|
|
|
|
Even in the Old Testament the question was repeatedly asked why the people of Israel turned away from Yahweh, although he had done such wonderful things for his people. One of the texts dealing with this question is Judges 2.6-19. This text is preceded by an original account of the conquest of the Land and its division among the various tribes (cf Jos 21). This text can be found at the beginning of the Book of Judges. It offers a general interpretation of the accounts that follow in later chapters of how Yahweh repeatedly saved his people from the greatest need through the Judges. What do we learn from the text? - The generation that Yahweh had led out of Egypt had
died (Jg 2.6-10) Why did they turn away from God? We find the reason why they turn from him in v.10:"And when that whole generation (Joshua's) had been gathered to its ancestors, another generation followed it which knew neither Yahweh nor the deeds which he had done for the sake of Israel". The statement that they no longer knew Yahweh does not mean that the new generation that had grown up in the Land had not been told about the wonderful events of their exodus from Egypt, the journey through the wilderness or the conquest of the Land, because that would have meant that the older generation had not told them about it. The word "know" in the Old Testament implies not just knowledge, but also, and far more, an actual experience in their own lives. They had not experience that God was at work in their own lives In other words, the generation that had grown up in the Land knew what God had done for them from the accounts of their parents, but they had not experienced until then that he was at work in their own lives. They had not discovered him for themselves. The new generation was by no means irreligious, because in the ancient Orient that would have been inconceivable. However, they no longer looked for "religious" answers from Yahweh, but from the other gods they encountered in the world around them. At some stage, however, that generation was threatened in new ways, which were not dissimilar form those of their forefathers: at their time it was slavery and oppression by the Egyptians, now they were threatened and oppressed by other peoples. Interestingly enough the Hebrew text in v.18 about their complaints against the oppressor uses the same word as in the Exodus narrative (cf.EX 2.24; 6.5). This word does not express a complaint in which the people call upon Yahweh, but simply their groans directed to an actual person, not to God. In their need that generation then recalls, in the person of a Judge, that the God they had neglected until then had been their saviour. From the moment that the generation discovers and experiences Yahweh in their lives, they are faithful to him. However, when the Judge, who had reminded them of Yahweh through his presence and admonition, dies, the story starts again. Along with the Judge the experiences of God's intervention in their lives also die, and a new generation grows up which again has heard of God's deeds only from what they have been told, but which had not experienced it in practice in their lives. A new cycle begins. From the moment that the generation discovers and experiences Yaweh in their lives, they are faithful to him In my opinion this offers us a hermeneutic key that will enable us to interpret our present situation, which is very similar to that described in Judges 2. - The circle of people who have experienced God's action in their lives, and not just from historical accounts, increasingly shrinks. However, the circle of people who have not had this experience or who have not discovered God's action in their own lives constantly grows. - This second circle seeks, or creates their own gods in various ways. Some separate material or conceptual values from their organic context, absolutise them and see them as the most important part of their lives. Others collect aspects from the various offers available and create something that suits them. Neither group is irreligious. The activity generated by football, for example, can well be compared with a cult. For some people their favourite club is the central values in their lives, and their Saturday visits to their stadium has to some extent replaced their church services. The answer in principle offered by Judges 2 - as to why the younger generation turns from Yahweh - also applies to our situation. Ever fewer people experience in practice that God is at work in their lives. The God of life degenerates to become a God of the historical past. What is related happened long ago and does not affect me. The God of life degenerates to become an idea. Very few question whether God exists, however he has nothing to do with their lives. The God of life becomes an impersonal generalisation - God has redeemed the world. However that this means that God has redeemed me, me very personally, the individual me, me with my history, has ceased to be a reality in the lives of most people. We have to help people to recognise God's activity in their lives When I say that ever fewer people experience in practice that God is at work in their lives, it does not mean that God is not at work, but that people do not recognise how he works, they are unable to discover, or have not learnt, how to interpret his activity. So if we ask for an answer to the present-day situation of faith, which does not remain on the surface of structural reforms, the answer seems to be that we have to help people to recognise God's activity in their lives, to discover what God is doing with them very personally. Yet how can people discover that God is present in their lives? In 1 Samuel 3. 1-10 we are told about the calling of Samuel. What happens in this account? God calls Samuel but Samuel thinks Eli is calling him. How could he arrive at such a conclusion? The text gives us the answer : "As yet, Samuel had no knowledge of Yahweh and the word of Yahweh had not yet been revealed to him." Once again, when it is said that Samuel had no knowledge of God, it does not mean that Samuel did not know that God exists or who this God is. After all he is serving in the Temple, so he has an active role in the acts of worshipping this God. Just as in Judges 2.10 this text is telling us that Samuel had until then not experienced that God was at work in his life. What had to happen before Samuel could open himself to this God? He needed Eli, the old priest, who had experienced God's action often enough. It was Eli who interpreted God's call to him and told him what to do. If Samuel was to recognise his calling, he needed someone who could help him to interpret his experience. This was how Samuel discovered God's activity in his life, and not just in an abstract way through the history of his people. People learn to discover God in their lives when others, who have already experienced this personally, help them to interpret their experiences in relation to God. It is as though we need people like Eli. So our answer to the present situation of faith is this: We should become like Eli and help people to discover God at work in their lives. Helping people understand Divine Providence What does it mean in practice to discover that God is at work in our lives? Faith in Divine Providence practised in life is nothing else than searching for what God wants to say to us through actual events. But it is one thing to practice faith in Divine providence personally, but quite another to talk to other people about it. We find it difficult to talk to one another about our faith. Talking about our personal experiences of faith is taboo for many people. It's too intimate to do beyond a select few. Underlying this attitude is often fear. The two main reasons for this fear I believe are one that we feel that what is happening within us is holy, and because it is sacred to us, it has to be protected from being made fun of by others. When this happens, we are deeply hurt. Besides this, if we reveal what is going on deep within us, we become vulnerable. We are not prepared to expose ourselves in this way. As well as this, experiences of faith are not objective. They concern the ways that God has touched us personally. Others might see things differently. Our personal experiences of faith do not pretend to be generally valid. It is precisely in the realm of faith that people at present avoid saying or doing anything that could give otehrs cause to think that they could be a norm for them. The difficulty in talking to others about our personal experiences of faith is very widespread. Even priests have problems in this regard as soon as people are involved who are outside their closest friends. "One very quickly moves onto a more objective level of reflection, a generalised analysis of problems that has very little do with our personal lives. Have the courage to tell one another about the difficult faith experiences too The Bishop of Rottenburg, Gebhard Fuerst, point out in his Lenten Pastoral Letter in 2002 that in this regard a great need is being felt, and he invited parishes to enter into dialogue about their experiences of faith. "Have the courage to tell one another about the difficult as well as the encouraging aspects of your experiences with the faith, develop the trust that will enable you to talk about the history of your faith. If not in our parishes, where else should we be able to find places where such trust is possible?" Edited from an article by Fr Bernd Biberger
which appeared in Regnum, the quarterly publication of the Schoenstatt
Movement (Feb 2003).
|
|
||
 |
In
Western Europe the Church is very evidently in decline with a falling
and ageing Church attendance and few vocations to the priesthood
and religious life. Many the responses to this have been simply
attempts at structural reform - the amalgamation of parishes, the
scrapping of priestly celibacy or calling for female ordination
and the promotion of lay leadership of parishes. Fr Bernd Biberger,
a Scripture scholar and member of the Schoenstatt Movement in Germany
sees the problem as far more fundamental, and sees parallels and
solutions in his study of the Old Testament.