James Tissot, "The woman who had been crippled for 18 years" (1886-1896)

First published in The Window (November 2006)

Sabba- (or) Holy Liberation, part V
Richard M. Wright

(The Sabba- is going somewhere…)

Last week I suggested that Sabba- in part represents the opposite of slavery. Perhaps liberation. And therefore asked, If we choose not to practice Sabba- are we choosing (a kind of) slavery over freedom?

In Luke 13 Jesus heals a woman on the Sabba-. “On a Sabba- Jesus was teaching… and a woman was there who had been crippled by a spirit for eighteen years… When Jesus saw her, he called her forward and said to her, ‘Woman, you are set free from your infirmity’” (13:10-12; NIV).

What is strange is that Jesus does not use the language of healing. Not “woman you are healed” but “woman, you are set free (Greek apolúoo “set free, release, pardon”; Bauer-Arndt-Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: 96b). And when some complain that Jesus is healing on the Sabba- he replies, “Should not this woman… whom Satan has kept bound… be set free (Greek lúoo “loose, untie, release”) from what bound her?” (13:16).

Jesus uses the language of liberation. Of untying… of forces of evil (spiritual? psychological? socio-economic? even physical?) that hold prisoner and that keep in bonds… of release. This is not just about healing a sickness. This is about setting a human being free from the forces that make her a prisoner and hold her down. The Sabba- is a day for rest and worship… for playing and praying… The Sabba- is also a day for liberation and for setting human beings free from whatever holds us prisoner.

Two questions.

First. Does the Christian community ever turn this day of liberation into a day of… bondage? slavery? drudgery?

Second. How do we – as individuals, as families, as a church family – practice Sabba- even more as a day of liberation?

Arthur Waskow describes Sabba- as a revolutionary act – and Sabba- keepers as guerilla soldiers who liberate time. I would add that Sabba- must become even more a liberating time and Sabba- keepers as those who not only liberate time but set human beings free.

Philip Ratner, "Remember the Sabbath"

Originally published in The Window (November 10, 2006)

Holy Liberation (or) Sabb-, part IV
by Richard M. Wright

(The Sabb- is going somewhere…)

Are we slaves?

(Say whaaa-?)

That is an offensive question but bear with me. One of the speakers at the (can you guess?) Catalyst Conference was Gary Haugen, who works with the International Justice Mission which basically finds and rescues people from slavery. No kidding.

Even in countries where it is illegal some people sometimes engage in slavery. Haugen described a brick-making complex somewhere in Asia where people – including husbands and wives and children of all ages – were forced to make bricks 12-14 hours each and day and 7 days a week. Beatings for failure to keep quota. No escape. And no rest from work.

That – among other things perhaps – is a key characteristic of slavery. Working without ever resting.

Rewind a few millennia. The Hebrews are former slaves about to enter the land of Canaan. God through Moses reminds them of ten things. The fourth – which is the longest commandment so maybe it is rather important – says:

“Observe the Sabb-day by keeping it holy, as the Lord your God has commanded you. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabb- to the Lord your God. On it, you shall not do any work, neither you, you’re your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your ox, your donkey or any of your animals, nor the foreigner within your gates, so that your manservant and maidservant may rest, as you do. Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the Lord your God broutht you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the Lord you God has commanded you to observe the Sabb- day.” Deuteronomy 5:12-15

Fascinating. Why should you observe this day of rest/fun/worship/prayer? Because once you were slaves but now you are no longer. Sabb- in part represents the opposite of slavery. Perhaps freedom. Liberation. (More about that next week.)

(So, if we choose not to practice Sabb- are we choosing to live like slaves?)

“It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.” (Galations 5:1)

Originally published in The Window, October 30 2006.

Sab- (or) Holy Snugglebunnies, part III
Richard M. Wright

(Warning: This article contains mature content.)

(The Sab- is going somewhere. Trust me.)

There is a theological theme that has been… Play.

Many years ago during that tender first year I bought a book called The New Joy of Snugglebunnies* by Alex Comfort. Have hardly looked at it since then. But I will never forget something the author states in the introductory chapter. That snugglebunnies is for adults a “form of play.” (It is much more than that of course. But let me focus on that important insight. Snugglebunnies is fun. Play-ful.)

A few weeks ago I shared how Kevin Carroll – one of the speakers at the Catalyst Conference in Georgia – said adults do not play enough. (Not referring to snugglebunnies.) What if modern Western technological society… what if our culture… does not allow enough time/opportunity/permission for play? For children as well as adults? What happens if the deep human need for play goes unfulfilled?

Let us put the pieces together. Human beings need play. The need for play goes unsatisfied. Snugglebunnies is a form of play.

Then perhaps human beings will sometimes meet that need through forms of snugglebunnies that are broken and distorted. Before marriage. Not within marriage. Not with anybody. Hurt others. Hurt themselves. And so on.

Dare we consider that failure to play enough… perhaps even the failure to practice Sab- keeping… is one of the causes of s’ual sin?  Our exceptional minister with youth recently urged dads to pay attention to their daughters – or their daughters might try to meet that need elsewhere and less appropriately. Perhaps we can say, “Parents – play with your kids!”

Speaking of Sab- keeping and snugglebunnies… Turns out the Jewish rabbis taught that snugglebunnies on Sab- is actually a mitzvah. A commandment. That one of the benefits of observing a whole day of rest/play/prayer/worship is it provides time/opportunity/permission for snugglebunnies. (No books to recommend. Go write your own.)

Children or not… married or single… do we play enough?

*(Borrowed from Opus the Penguin, “Broome County”)

Originally published in The Window, October 10 2006

Holy Play (or) S-, part I
Richard M. Wright

(The S- is going somewhere. Trust me.)

There is a theme – a theological theme that requires a change in how we live – that has been impressing itself upon my soul/awareness. Play.

Three days in Atlanta for the (apparently well known) Catalyst Conference. The world’s largest pillow fight involving thousands at the Gwinnett Arena on Friday morning. The dodge-ball national championship team – comprised entirely of “youth pastors”, why are we not surprised? – shows up… a dozen from the audience throw official dodge-balls at them which they dodge or catch-and-return-with-force then quickly (d)evolves into thousands throwing their red rubber balls at these masters of a play-ground sport who manage to dodge-or-catch-and-return not a few amidst the red maelstrom.

Yeah the conference was inspiring, informative, challenging and all. But it was also fun.

Which brings me to one of the speakers: Kevil Carroll of Rules of the Red Rubber Ball fame. Worked for years as a “creative catalyst” at Nike.

One of his central points was adults do not play enough. Without play… imagination and creativity shrivel. And perhaps the reverse is also true? That play can be a holy activity. And one that can fuel creativity and imagination and by extension our ability to perform… succeed… innovate… problem-solve… fulfill our mission as individuals and as a church family.

I first learned this lesson from a Baptist campus minister at Cornell University by the name of Armetta Fields. (Interesting first name.) She thought Cornell students were too serious, studious, and stress out. (Oh and arrogant.) So she made us play once or twice a semester.

Crayons and coloring books at Thursday evening “Bible study/prayer” meeting. Taking us to a nearby vocational school at night to spend a couple hours on the playground. Swings and slides and death-by-monkey-bars.

More than therapy but fulfilling (in part) a divine commandment. Care to guess what letter it starts with?

Originally published in The Window (October 23, 2006)

Sa- (or) Holy Play, part II
Richard M. Wright

(The Sa- is going somewhere. Trust me.)

There is a theme – a theological theme that requires a change in how we live – that has been impressing itself upon my soul/awareness. Rest.

Three days in Atlanta for the Catalyst Conference. (Hey this article sounds strangely familiar…) Some of the “Lab” (one day of smaller pre-conference sessions) speakers focused on culture. (Such as Andy Crouch, Cornell class of 1989, my classmate for Attic Greek 101 and 103, and my small group leader in Cornell Christian Fellowship.) On how the Christian church must not only engage (our current “emergent”) culture… but even create culture. But how?

Some of them addressed how. Mark Buchanan on “The Rest of God”. Lauren Winner was going to talk about “Sleep, Kids, and Technology” (my emphasis) but focused on understanding/reading/engaging our culture.

The back of our lab booklet listed the speakers and the many books they have written. Several of the books by the various lab speakers were on the subject of Sa-. Mark Buchanan. Eugene Peterson. Lauren Winner comes from a lapsed-Southern-Baptist/Orthodox-Jewish home and has written extensively on what the Christian movement needs to learn from Judaism. (Did you know Jesus was Jewish?)

Speaking of Cornell and of Orthodox Judaism… one of my best friends was Leah Rosenthal who lived in Young Israel House (a Jewish co-op). About once a month I walked all the way across campus to visit her. Usually on Friday night. Sometimes I watched/listened to Sa- prayers. We hanged out and talked. Then stayed for Sa- dinner.

What struck me was how Friday night there was an oasis of rest dare I say peace (shalom) in the ocean of intense academic stress that was life at Cornell. Sit and talk. Read. Leisurely meal with friends that ended with vast quantities of schnapps (which I skipped) and boisterous singing. Sleep. No phones or television! No work of any kind! Sometimes Leah and I went for a walk. (Once to visit a classmate from Genetics – an international who lived in a single room smaller than some walk-in closets.)

More than a break but fulfilling (in part) a divine commandment.

Been strange but good this year. Enjoyed the time with my friend Chris Brady and chance to meet some of his friends and colleagues and fellow bibliobloggers. Lunch at Bacco’s was excellent and only $15. Dinner at Ralph and Kacoo’s pricey and not so good and service was weak. Had to drive back to Baton Rouge on Sunday morning for Sunday morning Bible study and worship. Dinner by myself in hotel restaurant was my first Kobe beef hamburger very good and cooked perfectly. Had to drive back to Baton Rouge again today for memorial service for Lois Draayer. Lunch at Middle East restaurant in French Quarter was decent. Right now waiting to meet Eric Mason for dinner.

I have not been to many sessions and papers largely because of the back-and-forth and how tired this has left me. Been focusing on sessions on Psalms – did not have enough energy for session on Sabbath this evening. Creation imagery and theology in the Psalms. And more insight into the formation of the Psalter. Caught end of a talk last evening by Shalom Paul on Late Biblical Hebrew in Isaiah 40-66 – was disappointed he made no reference at all to my work which does briefly touch on the issue and points toward a future article.

I have noticed that some biblical scholars use cliches and buzz phrases without(?) quite realizing what they are saying. In the Psalms sessions several references to “global warming” – I care very much about the environment but believe there is legitimate cause for questioning Anthropogenic Global Warming dogma. Many references to how Katrina “exposed injustice and inequalities in our community” along with some gratuitous and ill-informed Bush-bashing – but do people who throw that around really know what they are talking about? Plenty of middle and upper class New Orleans residents suffered and lost everything. It was in the recovery process that one sees more of the disparity. And although the Federal government responded poorly one should not overlook the colossal ineptitude of Louisiana authorities.

If some scholars engage in casual Bush-bashing and Global Warming kvetching during their talks – why do other scholars not engage in casual Obama-bashing and in digs against Anthropogenic Global Warming?

For years we have noted the abundance of facial hair. And how much biblical scholars dress in black. Biblical scholars male and female are a surprisingly good looking bunch.

Appreciate Andrew Das saying hi when I was waiting for valet to bring down my car.

I do feel a little out of place largely because I have fallen behind and not been involved much in my field. Wonder what it would take for me to get “back in academic shape” so as to produce new research and writing that would stand up and receive respect at this gathering. But I can no longer beat myself up so harshly for not ever having secured a position at a college or seminary. The competition in biblical studies is astonishing. About ten (10) open positions this year. For just one position at Judson College (my friend Eric is in charge of the search) they have sixty (60) people who are interested.

In other words you can be smart and good – and never get a teaching position.

The exhibitors’ hall is overwhelming. Booth after booth full of books and publications – which are worth buying? which are worth reading? And I wonder if all of them are necessary. To what extent do people write books because they need to in order to get a position or get tenure? That is a risky thing to say and perhaps I do not understand. Often congregants comment that my Bible studies are very “academic” rather than “practical” – to which I try to explain that good application will grow out of good academic(?) analysis. How many people thought Einstein’s theories were too academic? And yet they yield results that are deadly practical.

I do wonder sometimes why I spent so many dang years working on that PhD and that dissertation given what I do now. But I trust that God led me in that direction for a reason. That is what I have been struggling with. Given my gifts and education – what exactly am I supposed to be doing right now?

Update (11/24/09): Had excellent time with Eric Mason last evening. We hiked over to the Gumbo Shop and each of us got the 4-course “Creole dinner” special. Best meal I have had here so far. Main entree was Chicken St Peters which was outstanding. I have always liked Eric but was especially impressed to realize just how strong and productive he is in his field – focusing particularly on Hebrews and 2nd temple/Qumran. He is well involved in scholarly circles and produces an amazing number of articles papers and books each year. Toward the end of dinner a few large groups started to come in and Ralph Klein of Lutheran Theological Seminary in Chicago famous for his work on Chronicles (and Ezra-Nehemiah) came over to say hi. (Wonder if I should try to snag some Hermeneia volumes before leaving.) Grateful to God that I know Eric – he demonstrates you can be an excellent scholar and a great guy at the same time.

My friend Joshua (whom I get to visit when in Atlanta for Catalyst Conference) is a self-described “Socially Liberal, Theologically Conservative, Protestant” whose political views are “Very Liberal”. My intent here is not to debate or quibble with the “socially/politically liberal” part but rather to celebrate one of the most brilliant and concise descriptions of “theologically conservative” Christian faith.

He is also a great guy with an excellent family (he is a better parent than I by far) and his collection of science-fiction and fantasy books will make you cry.

(And yes he gave me permission to quote him.)

A key paragraph might be:

Also, the value of history becomes clear. “Christian” isn’t just defined by Scripture. It is defined by the people who died for the gospel in the first few centuries of the Church’s development. It is defined by the people who, 350 years after the time of Christ, selected, compiled, and edited the Scriptures that would become the Bible. It is defined, in short, by the historical identity of the Church.

Other might use the term “tradition” (or more precisely Tradition) in place of “historical identity”.

“Being Theologically Conservative” by Joshua Villines

The first point that I should probably clear up is that being theologically conservative is not the same thing as being socially conservative. Despite what Focus on the Family and other fringe groups on the axis of intolerance want you to think, Christian views on social issues have changed from generation to generation – and they’ve changed dramatically from era to era. If Christianity is defined by a particular social agenda, then there have been almost no Christians since the third century.Likewise, trying to use some form of convoluted logic to make the words of the Christian scriptures “inerrant” is not being a theological conservative. Clearly the people who wrote, compiled, and edited the Jewish and Christian scriptures didn’t think they were creating an inerrant collection of documents. They would have made them more homogeneous if they had. People who talk about biblical “inerrancy” are really just using a code word for their desire to subordinate Scripture to their social agenda; and they typically do so with people who don’t have the scholarly background to appreciate how ludicrous their claims really are (or to realize that the “inerrantists” aren’t conserving anything, they’re creating a new doctrine).

The reason that I began with the negatives, defining what “theologically conservative” is not, is that – for me – paring Christian identity down to the essentials was part of the process of defining my own role as a pastor. Through ordination, the Church entrusts to its clergy the custodianship of the Chruch’s identity; and so understanding what is “Christian” and what is not is part of a pastor’s role. Consequently, when I was ordained I realized it was important to try have a working definition of the word “Christian” if I was going to be able to do my job well.
If one takes this exercise seriously, it’s harder than it seems. On one side, there are the shrill voices of the fundamentalists. In order to place their counter-cultural assertions beyond critique, fundamentalists insist that even the most minute component of their doctrine, no matter how scant the biblical or historical support for it might be, is an essential part of being “Christian.”

On the other side are the real liberals. They claim the label Christian, while ignoring, denying, or contradicting nearly everything that Christians have historically believed – be it the deity of Christ or even the authority of God.Both extremes have kept the label “Christian” because they have positive associations with it or because it gives greater credibility to their belief systems; but in neither case is the label helpful. “Being a ‘Christian’ means understanding the world exactly the way I do, even if I don’t realize that the way I understand the world is very different from how Christians have historically understood it!” is not a useful definition. Nor is, “Being a ‘Christian’ can really mean anything as long as you include the word ‘Jesus’ in there somewhere.”

But with so many groups offering so many different, and contradictory, understandings of what it means to be a Christian, where can one turn? For me, the logical answer was (and is): Scripture and History.

Scripture alone is not completely helpful in this regard. Even if one limits such a search to the New Testament, the authors there wrote from very different perspectives and with different, sometimes competing, agendas. One of the reasons for the great variation in modern definitions of Christianity is that, lacking an external locus of authority, people have picked and chosen what they liked from Scripture to define Christianity.An example here is the debate over predestination versus free will. There are biblical passages that support both positions, but adherents to each camp will insist that their position is the correct, Christian view. They do this by privileging the texts which support their view, and subordinating the texts which disagree with them. As a result, they claim that they are simply “taking the Bible at face value” and “letting Scripture alone define their beliefs.” What they are really doing, however, is imposing their beliefs on Scripture.

A couple of useful things come out of this realization. The first is that lots of things that might be helpful to have in a consensus definition of Christianity (like, for instance, settling the question of predestination) can’t be included. That’s because the biblical record is too mixed. This is even true on really major questions like the mechanism of justification/salvation, and on key social issues like slavery. If one approaches Scripture honestly, allowing its authors to speak with their individual voices, it becomes clear that the basic definition of Christianity, its essential heart, must allow for a diversity of views on many theological points.

Also, the value of history becomes clear. “Christian” isn’t just defined by Scripture. It is defined by the people who died for the gospel in the first few centuries of the Church’s development. It is defined by the people who, 350 years after the time of Christ, selected, compiled, and edited the Scriptures that would become the Bible. It is defined, in short, by the historical identity of the Church.

In addition to the necessity of history in establishing some consensus on interpreting Scripture, a study of Christian history is essential since that is the history of the Bible. Scripture was not created ex nihilo. The same process of prayer, study, debate, and encounter with the world which produced the creeds and early doctrines of the Church is the process which produced the Christian Scriptures. The Bible did not come to be in a vacuum, and trying to interpret it outside the context which produced it is nonsensical.

And so, in my personal journey to find a working, consensus definition of Christianity, I turned to Scripture and history. Fortunately, at that point my work was really done. Christians had already worked out two beautiful, consensus statements of what it means to identify oneself as Christians: the Apostle’s Creed and the Nicene Creed. Interestingly, neither statement makes any mention of social issues or addresses the kinds of minutiae that Christians use for division and dispute these days. There was already enough history of dispute over those kinds of things that the Church knew that any statement of faith which was based on them would exclude more Christians than would include them.

Instead, the creeds focus on the heart of Christianity: a specific understanding of metaphyscial reality. This includes the preeminence of God, the deity of Jesus, the reality of the Holy Spirit, the brokenness of humanity, the need for restoration to the divine reality of God, the importance of community, and the defeat of death through the suffering, execution, and physical resurrection of Jesus, God Incarnate.It is not in its practical morality that Christianity defines itself. Lots of groups produce moral views that are nearly identical to those held by most Christians. Nor is it in its explanation of the inexplicable that Christianity defines itself. The creeds are noticeably lacking in the kind of theological specificity that modern logic craves. The holy is, by definition, “other” and undefinable.

The uniqueness of Christianity is found in its metaphysical claims, its assertions about the nature of the human condition and the reality of a holy Creator seeking a relationship with us. It is for that reality – made explicit in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus – that the martyrs gave their lives. It is that reality that Paul proclaimed on Mars Hill. It is that reality which, no matter how it is encumbered by our own agendas and weaknesses, changes lives to this day. To deny any part of those metaphysical claims is to create new set of metaphysical beliefs, essentially a new religion. If someone wishes to do so, far be it from me to stop them. Nevertheless, a new religion needs a new name. It is not “Christianity.”

To finally answer Colin’s question, I define myself as “theologically conservative” because I define the gospel – the good news of Christianity – in a way that is consistent with how Christians have historically defined it. No matter how trendy or convenient, I will not take away anything from the heart of that confession. There is a God, incarnate in Jesus, who died of necessity to restore relationship with a broken humanity, and in his resurrection is victory over death.

Nor will I add to that definition, as fundamentalists do with (ironically) their own kind of liberalism – assuming somehow that their specific, modern understanding of morality and social issues is the unique and most accurate understanding of Christianity. In so doing, they ignore both the consensus of history and the diversity of Scripture, treating both dishonestly or, at best, disingenuously.

I am theologically conservative because I believe that, to be a “Christian” means to neither add to nor subtract from the common beliefs of those who died to give the word its meaning.

Holy Conservation (or) Sabbath, part XXVI
Richard M. Wright

The carbon footprint of the Baton Rouge metropolitan area grew at almost three times the per capita rate of the footprint of the average U.S. metropolitan area between 2000 and 2005, a national survey released Wednesday says. – Baton Rouge Advocate (May 29, 2008: 1)

The soaring price of gasoline (a product of the soaring price of petroleum) has forced Americans to examine more how they consume resources and/or conserve energy. Recent news reports about how people are moving to smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles. Or choosing not to travel as much or as far.

A few weeks ago I had an interesting conversation with my excellent colleague Mikel Dasch who was talking about the problem of busyness. And how practicing Sabbath can mean avoiding busyness in ways that (among other things) conserve energy.

Instead of driving all over town unnecessarily or sitting at home watching (and using) every electronic device in the house we go out and play (for example) Frisbee golf. Setting the thermostat a couple degrees higher during the summer so the air conditioning does not need to run as much. Turning off lights that we are not using.

For a few months I have been not only turning off the family computer before bed – I shut off the power strip. (Because many electronics still draw power even when “off”. Plus the wireless/networking equipment runs off the power strip.) Even my computer equipment gets a little Sabbath.
The list of ways to use less energy is almost endless.

In her book Mudhouse Sabbath Lauren Winner also mentions eating food in season as well as food grown locally. Consider – how much energy does it take to transport food from there (where it grows, or where it grows at this time of year) to here? Stanley Hopp writes that “if every American would eat just one locally and organically produced meal per week, it would reduce our oil consumption by 1.1 billion barrels per week” (Creation Care: A Christian Environmental Quarterly, Spring 2008: 41). (That sounds rather high to me… but accurate or not surely more local food in season would use less energy/resources.) I confess that my own family still pretty much buys what we want from wherever.

My Jewish friends at Young Israel House at Cornell during the Sabbath did not turn on anything that used electricity. (Although they did not turn anything off either.) Orthodox Jewish people do not drive during Sabbath either. And how much energy would not be used if businesses voluntarily closed – dare we say Sabbathed – one day per week?

Practicing Sabbath becomes even more relevant as industrialized nations become increasingly concerned with the rising cost of energy and the need to lower our “carbon footprint”.

Holy Restraint (or) Sabbath, part XXV
Richard M. Wright

Six years you shall sow your field, and six years you shall prune your vineyard, and gather in their yield; 4 but in the seventh year there shall be a sabbath of complete rest for the land, a sabbath for the LORD. – Leviticus 25:3-4

When the Israelites were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the sabbath day. – Numbers 15:32

Most unusually NBC Nightly News led with the price of gasoline as their top story last night (May 05). This week on NPR radio I heard a report how the price of gasoline in less than one year has moved from one of the least to one of if not the most important issue for voters in deciding which candidate they will vote for in this year’s presidential election. If nothing else Americans have been forced to examine and reconsider how they consume natural resources. A recent editorial noted:

Yes, higher gas prices are tough on our personal and collective budgets. Then again, higher gas prices strengthen motivation for fuel conservation, alternative-energy development and mass transit (“Gas Tax ‘Holiday’ From Reality”, Charleston Post and Courier; May 04, 2008)

What does this have to do with Sabbath keeping?

Part of Sabbath keeping is the idea of rest even for the land. On the Sabbath do not gather natural resources to burn as fuel. For one year in seven do not work the land to produce crops. Do not gather more than you need. Give creation a break – even a Sabbath.

Tilden Edwards in Sabbath Time writes on the social (I would add environmental) implications of Sabbath:

As we taste the fruits of authentic Sabbath rest, perhaps we can appreciate the value of rest for others as well as for ourselves, and for the earth, and even for machines. We can allow the world to happen a little bit more easily, and loosen our grip on trying to force it to produce life artificially for us. (101)

I would add “force it to produce fuel for us”.

Granted biblical teaching on Sabbath keeping focuses on gathering rather than consuming. But surely if we consume less… we would need to gather less.

Next week I will discuss more fully the relationship between conservation and Sabbath keeping.

Sabbath (or) Holy Gloaming, part XXIV

Richard M. Wright

barukh attah adonay eloheynu melekh ha`olam asher qiddshanu bmitzvotav vtzivvanu ner shel Shabbat
Blessed are you O Lord our God king of the universe who makes us holy by his commandments and commands us to kindle the Sabbath lights (my translation)
- Sha`arei Tephillah. Gates of Prayer: The New Union Prayerbook (Central Conference of American Rabbis, 1975: 117)

There is something about candles – or more precisely candlelight.

The last Saturday before Christmas I was finally able to visit St Matthew the Apostle Orthodox Church here in Baton Rouge for Saturday Vespers. (I like to visit and worship/pray with other faith communities when I can. I have exchanged a few emails with the lay pastor and was looking forward to meeting him.) It is a storefront church – they rent space in a small building along with a few businesses and stores. How does one turn rented office space into holy space? Icons – lots of them – adorned the walls. Beautiful rugs on the otherwise tile floor. Chairs – somewhat surprising in an Orthodox Christian place of worship. And candles. Not one electric light was on.

I wonder if that alone or simply most of all helped to create an atmosphere of serene peacefulness. One could hardly imagine shouting or arguing or fussing or gossiping or even speaking loudly. One could only engage in warm and quiet conversation with the person behind me. Or sit and pray in silence. Or listen to the story of salvation sung by the pastor and his wife. And one could only – even at the conclusion of the prayer service – drive away still effused with the gloaming light of Sabbath peace.

There is something about candles.

I remember with my new wife visiting my major professor and his family down in Binghamton for Shabbat dinner. The table well set. Everyone dressed in nice clothes. And the mother of the home lighting the Sabbath candles. Quietly saying the prayer. And gesturing over the flames to signify the holy light of God coming closer. Barukh attah adonay eloheynu… asher tzivvanu ner shel Shabbat.

And as an undergraduate visiting my good friend Leah at Young Israel House where Orthodox Jewish students observed strictly the rule of not turning on or off any electric device. In many rooms only candlelight. For prayer. For conversation. For resting.

What would happen if – say Saturday night – we light candles to welcome Sabbath? (Tilden Edwards in Sabbath Time suggests using three to represent the Trinity.) Perhaps use nothing but candlelight until we went to bed? Our family experienced a weak form of this when – for reasons I will not explain – after Christmas we went for a week with almost no television, computer, or electronics. It was strangely refreshing. Although I understand that one would need to find room for candles in the weekly household budget – shall we try it?

One of my favorite prayers from Christian history is the Phos Hilaron.

O gracious Light,
pure brightness of the everliving Father in heaven,
O Jesus Christ, holy and blessed!
Now as we come to the setting of the sun,
and our eyes behold the vesper light,
we sing your praises, O God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
You are worthy at all times to be praised by happy voices,
O Son of God, O Give of life,
and to be glorified through all the worlds.