One of the scribes came near and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, he asked him, “Which commandment is the first of all?” Jesus answered, “The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these. (Mark 12:28-31)
For Christians, according to our Patron, the second greatest Commandment is to "love your neighbor as yourself." Suffice it to say that, upon observing the behavior of the vast, diverse group who self-identify as Christians, this seemingly simple directive appears to be a daunting challenge indeed. Further, it would seem that those who profess to follow Jesus Christ should try to emulate His example. Here, too, this ostensibly simple calling proves far more challenging in practice. As Gandhi noted, “I like your Christ; I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”
Why are we Christians so unlike our Christ?
Well, the first reason is an obvious one, that we are not, as we were taught to believe, fully divine or the Son of God as he was, so we aren't capable of emulating him fully. Perhaps. As Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong has noted, what made Christ so transcendent was his full humanity, that he gave himself away at every turn, seizing every opportunity to be loving and life-enhancing. And as second century Bishop of Lyons St. Iraneus observed, the glory of God is man (i.e., human beings) fully alive. Jesus was certainly fully alive and a vessel for the Holy Spirit to be made manifest in our world during his earthly life. Accordingly, His example is an eternal one, both in the sense that it endures throughout the ages and in the sense that it serves for all time as a cardinal example of a life well-lived.
Yet, again following Bishop Spong, can't we (more consistently) choose to live fully, love wastefully (as in giving ourselves away lovingly and unconditionally as Jesus did) and be all that we can be? I believe so ... which is why so much of so-called Christian behavior troubles me, both historically speaking and contemporarily.
The historical examples are legion, so at the risk of giving them short shrift, I will cite a single illustrative example and move on. The Inquisition of the Middle Ages now appears to us to have been an extended and immoral example of religiocentrism. Some Christians in positions of power took it upon themselves to determine what were the acceptable practices of the faith and then enforced these views repressively and inhumanely for hundreds of years. Their sense of religious exceptionalism even led them to consider themselves the sole arbiters of the path to God, which led them to persecute not only those Christians whom they considered to be heretical but practitioners of other "false" faiths as well. Countless lives were sacrificed by the self-selected Elect in the name of (the Christian) God.
(In its modern incarnation, such inhumanity in the name of God is the cause of extremism and terrorism of all types, from "Christian" paramilitary groups and abortion clinic bombers to Islamist jihadists, etc.)
Today, especially in the United States, we find ourselves with a widening gap of opinion (or, if you will, fraying consensus) with respect to the practice of our faith. On the one side are the Christian fundamentalists and literalists who insist on the inerrancy of Scripture, profess to espouse "conservative" or "family values" and claim any number of religiocentric views on behalf of their perception of the Christian God.
On the other hand are the Christian liberals and progressives who are only now beginning to respond vigorously to the re-definition of American Christianity successfully pursued by the Religious Right in the past half-century. This group is more inclusive and accepting by nature, so its views are more varied as is its approach both to its faith and to the dialogue within and outside of the Christian community. This diffusion has not served it well historically as the designation of "Christian" is most likely to be associated with fundamentalism and not liberalism today. As one friend put it a few years ago, based on the behavior of some of the more proactive fundamentalists of today, she doesn't like to identify herself as a Christian because it's not typically considered to be a positive reference in the collective consciousness.
Why would anyone be embarrassed to be a Christian today?
Well, because of the frequent and visible behavior patterns of many other self-identified (and mostly self-described conservative) Christians, which, to many, appear to be the very antithesis of the Patron's example. One viewing of the documentary Jesus Camp will acquaint the reader with a vivid example thereof. And it's hard to know where to start when considering the twisted mixing of pseudo-Christian moralism and our modern political process. That we even have a concept that has enjoyed great notoriety in recent years called the War on Women, led ostensibly by self-described conservative (Republican) Christians (who are also apparently all male), is another such example. That they would presume to legislate the behavior of their sisters in Christ without the latter's engagement is another frightening example of how twisted the use of our faith has become.
Yet, the example on which I would like to focus most is that of our treatment of the poor, the less fortunate, the other, the different among us. Suffice it to say that one of our major political parties has made great hay by vilifying these groups, inciting a distrust cloaked in pseudo-Christian hypocrisy that is almost hard to describe in its depth and breadth. How anyone could see cutting social welfare benefits for the least fortunate or giving tax breaks to the billionaire owners of corporations whose employees are paid so little that they rely on those very same benefits as being reflective of - much less being motivated by - Christian faith is beyond my and many others' comprehension. The poor are seemingly demonized at every turn now, yet weren't they Jesus' special focus during his lifetime?
Many of us understand our Christian calling as to be joyfully charitable - meaning inclusive, loving and giving - to those who are less fortunate and/or somehow different or (incorrectly/inhumanely but invariably considered) 'lesser'. As Jesus was recorded as saying in the Gospel of Matthew:
"Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me." (25:40)
Based on this and numerous other similar statements attributed to Him, it would appear that Jesus expected something much different from us than we now often see.
And when this calling is interpreted in our political realm, it seems to become all but perverted completely. In fact, many of the policies advocated by so-called religious or social conservative leaders and politicians seem to be the very antithesis of the Patron's charge to us. That the Christian faith is associated with the support of the status quo and protecting the privileges of the few (i.e., the wealthy and powerful who control and benefit disproportionately from it) is only recently being contested vigorously in our societal dialogue, as abhorrent and antithetical as it may be to some. Wasn't Jesus executed precisely because He contested the corrupt and oppressive established order of his day? What would He do in today's world? Somehow I can't see Him hangin' with the Plutocrats....
So how do we become better Christians?
The answer may lie in not becoming better Christians, actually, but by striving to be what Rev. Dr. Obery Hendricks calls "Followers of Jesus," people of faith who are committed to emulating Jesus' example in the profession and practice of their faith. Followers of Jesus (or, as they were known in the first century, Followers of The Way) are loving, inclusive and community-focused as was their patron. They are not concerned with creating a (rule- and dogma-defined) religion or an (institutional) church or with accumulating wealth and power in this earthly life as much as they were concerned with the communal welfare of all and with sharing with each other in uplifting and mutually beneficial ways. (Yes, they would indeed be labeled "socialists" in today's enflamed and exaggerated political climate.)
Another way is to engage more proactively in (non-judgmental) service. Jesus's entire public ministry was about service. He literally gave himself away by being loving to all, including/especially the dispossessed of his time. In fact, it was his anti-establishment approach that led to his death by crucifixion when he had become too big a thorn in the side of the Jewish ruling class (and their Roman patrons). Perhaps not to the point of sacrificing ourselves - a worthy goal, to be sure, but not one that the majority will consider seriously nor to which it will commit - but certainly giving of ourselves individually and collectively more than we do should be our goal
A third and final way that I'll suggest is to practice inclusion proactively. Certainly Jesus did this during His lifetime. He associated, broke bread with and healed Jews and others, especially those on the lower rungs of the oppressive social order of His day. What would happen if, rather than recoiling from those we don't know or whose culture or faith we don't understand, our first inclination were to engage in dialogue rather than judgment? Would we all get together and sing Kumbaya as the world's problem's floated away? Probably not. But would there likely be a much greater understanding between and among the world's peoples and thus a stronger basis for relating and collaborating in mutually beneficial (and peaceful) ways? Absolutely.
And that's the point: if we overcome our human nature to exclude, recoil from and judge negatively "the Other" and practice Jesus' example of loving inclusion and community instead, the world will indeed be a better place ... and we will be far better Christians....
Why are we Christians so unlike our Christ?
Well, the first reason is an obvious one, that we are not, as we were taught to believe, fully divine or the Son of God as he was, so we aren't capable of emulating him fully. Perhaps. As Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong has noted, what made Christ so transcendent was his full humanity, that he gave himself away at every turn, seizing every opportunity to be loving and life-enhancing. And as second century Bishop of Lyons St. Iraneus observed, the glory of God is man (i.e., human beings) fully alive. Jesus was certainly fully alive and a vessel for the Holy Spirit to be made manifest in our world during his earthly life. Accordingly, His example is an eternal one, both in the sense that it endures throughout the ages and in the sense that it serves for all time as a cardinal example of a life well-lived.
Yet, again following Bishop Spong, can't we (more consistently) choose to live fully, love wastefully (as in giving ourselves away lovingly and unconditionally as Jesus did) and be all that we can be? I believe so ... which is why so much of so-called Christian behavior troubles me, both historically speaking and contemporarily.
The historical examples are legion, so at the risk of giving them short shrift, I will cite a single illustrative example and move on. The Inquisition of the Middle Ages now appears to us to have been an extended and immoral example of religiocentrism. Some Christians in positions of power took it upon themselves to determine what were the acceptable practices of the faith and then enforced these views repressively and inhumanely for hundreds of years. Their sense of religious exceptionalism even led them to consider themselves the sole arbiters of the path to God, which led them to persecute not only those Christians whom they considered to be heretical but practitioners of other "false" faiths as well. Countless lives were sacrificed by the self-selected Elect in the name of (the Christian) God.
(In its modern incarnation, such inhumanity in the name of God is the cause of extremism and terrorism of all types, from "Christian" paramilitary groups and abortion clinic bombers to Islamist jihadists, etc.)
Today, especially in the United States, we find ourselves with a widening gap of opinion (or, if you will, fraying consensus) with respect to the practice of our faith. On the one side are the Christian fundamentalists and literalists who insist on the inerrancy of Scripture, profess to espouse "conservative" or "family values" and claim any number of religiocentric views on behalf of their perception of the Christian God.
On the other hand are the Christian liberals and progressives who are only now beginning to respond vigorously to the re-definition of American Christianity successfully pursued by the Religious Right in the past half-century. This group is more inclusive and accepting by nature, so its views are more varied as is its approach both to its faith and to the dialogue within and outside of the Christian community. This diffusion has not served it well historically as the designation of "Christian" is most likely to be associated with fundamentalism and not liberalism today. As one friend put it a few years ago, based on the behavior of some of the more proactive fundamentalists of today, she doesn't like to identify herself as a Christian because it's not typically considered to be a positive reference in the collective consciousness.
Why would anyone be embarrassed to be a Christian today?
Well, because of the frequent and visible behavior patterns of many other self-identified (and mostly self-described conservative) Christians, which, to many, appear to be the very antithesis of the Patron's example. One viewing of the documentary Jesus Camp will acquaint the reader with a vivid example thereof. And it's hard to know where to start when considering the twisted mixing of pseudo-Christian moralism and our modern political process. That we even have a concept that has enjoyed great notoriety in recent years called the War on Women, led ostensibly by self-described conservative (Republican) Christians (who are also apparently all male), is another such example. That they would presume to legislate the behavior of their sisters in Christ without the latter's engagement is another frightening example of how twisted the use of our faith has become.
Yet, the example on which I would like to focus most is that of our treatment of the poor, the less fortunate, the other, the different among us. Suffice it to say that one of our major political parties has made great hay by vilifying these groups, inciting a distrust cloaked in pseudo-Christian hypocrisy that is almost hard to describe in its depth and breadth. How anyone could see cutting social welfare benefits for the least fortunate or giving tax breaks to the billionaire owners of corporations whose employees are paid so little that they rely on those very same benefits as being reflective of - much less being motivated by - Christian faith is beyond my and many others' comprehension. The poor are seemingly demonized at every turn now, yet weren't they Jesus' special focus during his lifetime?
Many of us understand our Christian calling as to be joyfully charitable - meaning inclusive, loving and giving - to those who are less fortunate and/or somehow different or (incorrectly/inhumanely but invariably considered) 'lesser'. As Jesus was recorded as saying in the Gospel of Matthew:
"Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me." (25:40)
Based on this and numerous other similar statements attributed to Him, it would appear that Jesus expected something much different from us than we now often see.
And when this calling is interpreted in our political realm, it seems to become all but perverted completely. In fact, many of the policies advocated by so-called religious or social conservative leaders and politicians seem to be the very antithesis of the Patron's charge to us. That the Christian faith is associated with the support of the status quo and protecting the privileges of the few (i.e., the wealthy and powerful who control and benefit disproportionately from it) is only recently being contested vigorously in our societal dialogue, as abhorrent and antithetical as it may be to some. Wasn't Jesus executed precisely because He contested the corrupt and oppressive established order of his day? What would He do in today's world? Somehow I can't see Him hangin' with the Plutocrats....
So how do we become better Christians?
The answer may lie in not becoming better Christians, actually, but by striving to be what Rev. Dr. Obery Hendricks calls "Followers of Jesus," people of faith who are committed to emulating Jesus' example in the profession and practice of their faith. Followers of Jesus (or, as they were known in the first century, Followers of The Way) are loving, inclusive and community-focused as was their patron. They are not concerned with creating a (rule- and dogma-defined) religion or an (institutional) church or with accumulating wealth and power in this earthly life as much as they were concerned with the communal welfare of all and with sharing with each other in uplifting and mutually beneficial ways. (Yes, they would indeed be labeled "socialists" in today's enflamed and exaggerated political climate.)
Another way is to engage more proactively in (non-judgmental) service. Jesus's entire public ministry was about service. He literally gave himself away by being loving to all, including/especially the dispossessed of his time. In fact, it was his anti-establishment approach that led to his death by crucifixion when he had become too big a thorn in the side of the Jewish ruling class (and their Roman patrons). Perhaps not to the point of sacrificing ourselves - a worthy goal, to be sure, but not one that the majority will consider seriously nor to which it will commit - but certainly giving of ourselves individually and collectively more than we do should be our goal
A third and final way that I'll suggest is to practice inclusion proactively. Certainly Jesus did this during His lifetime. He associated, broke bread with and healed Jews and others, especially those on the lower rungs of the oppressive social order of His day. What would happen if, rather than recoiling from those we don't know or whose culture or faith we don't understand, our first inclination were to engage in dialogue rather than judgment? Would we all get together and sing Kumbaya as the world's problem's floated away? Probably not. But would there likely be a much greater understanding between and among the world's peoples and thus a stronger basis for relating and collaborating in mutually beneficial (and peaceful) ways? Absolutely.
And that's the point: if we overcome our human nature to exclude, recoil from and judge negatively "the Other" and practice Jesus' example of loving inclusion and community instead, the world will indeed be a better place ... and we will be far better Christians....
