An Easter Reflection....

I like your Christ.  I do not like your Christians.

Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.

- Mahatma Gandhi

 

 

On the eve of the holiest day of the Christian year, I'm perplexed: as deeply spiritual and Episcopalian Christian as I am/as I've become, I'm ever more dismayed by what I perceive to be the routinely and so often almost completely unchristian behavior of others who claim to share my faith ... and I'm also dismayed by the relative silence of so many so-called Christian leaders in combatting this reality.  It doesn't make me any less a believer in Christianity; actually, it has the opposite effect: in response to the unchristianity that's so prevalent in our society (and world), I'm actually called to be more Christian ... or, actually, Christ-like.  And, in modern America, these are two very different things....

 

In my humble view, modern Christianity - at least as many of its professed adherents practice it - is in need of a major overhaul ... and, should it not choose to change dramatically, it will surely die eventually as Bishop John Shelby Spong has predicted.  The signs of this decline are legion and evident: from declining church attendance to the rise of the religiously unaffiliated and "unchurched" to the ever-distressing politicization of the faith coupled almost always with a distinctly unchristian and inhumane vehemence.  I seriously doubt that if Jesus were to return today that He would recognize (or accept) most of what's being done in His name.

 

An instructive case in point is the advent of so-called "religious freedom" laws in twenty of the fifty United States, with Indiana's and Arkansas' iterations serving as the current flashpoint.  As much as some defenders attempt to deny (while they dissemble), the practical effects and the sponsors of such legislation are instructive: in the case of Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act, when it was signed in a private ceremony by Governor Mike Pence, several of those invited to stand by him as he did so were in fact among the most vociferous of opponents of gay marriage/rights/equality.  So, if we take the governor at his word that the law wasn't enacted to allow Indianans to discriminate against LGBT fellow citizens - although, in fact, this is just what it did allow - then what are we to make of the reality that a significant proportion of its most visible supporters and, ostensibly, catalysts and proponents want and expected it to allow just that?

 

And though there was popular outrage and an uprising of conscience in response to this travesty, it seems to me that the response from many high profile 'Christian' leaders was muted.  Some progressive Christian denominations were observed among the protestors, but many, many other so-called Christian leaders were not.  In fact, many in the more supposedly socially conservative and fundamentalist wing of the faith were the law's greatest champions and defenders.  They asserted, quite correctly, that the law would allow them to avoid serving those whom they believed their religion to condemn ... like, say, our gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender brothers and sisters.  They see it as a legitimate and welcome  (political) protection of their religious right to discriminate against those whose lives and lifestyles offend them.  Hmmm....

 

To me - and, again, in my humble opinion - this is so wrong on so many levels, but for the sake of brevity let me focus on just two:  First, how on earth can the American constitutional freedom to practice a religion be conflated with the right to discriminate in the public sphere (or, perhaps more accurately put, square) because of it?  If church and state are truly to be separated as the cherished American value alleges, then the State cannot abridge the public rights of one group to satisfy the desires of another one under the cloak of protecting the latter's religion/religious beliefs.

 

An extreme example to illustrate the point:  If I were a devout Muslim and decided (incorrectly) that my religion allowed me to discriminate against Christians, how would this be received in this still Christian-dominant country?  Can any of us seriously imagine even progressive Christians leaping to the defense of such 'religious beliefs'?  Of course not.  The idea only has currency because the dominant group - in present-day America meaning (so-called) Christians - wants to exercise its considerable institutional/political power to do so.  It only works because the in-group wants to discriminate against an out-group (or out-groups); no in-group would ever agree voluntarily to condone discrimination against itself.

 

Another reason that these laws are so repellent to me is that they completely contradict the example of Christianity's Patron.  Jesus was known for communing with the dispossessed and advocating for the powerless against the interests and system of the powerful.  In fact, this is why he was put to death, because he afflicted the powerful on behalf of the dispossessed.  Translated to our time, this suggests that Jesus would be communing with those often spurned by society, including, sadly and still, our LGBT brothers and sisters.  Can any one of us imagine Him demonizing the LGBT community as so many of today's 'Christian' leaders have?  Can any of us imagine Him condoning discrimination against them ... or Jews ... or African-Americans, etc.?  Of course not.  Which makes Gandhi's observation so prescient: too many of us modern 'Christians' are so unlike our Christ.

 

To put a finer point on it, for those who claim their objections are Scripturally-based, such freedom-to-discriminate-under-the-guise-of-religious-freedom runs counter the final charge that the Lord gave his disciples before he left the earth physically.  As captured in the Gospel of John (13:34, NRSV), He instructs them:

 

I give you a new commandment, that you love one another.

Just as I have loved you, you should also love one another.

 

Suffice it to say that there's no way to contort this commandment to suggest that discrimination in Jesus' name is in any way loving.   So, yet again, so many of His ostensible followers ignore, pervert or outright contradict His commandments, in this case under the guise of their belief in Him.  Can anything be more unchristian than this?

 

So, as we prepare to remember Christ's life and legacy in the celebration of Easter, I'm reminded of Rev. Dr. Obery Hendricks' distinction - in his brilliant and classic book The Politics of Jesus - between so-called/self-professed Christians and Followers of Jesus: many if not most of the former support the modern status-quo-aligned institution of the Christian church - including its misguided and perverse efforts to promote so-called religious freedom - while the latter believe that emulating Christ's example is the true version/practice of the faith.  When I see Christians discriminating in Christ's name, I'm glad not to be one of them, but ever more thankful to be a Follower of Jesus and hope that you will be, too, whatever your religion may be....

 

In other words, Jesus' view is that laws are to serve us, not oppress us.  That is why in our practice we must always stress the foundational principles of Jesus' politics - justice, righteousness, and steadfast love.  Any laws that are not based on these principles are inconsistent with the politics of Jesus.

- the Rev. Dr. Obery M. Hendricks, Jr.

The Politics of Jesus:

Rediscovering The True Revolutionary Nature of

Jesus' Teachings and How They Have Been Corrupted