Another sad disagreement with Christian fundamentalism
There is a rolling drum-beat coming from many Christian churches declaring the world’s ‘need for God’….And the ‘sales pitch’, while familiar and somewhat historic, nevertheless, reeks of more desperation on the part of the church than it does of the desperation of the world. Phrases like, ‘the time is now for the church to be that Holy, Chosen, and Called Ones of God to clearly step up to the plate’ sound like a clarion call for God and for those chosen to ‘step up to the plate’ and warriors of the kingdom.
The notion that God, the Christian God, the Hebrew or
the Muslim God, the Hindu needs to have a “special forces brigade’ of saved
individuals, as his army to save the world, is both pretentious, specious and tendentious.
The notion comes from one who, as a proverbial story about such ambassadors of
this theology goes, turns to the few adolescents in his car while driving them
to a church event, takes his hands off the steering wheel and proclaims that God
is now driving the car. It is also redolent of the Sunday School teacher who,
while orienting new volunteers to the program, indicates, following the direction
of the teacher’s manual from David Cook’s curriculum, “these are the words to
say to the five-year-old’s who are saved, and these, different words, are those
reserved for the five-year-old’s who are not saved.”
Rubbish, and the examples are not summoned up from an
over-exuberant imagination. They are documented from a small stint as a clergy
in small parishes where I followed this kind of theology. And where, to the
surprise of none of those parishioners at that time, I was formally confronted
by one of their ‘leading members’ and told to pack my bags, and leave the
church and the town. I had been delivering a small number of homilies, based on
a more liberal and less literal interpretation of both scripture and tradition,
and was already deemed a ‘heretic’. When an announcement was handed to me
during the offertory hymn in mid-service, without previous warning or viewing, and
told to announce the screening of a video on Tuesday evening that week, (again
to demonstrate how heretical were the homilies I had been writing and delivering)
of course, I put the announcement in a pocket, without uttering a word of its
content. Subsequently, I wrote to the ‘leading member’ a letter outlining his
resignation as ‘warden’ from that congregation, and delivered it to his business
address.
Sales pitches, in the church known as evangelism, that
not merely suggest a divide between those who are Christians from those who are
not saved, is a scourge not only on the faith itself, but on the whole
community. It designates a single passage, under the direction of those already
saved, to a consummated relationship with God through Jesus Christ. It also
postulates a reading and interpretation of scripture that fails to acknowledge
the poetic, the mythic, the historic and the legal as very different forms of
thought and writing, irrespective of the extensive historic nature of scripture,
and the multiple human minds, hearts, bodies and spirits that have had their
part in its delivery.
The ‘road to Damascus’ bright light conversion written
about by Paul, and then held up as the eye of a needle through which God
intends and expects those who are seeking a relationship seems about as
kindergarten-like and reductionistic a proposition that does not and cannot withstand
scrutiny as a proposition of a faith worthy of the name. And yet, steeped in
such interpretation, are many in both the pulpits and also in the theological
schools as instructors who have a considerable following.
This kind of theology, however, while leaning toward
the kind of dichotomous, binary, Manichean view of salvation that has not and
will not penetrate the consciousness of some of us. And any sustained search
for God, (itself a phrase fraught with meaning, complexity, nuance, dynamism,
poetry, music, art, and even a prospect of spiritual health) has to be
considered one of the more ephemeral, mysterious, mystical and both delicate
and substantive journeys of the whole person imaginable. As the Pope uttered on
a plane when asked about the “faith” of the gay and lesbian community, “Who am I
to judge?”….a statement repeated and echoed around the globe for its surprise and
its humility and its historic breakthrough the seemingly steel curtain of
exclusion that has precluded such a papal utterance for centuries.
A child-like dependence, again based on a phrase from
scripture, “Unless you change and become like little children, you will never
enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3), that has been reduced to a single-minded
innocence and submission to something like the will of God, through the saving
grace of Jesus Christ, who died for ‘your sins on Calvary. There are, as we are
all aware, multiple paths to changing and becoming like children. For some of
us, that notion starts with a kind of awe and mystery and the appeal of both a
story and a potential relationship that knows no boundaries and limits to its expectations.
It cannot and must not be reduced to a simplistic, reductionistic total and absolute
submission and surrender of one’s mind, body and spirit to this deity, as
defined by some humans. And the Manichean nature of such a black and white faith
posture, leaves those embracing it, and the faith itself vulnerable to the
exclusive and superior component of abuse of its self-appointed, anointed and deployed
power, in the name of God.
Manicheanism, is a faith that breaks everything down
into good or evil. For Augustine, one of the primary pillars of Christian
theology, according to Roland J. Teske
S.J. writing in the Catholic Historical Review, January 2011, pp 112-113,
reviewing David BeDuhn’s ‘Augustine’s Manichean Dilemma,’ writes: (BeDuhn’s) “study,
has for the first time, made Augustine’s conversion to the Manichean religion
and his remaining in it so long intelligible for me. He argues that
Manicheanism offered a religion to the young Augustine that promised to satisfy
his deepest spiritual and intellectual aspirations--aspirations that remained
much the same for Augustine the apostate from Manicheanism and new convert to
Catholic Christianity.”
It (Manicheanism) is such an easily grasped
perspective and the binary, dual, either-or concept has had considerable
prominence throughout western history. Comparisons of related concepts, through
research that postulates a null hypothesis to be disproven, for example, is one
application. News and public affairs frames are historically and traditionally
deemed to be a ‘position’ by one source countered by an opposing view from another
source. In the court rooms, the plaintiff offers a version of the facts, while
the defendant offers a different version of those same facts. Literature is
seeded with multiple examples of so-called “Good” characters in conflict with
so-called “bad characters” with more minor characters often serving as the
porridge that brings them to the same table (metaphorically).
And yet, at the root of most of these “systems” of
thought, is a primary concept: the focus on the literal, the nominal, and the
tension that exists, (or we assume, or postulate, or profess, or believe or actual
attempt to demonstrate) between one aspect of each nominal* notion and another.
In such a culture, ostensibly deemed by its political,
economic and many of its theological and spiritual leaders to be “Christian” in
some form and to some varying degree, much public discourse, and too much
so-called theological and spiritual discourse, including the above quotes, are
little more than heated (yet still dark and unimaginative, and uninspiring)
debates about the ‘correctness’ of one position or view and the error of
another.
“Is Hitler in heaven?” was hotly debated in first year
in seminary at Huron College in 1988.
Is the apocalypse near? Is another such question that has
fueled debates for centuries and even driven religions apart.
Does God have a class of ‘chosen’ people? Is another of
those questions to which an either-or approach too often is applied, by people
sincere in their faith.
What is the difference between faith and perception? And
what role does perception and world view have in the development of a faith?
Who/what/where is God? Is another of those proverbial
questions that tends to divide believers from non-believers.
Does DNA, or the Big Bang, or the mystery of the
universe confirm or deny, or complicate the question of the existence of God?
Is war an instrument of God, or does God prefer peace?,,,,similar
to the age-old, does God support capital punishment for criminal behaviour?
Is solitary confinement God’s chosen path to rehabilitation
for criminals?...
The questions are endless,….and yet the answers are
too often reduced to one side or another….as in the recent ‘abortion debate’.
The definition of a fetus, (at conception, or later)
has consumed both tank-fulls of ink, and eons of air time among those
contending on both sides….and yet, if we are open to a more tolerant, compassionate,
complex and less simplistic notion of how we might regard this issue, along
with many other issues, we might be able to take a view as a culture that,
while preferring a general overview and stance, could still see the ethical
value of individual situations in a manner that might try to emulate a less
constricted and less rigid and less dogmatic application of “our personal” view
of God’s will.
While I disagree with attempting to sell Christianity,
and believe fully that such prosletyzing has resulted in both theological thought
and praxis that has been detrimental both to the church and to the relationship
between humans and God. And, lying at the heart of the western culture’s religion
is the notion of evil, and the acts that comprise that empire, and especially
the people who are accused, convicted and punished for their crimes.
Only recently have we begun to hear tentative rumblings
about the correlation between young lives that have been seriously abused and the
projected actions of many of those abused into their adult lives…and that kind
of research and social policy has to be taken into account, as does the most
recent discoveries about the multiple universes out there, by those who would
take up the mantle of thinking about and reflecting upon and praying about the
Christian faith. And such a project will need both the best efforts of clergy and
laity, given the narrowness of mind and heart and spirit of too many standing
in the pulpit.
*nominalism, of or pertaining to names, is the
ontological theory that reality is only made up of particular items, denying
the existence of general entities like properties, species, universals sets, or
other categories.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home