 |
|
I don't normally do religion in public, but I'm getting very tired of some of the people who claim to speak on behalf of all Christians. No, they don't. And *this* Christian is of the opinion that some of the things they claim to be saying in the name of Christianity are decidedly unChristian.
My basic philosophy is agnostic, in the technical sense of the term - it is not possible to prove the existence or absence of a god. My faith, if you will, veers all over the place. But the core of my moral code, the foundation of how I see good and evil, comes from Christianity. For better or worse, I am a Christian in general, and in particular I am an Anglican.
And I say that these people who are preaching hatred in the name of my Lord are not Christians, whatever they might call themselves and however they might pronounce the name of the one they do evil for.
I mention Anglicanism, because one Anglican's discussion of "deeds not words" is very pertinent and has recent wide exposure. "Therefore if any man swear by Tash and keep his oath for the oath's sake, it is by me that he had truly sworn, though he know it not, and it is I who reward him. And if any man do a cruelty in my name, then, though he says the name Aslan, it is Tash whom he serves and by Tash his deed is accepted." Quite. Doing evil in the name of Christ is still doing evil. Is it any wonder that there are certain preachers who have attacked Lewis, called him atheist or Satanist? They have seen a reflection in a mirror, and chosen to call it a view through a window. Or a cell door, that door they wish to shut on others without knowing who is on the inside, and who is on the outside.
What is evil? Well, Jesus was pretty blunt about how he wanted us to treat one another. Part of his response when asked which is the greatest commandment: "And a second is like it. You shall love your neighbour as yourself. Upon these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." Nothing can be put above the commandment to love our neighbour. And who is our neighbour? He was asked that too. The point of his answer has been softened down the years, because anyone exposed to Christianity has almost certainly heard the parable of the Good Samaritan, but doesn't have the context of the time that parable was first taught. For us, "Samaritan" has come to mean "good person". Now read that parable over, and substitute "Israeli" for "Jew" and "Palestinian" for "Samaritan". *That's* what's going on in that parable. Your neighbour isn't just the person you think it right and proper to treat as a human being. Your "neighbour" is *everyone*.
Over and over again, he told us to have mercy, to have compassion, to treat others as we would wish to be treated. And he warned us against condemning others for their sins while ignoring our own. "Let he amongst you who is without sin cast the first stone." That's not open to weaselling about "My sins are minor, but *those* people deserve to be punished." Nor is, "First pluck out the log in thine own eye." There is a great temptation to attack others for their sins, to make them scapegoats for our own sins that we do not wish to acknowledge, and he knew it. Whether he was Incarnation of God, prophet, or simply a man with a vision, he understood people and how terribly easy we find it to turn and rend the weak and the few and the oppressed. Self-righteous hatred is a most gratifying and addictive drug, and so very very sweet to indulge. And he wanted us to stop doing that, and take the harder way.
So now I will indulge myself. I say of our modern day Pharisees who ride the airwaves to preach hatred and violence towards any who are not exactly like themselves; they are not Christians. With their fear and their hate and their greed they have put themselves aside from God; and they will not find Him again until they find it within themselves to open themselves to His love for all of us. All of us, including the lepers, the poor, the whores, the tax gatherers, the outcasts of society, and even the officer of the occupying army. We are all one in the body of Christ, and it is not the place of the Pharisees to give Him orders as to who may or may not receive His love. And I really, really wish they would stop parading their sick and twisted version in public and saying that this is what Christianity is. It isn't.
And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as
you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you
did it to me.'
Post A Comment | 21 Comments | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Huh... what you read must be as aggravating as what I've been getting. Different though, want to swap annoyances? Just to freshen things up I mean.
Reply | Thread | Link
 |
|
Oh for the love of... You see, this is why I do NOT want to pony up the money to join the RWA. I don't see why I should have to join them to broaden my horizons or readership base. It's like paying dues to the KKK while being the mongrel daughter of a sand-Nigger and a Jew - exactly what I was called as a kid.
We've got the same "Join Jesus" mentality here but they back off me pretty hard and fast. But then I guess I paid my dues getting the crap beaten out of me by classmates and the Klan in the 80s during the Satanic Panic. One group thumped me around for being "Satanic" i.e. the granddaughter of a witch, the other because I stupidly and publicly declined to date the son of the Grand Dragon. But, I also didn't go away and make life comfy for any of them.
My hot button lately has been all of the people kvetching at Israel for starting a war with the people of Lebanon. I don't mind debating issues with people who are informed and think but when a whole group talks loudly out of their sphincter it irritates me to no end.
By the by, have you heard the recent flap aobut the MPAA upping ratings on G movies to PG status because of overt religious themes?
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link
As various people have been pointing out very loudly all over the romance blogosphere, an awful lot of RWA members do not agree with this garbage, including some of the inspirational writers. (One of the posters in the thread at Absolute Write was an inspirational romance writer who was just as furious about it as were the m/m writers, and was also incensed at being used as an excuse by the anti-erotic crowd.) But that doesn't stop some of the jerks from trying it on. This was a letter to the editor, and a number of letters in reply have been sent, so it will be interesting to see how many of them get printed...
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link
CS Lewis was a smart man. I'm an atheist, but if I had a choice of gods, I'd take Aslan. :-)
Charlie
Reply | Thread | Link
Yup. I have some issues with C S Lewis (his attitude to science), but he was very good at smacking down the people who try to use the letter of the law to abuse the spirit.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link
 |
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) ngaio |
| 2006-07-31 05:48 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
|
I think I love you!
Seriously, thank you for making coherent something which I can only feel instinctively.
Thanks.
Reply | Thread | Link
 |
| gauroth |
| 2006-07-31 09:57 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
|
Thank you. That is exactly how I feel, too. Especially about 'The Good Samaritan.' I'm disgusted with all the hate-filled people who bring my religion into disrepute.
I hope you're feeling better after your BBQ experience.
Reply | Thread | Link
I wrote the first draft after that conversation a couple of months back re: the latest Coulter outrage.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link
| (Anonymous) |
| 2006-08-06 14:40 (UTC) |
| I knew there was a reason I like you |
Um, not that there aren't many reasons, of course. But the whole "sane and rational" thing is a big one. Plus, the way you say a certain word, which still cracks me up. And your waffle fetish.
Tired. Think I should shut up now.
~Raven~
Reply | Thread | Link
 |
|
hi there,
Visiting by way of alg's, where I'm mostly a lurker.
Thanks for this. I was raised Catholic, and I'm pretty non-religious now, but some of my family still adhere to the faith, and they're all really big on Matthew 7.
Seems to me that too many people (not just the nominally Christian, by any means, but since it's their scripture I'm quoting, I feel it's fair to hold them to its tenets) use their religion/spirituality as a set of rules by which to judge others, completely disregarding whatever's in their own eyes.
I'm not saying that all so-called Christians are hypoChristians. Most of the avowed Christians I know (my Catholic family and my friends who attend Anglican and United churches) work very hard to follow the teachings of their faith, to examine their souls with honesty and humility, and to create a world in which people can choose freely and with joy to accept the Christian faith. Most of them have never said a harsh word to me concerning my rejection of many of the church's teachings, and I, for my part, respect their faith and their discipline. I can only imagine how saddened they are that the faith that is so central to their ontologies should be claimed by others who are eager to judge, to cast stones, and to coopt the role of the divine.
Reply | Thread | Link
This essay actually came out of a conversation in tharain's LJ a couple of months ago, where I was in a spitting fury about having seen the name of my religion once again hijacked as an excuse for behaviour that He had condemned. tharain more or less told me that it was time to stand up and be counted. So I did. I'm tired of seeing the hatemongers drag my religion's name through the mud, and I'm far from alone. I'm just as disgusted by similar behaviour within other faiths, but I don't take it quite as personally.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link
 |
| j_cheney |
| 2008-01-23 19:44 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
|
And I say that these people who are preaching hatred in the name of my Lord are not Christians, whatever they might call themselves and however they might pronounce the name of the one they do evil for.
You are SOO correct!
Reply | Thread | Link
 |
| legocoach |
| 2008-01-25 04:29 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
|
But of course, He warned us about these folks, didn't he?
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves." -Matthew 7:15
and
"Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many." -Matthew 24:11
and again
"For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect." -Matthew 24:24.
Seriously, these "Christians" are far more to be feared than any who merely don't have faith. Thanks for saying it so eloquently.
Reply | Thread | Link
Yes, I think you understand only too well how I feel about people like this ripping apart a Communion founded on the principle of being as inclusive as possible of different perspectives. Elizabeth's new church was deliberately designed to accommodate a wide range of beliefs without doing too much damage to any individual conscience. It's a human organisation, so is subject to human failings and has frequently failed to live up to that ideal; but tolerance of difference has always been at the core of what the church is.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link
|
| legocoach |
| 2008-01-25 12:02 (UTC) |
| (no subject) |
|
I've just written a Resolution for Diocesan Council about this; perhaps you've heard about the divisiveness in the Episcopal Church over on this side of the pond? Anyway, your reference to Elizabeth i a good reminder for me going into debate on this.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link
I've just returned to the UK after living in California for the last few years, so I don't know all the details but have had a closer view of it than your typical intermittently-attending British Anglican. And of course it does spill over into the national press here, because in England we are still the established church (though not in Scotland or Northern Ireland), as well as the focus for Communion-wide spats, and thus the internal upsets of the Communion have some bearing on the country at large.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link
|
|
|
|
|