From a friend of mine (thanks, Carol). One of those thoughts that just pop into her mind, formed in poetry and rich with content.
It seems to me that we’re in a time of:
Sketching all of our plans in pencil
Engraving our commitments in stone
Well, a new age is dawning – and its not the age of Aquarius!
If church can be virtual, how is communion to be conceived? Can this be done online, or do we need to be present together? Who are the officiants? And many more questions.
Here is a reply to one such thread that I posted today:
In the 1970’s, at Canadian Bible College, the question was whether we could hold communion off campus without a faculty member present. A question of the officiant (sacramental view).
Soon the question was whether there was real presence in the elements – and not just symbols. A desire to go deeper than just a picture but not as far as transubstantiation. A question of the efficacy of communion.
Then we moved to the matter of community – not just a selfish act but one of communion in community. A question of ecclesiology and how we combat selfishness.
Now we are into the whole question of virtuality. There is connectedness (community), but not presence (physical) of the participants. I have been affected by the Salvation Army over the years – they did not have baptism or communion for some time (although in the past decades they have questioned that). There would be no problem with virtuality in this case.
So, just studying historical precedents, you can pick one side or the other.
Sometimes I feel like I’m a bit slow.
One of those slow moments hit me yesterday.
How do you plant churches in a lockdown? Certainly not the traditional way of person-to-person interaction. Perhaps not even through interaction over the internet?
Which then begs the question – what is a church? Certainly not the building. Perhaps not even online membership?
Which then begs the question – what does God want from us? A big “US” in the question. What is corporality in a lockdown?
And there is the question of the day.
A question asked recently – Is the Holy Spirit of God male?
The question in part arises from a discussion of gender pronouns, the perception of the “gender role” of spiritual gifts and even the question of the personhood of the Holy Spirit.
In my days in theological institutions there were some basic principles laid out. The Holy Spirit can be grieved – that denotes an emotional/personal being. The Holy Spirit is fully discovered as Jesus leaves and the Comforter comes. The Holy Spirit appears in both Old Testament and New Testament.
The Greek words used for the Holy Spirit can be seen as gender neutral (pneuma) or masculine (paracletos). Of course, I have spent some time trying to write a grammar, and to interpret how grammarians see various words. The assignment of gender in a word may also be disregarded in following eons – as far as “gender” goes – while still maintaining the endings related to the gender of the word.
If you understand what I have just said, let me add this. A word study can help but isn’t always enough to prove a hypothesis.
Often context is as important. Read, read, read! Wrap the word with other words until there is a sense of what the present looks like (the play on tenses is fully intentional).
So, what have I said? Just a lot of words?
Simply put, I’m open to saying the Holy Spirit is feminine (and there is lots of historical references). But, I would rather say the Holy Spirit is gender neutral – in fact the term “gender” is not really applicable to a Spirit.