“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.

[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)

[Hadge Hughes]

I'm finding more and more that the language of salvation is inadequate in describing or attempting to describe what we may or may not be trying to say about the relationship we have as humankind to the divine or the transcendent or G-d. The word itself is too charged with centuries of the suggestion that humanity is lost and in someway separated from G-d and therefore in need of rescue. This scenario has played itself out in many different guises not least in the idea that there needs to be some sort of transaction requiring sacrifice (penal substitution?) so that we can be right with G-d. I have a recurring nightmare in which the church (Christendom?) is portrayed as a suffocating person trapped in a stuffy old room gasping for his/her last breath with the words, "Must ....... open ...... window ....... need ....... fresh .......air" as she/he reaches for the latch of a closed window. I'm hoping we can open that window here in this community. Salvation (σωτηρία) is about far more than rescue and a lot more about well being and inner health - something that the Mind, Body, Spirit shelves are weighed down with in most bookshops. People don't fear an eternal punishment or even an eternal death - the majority of them fear a meaningless life and a lack of happiness and well being. Surely our emphasis when we speak of salvation is to alert people to the need we all have of personal transformation as part of a community of those seeking the well being of the whole of creation? The idea that salvation is just a case of "I'm alright Jack" is anathema and the sooner we explode this approach (ie The Alpha Course) the better.

[John Sullivan]

The theology of salvation is varied and interesting... and I might add instructive... some of the theories put me off and Hadge I would say we're not alone in this. You mention "penal substitution" and I would guess many of us on this particular group page would maybe agree with you on that one or at least be sympathetic to your feelings about it. I might agree that some christian theories regarding the state of the human condition may be off but "salvation" is "gospel" whether you want to say that we are in need of salvation because we have somehow become estranged, that we've sinned, that we've forgotten our creator, that we've strayed, etc... the point being that we ( I mean here humanity as a whole... I will also include myself as individual) were and are in need. Salvation goes beyond a " whew... got that taken care of" mentality... but it's ok to feel a "wow... God loves me so much..." and of course we can say "me"... isn't there a sense of this in scripture and tradition?
Hadge you write yourself, "People don't fear an eternal punishment or even an eternal death - the majority of them fear a meaningless life and a lack of happiness and well being." Couldn't that sense of fear of meaninglessness be as much an indication for the need of salvation... a sense of estrangement from the Creator... a sense of sin if you like?... and so we can say as Jesus said... that he came that we might have life, and life more abundantly. I would guess that in the human condition there are some who do probably feel a fear of eternal punishment (or at least eternal estrangement) and so we hold out the hope of salvation as a community (salvation in the community) do we not.? Don't we (and doesn't the Christian scriptures bear this out as well) say to those around us... welcome to our community... the community of Christ... the kingdom of God...etc...? This is the heart of "radical hospitality" is it not? Transformed lives come from participation in this community not in a desert cave (although that might work as well... I don't want to discount our desert fathers and mothers).
Talking about the cross of Christ in terms of individual and corporate salvation is difficult for us on many levels but this is what we have to talk about (no other story was given to us). Am I wrong in saying that community is not the obliteration of the individual person but the affirmation of the individual person in the community?... I like the idea of a covenantal community and think that the idea speaks of "salvation" not in terms of "individual despite others" but "individual with others".

[Kieran Conroy]

Taking some time to re-read this a few times before I comment fully, but I agree it could have been worded a bit more carefully to build dialog, even if some of those quoting her did so a little out of context. I think these issues are very important to talk about, but doing so in a way that doesn't shut down evangelical voices unfairly is important.

I would have really liked to see more of her thinking on "Western" heresy perhaps be brought into dialog with the Eastern church's teachings on the redemption of all creation, etc. Could have made for a more fruitful dialog, and even acknowledged some of the struggles among many evangelicals to struggle for a more responsible earth and social justice ethic (something which was, in their founding days in the abolition era a cornerstone of evangelicalism)