personal salvation a heresy. This isn’t hard to do based on her brief, polarized comments. Evangelicals (and probably a few remaining evangelical Episcopalians) have taken offense to this, as personal relationship with God in Jesus is key to one’s salvation and at the heart of the gospel as they see it. Certainly we cannot discount the inherently personal nature of ones relationship with God and how Scripture speaks to that.

As a post-evangelical, Episcopalian “convert,” I was utterly compelled to spend a few days meditating on the PB’s strong words regarding what she deemed “the great Western heresy” – a rather bold accusation. I disagree with the PB that individual salvation can be categorically deemed a heresy. Her words are too polarized and there needs to be a nuanced, theological discussion on the topic of salvation in order to pinpoint where the heresy lies if she wants to take that rout. Heresy is a bold accusation and in this case can potentially be applied to many, many Christians. I do not feel I’m being too sensitive here.

What I hope the PB is saying is that individuals can not be saved or be in a right relationship with God alone or apart from being reconciled with God’s good creation. I am comfortable with that. There is no “just God and I,” but “God and us.” This follows James and how faith without works (broadly understood) is dead. What we do with our neighbor (and all of creation) is inseparable from what we believe or profess. I run into problems with her harsh remarks however, because there is still an event (or a series of events) that takes place in each of our lives that transforms us. Transformation in Christ is both personal and communal. An over-focus on the self can and does lead to idolatry, but it does not mean that one can’t have personal salvation. To me, the personal and communal aspects of "right relationship" with God are inextricably linked. I hope that’s what she’s trying to get at by saying that such idolatry is in part motivation for their use of Ubuntu. However, I feel all I can do is speculate because her rhetoric is cleverly worded at best, but sparse in clarity, where clarity is needed when making a heresy accusation that can apply to such a broad range of Christians.

[Eric]

Hi Mark,

I don't want to speak for the PB, but I do think people read into her statement a little more than she actually meant - or maybe I could say they read LESS into what she meant. We got to remember the context that brought about those opening remarks. The GC is just getting underway to vote on issues that very well may fracture us from the rest of the Communion. I think those words she spoke were a reminder that our decisions are not just between us individuals and God, that it doesn't matter what the rest of God's people think or feel. We are all interconnected by baptism, not one individual with God only through baptism. If the second were true, then there would be no reason to baptize in front of the rest of the Christian faith community, or have that community partake in it as we do.

From hearing the PB speak in the past, I think it is evident that she believes that each of us have a unique, transforming relationship with Christ on an individual level. And it is through that relationship that we are saved through Christ's atoning sacrifice. But, since the Episcopal Church wants to move forward past B033, her words could be taken as "if you think that Christianity is strictly between you and God, like there are no other Christians affected by what you do with your relationship with Jesus, then that teaching is false". To me, that is very different from upset Evangelical's simplifying her remarks into "personal salvation through Christ is heresy".

Does that make sense?

Eric

[Mark Wirtz]

What you said about interconnectedness makes perfect sense and I would agree if that's what I knew she was saying. Thank you for your thoughts. And you're right, I do not want to put words in the PB's mouth either! That's why I really wish there was a better theological exposition on what she said precisely because it can be taken in a number of different ways with a "plain reading" (such a tricky...and questionable...concept). Because we are all interconnected through our baptism, then we need to make sure we're not calling a huge number of Christians heretics if that's not what we mean. One certainly can't completely controll the media's reducing her comments as they are. But we need clarification lest we unnecessarily alienate many in the body of Christ. These comments would cause many to choke within Christianity.

[Drew Downs]

Mark and Eric,

I haven't read it in a few weeks now, but I was more taken by the first part of the phrase than the second: 'Western Heresy'. The implication (for me) is the particularly Western (and specifically) American Protestantism that is most interested in personal salvation. Or, for greater emphasis, solely interested in personal salvation. I think the intent is to critique not the individual experience but the primacy of that experience.

She is also speaking to a pluralist West that embraces a broad personal spirituality without religiosity and further, in a national context that favors rugged individualism to corporate consciousness.

In this context, I can't help but believe that 'Western Heresy' is intended to not only combat that sense of individualism OVER corporate interaction, but to also suggest that placing a message of individual salvation in a place of primacy is antithetical to the Good News.

It seems that her use of the word heresy caused quite a stir, not just in your (Mark) response, but to the Far Right who chose to look past her argument in order to nitpick her word choice. She was criticized in The Living Church because it isn't an "official" heresy.

Drew+

PS--since when did having an heresy be "official" prevent the Far Right from committing it?

[Mark Wirtz]

I agree that it is important to place the PB's Comment ("Western heresy") in context, and it does seem she is speaking of primacy. I think that's what my hopeful speculation was above, put differently of course. I dislike the inevitable reductionism from commentators in reaction to these words.

[John Sullivan]

When and how is it ok to refer to individual salvation?

[Drew Downs]

I am currently reading Diana Butler Bass's A People's History of Christianity, and one of the things that I have gleaned from our broad history as followers of Christ is this simple notion: whenever a group proclaims exclusive authority, they become the offshoot; they're on the outside looking in. Perhaps this is different at times of re-formation. But the symbolism, I think, is there.

If you allow me to differ from my above argument, I might also suggest that we have several influences that place not only a preference for, but an ideological separation of the individual salvation from corporate salvation. From agnostics to self-described traditionalists, the line of demarcation is individual salvation.

Attempting to tie these two principles together, the notion and principle of individual salvation in isolation--as in, without corporate salvation--puts one at odds with the church, and is therefore heretical. Even though many of our ancient and modern (last 500 years) texts may speak to individual salvation, the understanding is always within corporate salvation. When I say "I'm in with God, I don't know about you..." is about the time I'm no longer in with God.

[Mark Wirtz]

The Presiding Bishop brought clarity to her remarks on the "great Western heresy" as that of individualism. I'm right on board with what she said. You can find the article here.

[John Sullivan]

"The overarching connection in all of these crises has to do with the great Western heresy – that we can be saved as individuals, that any of us alone can be in right relationship with God. It’s caricatured in some quarters by insisting that salvation depends on reciting a specific verbal formula about Jesus. That individualist focus is a form of idolatry, for it puts me and my words in the place that only God can occupy, at the center of existence, as the ground of being. That heresy is one reason for the theme of this Convention. "
Isn't individual salvation "Gospel"... yes we are interdependent... we are "saved" into community... but a personal conversion to a personal Christ is legitimate... a personal and ongoing conversion is essential to our "membership" in this community. I don't necessarily read the PBs words as a refutation of this... but the protestant insistance on personal and intimate conversion was a reaction against an "idolatry" of a different sort... yes a formulaic (sinners prayer?) approach to relationship with God... and being able to recite date and time of "born-again" experience is irrelavant without a continuing and sustained experience of the "life of grace", spiritual living, life in the spirit, spirit filled life, etc... but when is a life in community really of life in community? and what community is it? Is association salvation?

[Bill Stoker]

i find we often take a splinter of a perspective and run with it, regardless of consequence.
and we often argue against something, even if something beautiful is also to be found in that which we disagree with -

and this causes disassociation, it causes strife, it causes a lot, and sadly, this is often disregarded upfront as we begin our communication against it. we know there is something good and pure there, but others have seemingly made it impure, and so instead of redeeming the word/event/etc, we reject it - it along with all that it has meant (good & bad).

i also find the following statement fairly at odds with much:

"...salvation....It's hard to pin down or talk about...."
(from PB's article linked above)