A Refreshing Perspective

Friday May 4, 2007

Notwithstanding my ‘close association’ with many member of the press core for whom I have great respect, dealing with the media is always a challenge. I think Bishop Spong is a gifted teacher, an eloquent preacher and a knowledgeable spokesperson for our ‘tradition.’ He is also very deft in his ability to field the critical questions of a not-so-theologically deft reporter. Good for him! Read on.

May 2, 2007

Discussing Biblical Theology on CBS Television

The medium of television is a fascinating place through which to seek to dispel the ignorance of biblical fundamentalism. The time is always short, the network needs to be “fair and balanced” and neither the producer nor the interviewer is necessarily well versed in the subject matter. To push against these barriers in a brief segment on national TV is a daunting task. Yet that was the task I faced on the Saturday before Easter when I appeared on the “CBS Early Show” to discuss “the resurrection of Jesus.” How did that assignment come about? The connections are interesting. My recent book, “JESUS FOR THE NON-RELIGIOUS” has a major focus on the resurrection, so the Religious News Service in Washington contacted me through my agent in Chicago for an Easter story that local papers might want to run during the Easter season. RNS then sent their story out on their wire and local newspapers bought it to run in their pre-Easter religious section. This particular story was a great success since the Washington Post, a premier newspaper, bought it guaranteeing a national audience. That perked the interest of producers at CBS-TV, who decided to make this story a feature on their Saturday Early Morning show between 8:00 and 8:30. The story had potential for a television segment because it revealed tension in the way the resurrection is traditionally understood.

The RNS interviewer had begun his article by quoting one of Jerry Falwell’s disciples at Liberty Baptist College. He then talked to me because the publicity on my new book indicated that I took a different point of view. His questions also revealed that his knowledge of the resurrection was on about the same level as the Falwell representative. “Do you believe in the resurrection of Jesus?” he began. “Yes, I do,” I responded. That was disconcerting because he had me pegged to be the one who would provide the controversy to his story. A bishop who appears to deny the literal accuracy of the resurrection creates negative energy. I then cited the reasons for my Easter conviction: the dramatic reversal of the disciples who abandoned Jesus when he was arrested, but who were later willing to die for the reality of a life-changing vision; the revolution in their thinking about the relationship of Jesus to God, and the establishment of a new holy day on the first day of the week. Something had to have created these effects. My interviewer, sensing the loss of his proposed story line, then began to add qualifiers to his question: Was the resurrection physical? Did Jesus literally walk out of the tomb? At this point, I clearly needed to do a Bible 101 course with him and began to state some very basic facts. “The gospels’ Easter stories are not eye witness accounts,” I began, “they are the products of the second and third generations after the crucifixion. They must not be viewed as either biography or as literal history.” Continuing this elementary discussion I added, “The gospels reveal this in their inconsistencies, disagreeing with each other on major questions. Indeed there is hardly an Easter detail in one gospel that is not contradicted by another gospel. They don’t even agree on your question about whether the resurrection should be understood as a physical resuscitation. Paul did not think so as a careful reading of his epistles, which were written at least a decade before the first gospel, will reveal, and Mark the earliest gospel writer, never portrays the risen Jesus appearing to anyone. A resuscitated physical body was clearly not what the resurrection was thought to be originally. That understanding, however, did enter the Christian story in the later gospels, especially Luke and John which were 9th and 10th decade works.” My interviewer was obviously disturbed that this interview was not falling into his pre-conceived format, nor did I sense that he had any comprehension at all of what I was saying. When I later saw the printed story this fear was correct, but the story was fuzzy enough for me to know that I had at least neutralized his literal characterization of Easter and had presented another option.

The story next leaped to CBS News and it was déjà vu. A young CBS assistant producer called to do the “pre-interview,” which enables her to shape the questions that the CBS host, J. B. Brown, would pose in the televised segment. She was engaging and enthusiastic, but totally ill-equipped to understand anything but yes or no answers. I was working that day in the library at Drew University near my home in New Jersey and so the phone appointment was set at a time certain and I agreed to vacate my assigned cubicle and step outside to take her call. I anticipated it to be 5-10 minutes at most. It was a cold, wintry day and I did not take my overcoat. The call lasted 45 minutes! She did not understand how there could be any confusion since the Bible was the “literal word of God.” Her bias was so obvious that I finally asked her where she had learned about the Bible. “I am a member of a Pentecostal Holiness Church,” she responded. She knew no way to ask about the Bible other than “Is it true or false.” I kept trying to show her that a more open-ended question would facilitate a better discussion. It became clear, however, that none of the people involved were really interested in such a discussion, so my task, now that I was in it, was far more to neutralize biblical ignorance than it was to open new possibilities to the viewing audience. That became my limited goal and my sole agenda.

When we arrived at the studio, I discovered our segment was sandwiched between a lawyer in the Duke University Lacrosse case and a feature with the Easter Bunny! Yes, I got to meet the Easter Bunny! At least our grandchildren would think that this made it worth my effort. I also met the young assistant producer. She was excited and told me that she had worked out four “really good” questions for J.B. to ask us. The “traditional voice” turned out to be the Rev. Dr. Calvin Butts, a respected New York clergyman, well known for his social ministry. On the set J. B. Brown, told us that he too was preaching at his church on Easter and hoped to get help from this interview. The cameras rolled. The first question addressed to Dr. Butts was exactly what I feared. “The Resurrection of Jesus,” J. B. said, “is it fact or fiction?” Dr. Butts did not hesitate. “A fact,” he said, quoting Paul to suggest that if Jesus had not literally and physically walked out of his tomb, there would be no Christianity. That is not what Paul said, but there was no way I could make that point. His explanation took 45 seconds. When J.B. posed the same question to me, I tried to open it up by shifting from his limiting contrast of “fact or fiction” to “real or delusional.” I said, “I believe it is real” and agreeing with Dr. Butts, stated that without some life-changing experience, “there would be no Christianity.” Then I tried to place some other data before the audience. I reminded them that the words of the gospels were written 40-70 years after the events they purport to describe. They were written in Greek, a language that neither Jesus nor his disciples spoke. I pointed to the various contradictions in the Easter narratives, noting that the gospels do not even agree on whether the disciples were in Galilee or Jerusalem when whatever Easter was dawned in their consciousness. I too consumed at least 45 seconds. With the thirty second introduction, half of our time was now gone. No attempt was made to engage the differences, our host was too intent to get to his next “exciting question.” Once again he addressed Dr. Butts: “The virgin birth of Jesus, fact or fiction?” It had gone from bad to worse. No one can discuss the resurrection and the virgin birth in a less than four-minute time slot. Obviously neither the resurrection nor the virgin birth was the real subject here, but whether the Bible must be read literally. Again, Dr. Butts gave the expected answer. “A fact,” and then he developed his answer a bit more fully linking the virgin birth to the divinity of Jesus. When my turn came the “fact or fiction” question was repeated. Once more I sought to broaden it. “The virgin birth is not about biology,” I said. “It was a popular 1st century way of trying to explain the Jesus experience. The virgin birth was not even an original part of the Jesus story but came into the Christian tradition in the 9th decade. Neither Paul nor Mark had ever heard of it, and John the last gospel to be written, actually omits it altogether, referring to Jesus on two occasions as the son of Joseph.” That was the final word as we were told that our time was up. The commitment to the Easter Bunny was sacrosanct. We were thanked and departed. As we walked off the stage, Dr. Butts made a revealing statement: “That kind of discussion belongs in a seminary,” he said, “in the church we preach it as fact.”
I admire Calvin Butts’ ministry in New York. His powerful voice takes on the political establishment of the city in the name of the poor. His ministry has integrity and he pastors his large congregation faithfully. His reference to these discussions taking place in a seminary, but not being allowed in the pulpits of our churches, however, indicates that his education has made him aware that these issues cannot really be reduced to “fact or fiction,” but since he discerns no great interest in critical biblical studies in his community, he does not bother about it nor is he conversant with that area of scholarship. I have no problem with that.

I live, however, in a world where bodily resuscitations, complete with angels coming out of the sky to roll away the stone in front of Jesus’ tomb and to place the Temple guard around that tomb into a state of unconsciousness; or stories in which virgins conceive and stars wander through the sky so slowly that wise men can follow them are unbelievable. If that is what Christianity requires then fewer and fewer citizens of the 21st century will continue to be disciples of Jesus or worshipers of the God experienced in Jesus’ life. So I will continue to use even brief media opportunities to let the world know that there are Christians who are not literalists and there are profoundly different ways to understand Jesus far beyond those arrived at by literalizing an ancient text. I can easily dismiss time bound and time-warped explanations. That does not mean that I dismiss the experience that my ancestors in faith sought to explain.

John Shelby Spong

Recent Articles

Twentieth Sunday in Ordinary Time 'A'

All are invited—no exclusions. It’s a safe bet that every ‘objective’ historian writes with a bias. When I attended Catholic…continue reading...

Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church

On “Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church—Reclaimng the Spirit of Jesus” By Bishop Geoffrey Robinson. The Liturgical Press,…continue reading...

THE SURVIVAL OF THE SPIRIT

WHILE MIRED IN THE TOXIC WASTES OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL SWAMP Thomas P. Doyle, J.C.D., C.A.D.C. ANNUAL SNAP GATHERING…continue reading...

Feast of the Assumption

She made it; so can we! It’s a happy coincidence this is the patronal feast for our parish. It is also…continue reading...

Nineteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time 'A'

Prophets take courage! We are not born with inherent fear and certainly do not come into this world with water wings.…continue reading...