The linked video (below) and transcribed words exemplify the wacky taffy foisted on religious congregations as so-called Christian theology by so-called pastors parading as Christian theologians. According to findachurch.ca, Holy Cross Lutheran Church in Newmarket, Ontario, Canada is an “ELCIC” Church (Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada). The ELCIC is also in “Full Communion with the Anglican Church of Canada.” Their pastor is Dawn Hutchings, who you will see in this video clip posted on “Woke Preacher Clips.” The heading notes that Hutchings teaches, “The Great Commission Is Fake and Racist,” and “asserts (without textual evidence) that Matthew 28:18-20, ‘The Great Commission,’ is a fabrication that has been used to justify racist colonization for far too long.”
Hutchings discusses that the “prescribed reading is known by the church as the ‘great’ (scare quotes) commission” which she doubts she will ever read again or claim it as the gospel!
“Over the course of many years of study, I have come to believe that the so-called ‘great’ commission is anything but the gospel. Indeed, I have come to believe that this particular ending to the gospel according to Matthew may be the source of the systemic racism which permeates not just the church, but also all of the Western cultures and institutions which arose out of what history has dubbed the Holy Roman Empire.”
Hutchings sets the stage for the basis of her claims – what she has come to believe “over the course of many years of study.” Never mind what anyone else has come to believe “over the course of many years of study.” She sets herself up as the authority. She will circle back around to this method as she goes on. After saying she would not read it or claim it as the gospel, she reads it to lambast it.
“Hear the words prescribed for this Trinity Sunday.”[i]
The Eleven made their way to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had summoned them. At the sight of the risen Christ they fell down in homage, though some doubted what they were seeing. Jesus came forward and addressed them in these words:
“All authority has been given me both in heaven and on earth; go therefore, and make disciples of all [the] nations. Baptize them in the name of Abba God, and of the Only Begotten, and of the Holy Spirit. Teach them to carry out everything I have commanded you. And know that I am with you always, even unto [until] the end of the world!”
This reading is taken from Matthew 28:16-20 in The Inclusive New Testament.[ii]
“Here ends the reading, not according to the anonymous gospel storyteller which we call Matthew[iii]. No! (wags finger) You can’t get out of first year New Testament classes and not learn that the vast majority of New Testament scholars agree that this particular ending of this anonymous gospel was added much later.”
Again, Hutchings appeals to authority. This time not her own, but to “the vast majority of New Testament scholars” and “the preponderance of evidence unearthed by New Testament scholars.” However, it is a false appeal based on skewed numbers – or maybe just made up numbers. I have been unable to find that any “vast majority” of “New Testament scholars” have reliable evidence that the ending of Matthew is a late edition. What is readily available primarily is anti-Trinitarians claiming that not the entire ending, but that the “Trinitarian formula” or “tripartite phrase” of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost has been inserted into Jesus’s “commission.” There are no available manuscripts of the gospel of Matthew before the 3rd century – only fragments. However, all manuscripts that contain the end of Matthew contain what Hutchings refers to as absent, the Great Commission, and even the tripartite phrase or designation.
“The so-called ‘great’ commission was added to the gospel by the Christian community sometime around the year 325, to bring this gospel into line with the brand spanking new creed which the church had just written, which we know as the Nicene Creed.”
In addition to manuscript evidence, references to this ending of Matthew is found in numerous early Christian writings, including The Epistle of Ignatius (died ca. AD 110) to the Philadelphians, Chapter 9, Longer Recension, Tertullian (ca. AD 155 – ca. Ad 220), Against Praxeas, Chapter 26, and Hippolytus (ca. AD 170 – ca. AD 235), Against the Heresy of One Noetus, paragraph 14. Tatian the Syrian included it in The Diatessaron (a compilation or harmony of the four Gospels, circa AD 170). The compilers of The Didache (circa AD 70) knew the traditional ending of Matthew. All of these occur and prove its provenance before the time Hutchings says the Christian community added the great commission around AD 325.
“…you still must begin to understand that these words, whether Jesus said them or not, these words became the justification for the doctrine of discovery.”
This statement highlights the liberal grounding of Hutchings. She does not really care “whether Jesus said them or not.” Let that sink in. How these words may have been wrongly interpreted and used holds much more importance to her than their being the words of Jesus, and meaning what he meant. A little exercise in theological gerrymandering may make people feel better by the “possibility that Jesus never actually issued the great commission.” Ultimately, it does not matter to her whether or not he did. Critical Race Theory trumps Jesus.
However, those of us who hold verbal plenary inspiration, the inerrancy of scripture, and its providential preservation do not interpret – much less dismiss – the words of Jesus based on how someone may or may not have abused them. They are the words of our Lord and Saviour. This possess all authority, his authority. They must be accepted and obeyed on that basis.
Hutchings signals her wokeness, personal virtue, and white loathing – no doubt hoping for absolution and acceptance, channeling George Floyd and the weight of her “knee of privilege pressing down upon their necks.” There is no absolution, no forgiveness. She will always and forever be white, a white “privileged” descendant of white “privileged” ancestors – at least judging from the perspective of Critical Race Theory.
There is so much that could be said, but let us hasten on to the conclusion. “On this Trinity Sunday when the church celebrates its creeds,” Hutchings rejects “ the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, or—God-forbid—the Athanasian Creed” to look for a vague and anonymous “very first creed” of the Jesus followers who held “no view” of him as the son of God, but a “high view” of things that surprisingly support the teachings of modern woke culture.[iv]
“This nascent Jesus movement understood well the tendency of humans to resort to tribalism. In the teachings of Jesus, they came to understand that race, class, and gender are typically used to divide the human race into us and them, to the advantage of us. This evolving Jesus movement declared in their creed there is no us nor them, we are all children of God. The Jesus movement was about solidarity, not cultural obliteration. New Testament scholar Stephen Patterson has studied the early manuscripts in an attempt to uncover the words which the apostle Paul quoted and then adopted. His unearthed version of that first Christian creed reads like this, ‘You are all children of God, there is no Greek or Jew, there is no slave or free, there is no male and female, for all are one.’”
In her conclusion, Hutchings makes another appeal to authority, this time “New Testament scholar Stephen Patterson has studied the early manuscripts in an attempt to uncover the words which the apostle Paul quoted.” (Seemingly no one else with a different view has ever studied anything.) Stephen J. Patterson is a professor of Religious Studies at Willamette University in Salem, Oregon, and the author of The Forgotten Creed: Christianity’s Original Struggle Against Bigotry, Slavery, and Sexism. Prior to this he served at the Eden Theological Seminary in St. Louis, affiliated with the ultra-liberal United Church of Christ. Patterson probably is not a “New Testament scholar” in the way that terminology would first strike my readers. It does not appear that he is immersed in the study of the manuscripts of our New Testament, but rather is a student and proponent of writings of that period which do not appear in the New Testament.
Following her authority, Hutchings takes on Patterson’s “us” and “them” motif. She swallows hook, line, and sinker a creed that is not found in the inspired New Testament, making it the apex of her talk, guiding her followers not down a biblical path, but a primrose one of her own making. Such preachers should admit they do not believe the Bible and find an honest job. If they want to sell this stuff they should sell it under their own banner, and not that of a church heritage that claims to be following Jesus Christ.
For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. (Acts 20:29-20)
Take heed, watch, and remember.
Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, to the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen. (Jude 24-25)
[ii] The Inclusive New Testament, Priests for Equality, Lanham, MD, 1996, p. 55. Under the heading “To use terminology that acknowledges the many forms in which God appears in our lives,” they explain, “We wanted to retain the idea of intimacy of relationship while de-emphasizing the idea of fatherhood, so we substitute the term Abba God—hearkening back to Jesus’ own appeal to God as Abba in the garden of Gethsemane. Our terms for Jesus also stress relationship rather than hierarchy. We use Only Begotten, Firstborn, and God’s Own in place of ‘Son’ to express Jesus’ relationship to the Godhead.” p. xviii.
[iii] Notice also that Dawn Hutchings rejects the traditional authorship by an apostle and eyewitness, calling the writer rather ”the anonymous gospel storyteller which we call Matthew.”
[iv] Hutchings does not discuss whether Jesus was the Son of God in this clip, but her source, Stephen J. Patterson does so in his book. One might also misunderstand that she holds some high view of Paul and his writings. However, her source clearly debunks Paul buying in to the teachings of the so-called early Jesus followers, and in addition claims someone else forged the writings of Paul, as we know them. “The Early Christians Were Focused on Solidarity Across Race, Class and Gender. Then Things Changed” in Time magazine demonstrates that this “authority” also appeals to authority, making her appeal a double meal deal without proof.
No comments:
Post a Comment