Pope Benedict and "Hard Scriptures"

 It seems to me that too many people assume a fundamentalist view of Scripture, that ignores genre, ignores allegorical readings, ignores the entire tradition of interpretation, and instead proposes that every bit of the Bible is intended as a History Text book, and must be accepted or rejected as such.  There are Christians who try to maintain this position, though it is untenable; and there are non-believers (many of them former Christians) who use this as their reason for rejecting the faith. 

This video examines some of Pope Benedict's writings and his engagement with difficult and dark passages in Scripture.  Of course, he's not the only one to do this, or offer this approach.  It is well-attested in the universal tradition.  Just read, for example, C.S. Lewis' Reflections on the Psalms for some very similar thoughts from another brilliant Christian thinker who was well-grounded in the tradition (Lewis was, of course, an Anglican - nuanced approaches to Scripture are not only found among Roman Catholics).

If you struggle with the Bible, or what it means to accept it as "the Word of the Lord" - this video could be of great help to you.

Is Diversity our Strength?

I remember reading a while back about a Canadian Province that changed its traditional motto (Latin, if memory serves) to the multi-cultural mantra "Diversity is our Strength."  
This is, I would posit, true in some senses or scenarios, but is not always true.  Nevertheless it is believed without question - sometimes in spite of the evidence - as an article of faith in the "secular/progressive religion" that is so prominent in our culture (and even more so in Canada, from what I can gather).

I've just lived through a denominational split that was caused by... well... diversity.  We had a diversity, even a divergence, of beliefs and priorities: We did not all believe the same things about God, Scripture, or Sin; We were not "on the same page"; we could not walk together because we did not intend to walk in the same direction.  If we had had a little less "diversity" and a little more "sameness" or commonality, maybe the United Methodist Church would not have split.  

Though "diversity is our strength" is the kind of thing you'd hear at meetings and church conferences; it is precisely what killed our ability to work together cohesively.

Of course, there is another kind of diversity that is a strength, as the Scripture affirms: different members of the body bring different spiritual gifts, skills, experiences, to the work of the Church, and the whole is stronger because of it.  There is a diversity of gifts and even backgrounds, but a common Lord, a common mission, a common faith that shapes a common worldview: One Body, One Spirit, One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism...  That God-given diversity is held together by a transcendent Source of unity.  That is the Biblical vision.  There is a Commonality that makes the diversity "work."

But what about in secular society?  Is Diversity our strength?  
The sociological evidence seems to indicate that the answer is "No."  I remember reading about this from Putnam's research years ago (that gets mentioned in this video) and I was hesitant to even share those articles online, because I thought I might get pushback for even suggesting that - just maybe - this "article of faith" in our secular culture might not be correct after all (and I did get some pushback when I shared the findings on social media).

Here is a video from a British conservative talking about this in light of the highly polarized situation.  I think the video does a good job raising the questions: how much "sameness" or "commonality" do you need for diversity to work?  I think the distinction he makes between a multi-racial society that shares a common culture and a multi-cultural society is an important one to ponder.