September 7, 2003
James 2:1-10, 11-13, 14-17; Mark 7:24-37
The author of James clearly believes in both the personal and social Gospel. That is to say that he/she is clear that the "Good News" is for the individual AND the world. He/she views "good works", including impartiality, to be a very natural result of sound faith. Furthermore, this letter contends that healthy "faith" is clearly becomes evident through the expression of one's life, i.e., "works". There seems to be no uneasiness about which comes first, faith or works. Good works may be possible without faith, but in this interpretation of the Gospel, healthy faith always produces good works.
This philosophy of what healthy religion is, and is about, fits hand in glove with process theology. Everything is related in some manner. Progress occurs over a lengthy period of time through a process of learning and experience rather than through, for example, an instantaneous miraculous answer to prayer. Civilized human experience has clearly shown that progress comes through learning and through an application of the positive knowledge that is learned. The logical result of this understanding is growth in both faith and the quality of life's expression (works).
Whereas the Epistle of James emphasizes works on the moral level of behavior and humanitarian compassion, the Gospel of Mark gives greater attention to proving that Jesus was "The only Son of God". This emphasis was at least in part a response to competitive religions in that part of the world at that point in history. The founder and leader of the Christian faith was more powerful than the leaders of other religions! It may well be that there was an assumption that moral good works was a "must", by the author of this Gospel but the primary emphasis of this treatise is not to change human behavior. The major concern was to win people to the person and leadership of Jesus. Physical healing was a major need in that society and medical science had not yet progressed to a point where it was dependable in meeting physical and mental health needs of the day. If persons could be healed their attention would surely be directed to the source of healing.
The importance of understanding life and faith, through the eyes o ( evident for us today. The work of God is more evident in our society through healing than in at the time and place of Jesus' ministry. There is a need, however, for us to "see" the work of God in places and ways that we may not always look. Contemporary medical science clearly shows the wonderful capacity for healing which God has made part of the human being. Over a long period of time and through a process of slow learning we know better how God works through healing the human mind and body. It is not through an instantaneous response to prayer. If this were true the chapels would always be full of persons experiencing healing. Instead, the places that are full of persons seeking healing are those places which are related to the nurturing of good health. In these places there may be an emphasis on the "whole" being, including the need for religion faith, but there is not likely to be an emphasis on faith alone as a technique for healing either the mind or body. We are coming to understand that we are "whole" persons with each aspect of our personhood in need of healthy nurture.
Process thought does not "see" the work of God any less in the concerns of human life in our world than was true during the development of the New Testament scripture. It simply sees the work of God in a different way as a result of what has been learned through the compounding of knowledge and experience. Because of this fact, some things that are viewed as "holy" might well be viewed as something else, and much that is viewed as secular ought to be viewed as "holy".