Christianity at the crossroads

Eastertide is a time when many Christians revisit, or re-evaluate, their faith*. The Easter story is a powerful one and, whether one believes it or not, brings us most directly into contact with Christ's mission. The Christmas story sets the scene for what is to come, establishing Jesus' credentials as the promised Messiah while making clear the path he is destined to follow. But Easter forms the fulfillment of the prophesies and the foundation of all Christian teaching.

The three Synoptic Gospels of the New Testament, Matthew, Mark and Luke, set out in simple narrative format the words and deeds of Jesus, unmediated by commentary. The slightly later Gospel of John meditates on Jesus' divinity, developing a Christology that was built on by missionaries such as Paul and Peter.

As an atheist, I have an intellectual curiosity about the historical background of Jesus, and a philosophical interest in the development of the story of his life, death and supposed resurrection into a major world religion. I'm entirely untroubled by issues of personal belief, having none. However, as a gay man, I am very troubled indeed by the hardening of attitudes against a more socially liberal and inclusive interpretation of Christianity which seems to have been gaining ground within both the Protestant and Catholic churches, appearing capable of creating a potentially dangerous schism.

Both Pope Francis, as spiritual head of the Roman Catholic communion, and the Archbishop of Canterbury, as leader of world Anglicanism, are facing serious challenges holding their churches together against a hardening of attitudes in favour of more traditional, even hardline, values. Issues such as same-sex marriage or blessings in church, and women priests, are becoming hugely divisive and could well lead to doctrinal splits, especially with Africa, but in the Western world too.

In reaction to these issues, the obvious question might seem to be 'what did Jesus say about it?'. Unfortunately, it's not that simple - if it were, an answer would already have been found. Jesus is silent on the issue of homosexuality so one can only infer what he might have thought about it. As a Jewish teacher it is highly unlikely he would have found it acceptable but his forgiveness of the woman taken in adultery shows compassion, though not complaisance. His challenge to the indignant mob who would have stoned her to death, let he that is without sin cast the first stone, is followed by an injunction to her to go, and sin no more. Clearly, his attitude towards sexual incontinence as a sin was an orthodox one. I don't think sexually active gay men can look for much sympathy there.

There have been suggestions that the relationship between the Apostles was a homoerotic, if not actively homosexual, one. I think this is wishful thinking on the part of those who seek comfort in it. They may have been a sodality but that doesn't imply that sodomy was a feature of the Apostolic group dynamic. No, agape rather than eros seems to have epitomised their bond, prompted by a strong devotion to Jesus as their charismatic spiritual leader.

Of course, there is that odd episode, mentioned only in Mark's gospel, of the naked young man in the Garden of Gethsemane: And there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; and the young men laid hold on him. And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked. If he is the same young man, again recorded only in Mark, in the open tomb: And entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe then I think we are entitled to speculate on the nature of his relationship to Jesus but, barring the unlikely discovery of linked lost texts, we will never know.

The central role of women, in the gospels and in early Christianity, is another interesting conundrum. How is it that the faith has become so male-centric, especially in its priesthood? I think the alleged misogyny of St Paul probably has a lot to do with that. He mentions many women in friendly terms in his letters but in Corinthians he is quoted as saying: As in all the congregations of the Lord’s people, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. But did Paul actually write this or is it, as some scholars have suggested, a later textual interpolation? As with the naked young man at Gethsemane, we shall probably never know.

So, if the central texts of Christianity are unclear, or of questionable veracity, how are the proper Christian responses to issues such as homosexuality and the status of women to be decided? I suppose the standard answer to that is: through divine revelation and personal conscience.

If these are the only options, I strongly suspect prejudice will prevail over tolerance every time. 

*These contentious issues are currently being debated at the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) IV in Kigali, Rwanda.

Popular posts from this blog

Looking to Africa - long read

As I sit here on an island just off the coast of North-West Africa I can't help pondering the future of that vast and seemingly unknowable continent, so near and yet so far. I'm writing this in Tenerife, one of the eight Canary Islands forming an archipelago off the coast of Morocco and Western Sahara - tantilisingly close and yet a world away from the 'mainland' of continental Africa. As an Autonomous Community of Spain, the Canaries form an outpost of the European Union (EU). Yet, despite their proximity to Africa, their outlook, politically, culturally and economically, is resolutely European. Africa may as well be Mars, though only a narrow gulf of the Atlantic Ocean separates these offshore islands from their continent. I say resolutely European but that resolve may, little by little, be weakening. There is a growing sentiment, especially, though not exclusively, amongst young Canarians, that they have been sold a pup. True, the economy is superficially buoyant, du
Read more

On old age

"The fact is that when I come to think it over, I find that there are four reasons for old age being thought unhappy: First, that it withdraws us from active employments; second, that it enfeebles the body; third, that it deprives us of nearly all physical pleasures; fourth, that it is the next step to death."  Writing his essay,  De Senectute (On Old Age), in 44 BCE, Marcus Tullius Cicero went on to refute these four supposed reasons in characteristically robust and forthright manner. Cicero wasn't one to sit about moping in his own old age; he remained actively engaged in the political life of the Republic whose survival, in the face of tyranny, he championed so fiercely.  Cicero was nine years younger than I am now when he met his untimely end yet he considered himself already an old man; or, rather, his society judged him to be so. His second point about age enfeebling is more germane. Physical decline had not yet impacted him but, six years on from my retirement, I
Read more

Born to rule

When, ten days ago, I posted my piece about the manipulated image of Catherine, Princess of Wales, and her children (see Snap Judgment) I didn't know of her cancer treatment. Had I known, I would have adopted a gentler, though I hope no less critical, tone. But I didn't know, and nor did any of us outside the immediate royal circle, which rather goes to strengthen the case against the monarchy. For Kate and her family the diagnosis of cancer (as yet unspecified) will have been a devastating blow, as will the chemotherapy she is currently undergoing. On a human level, of course I sympathise and extend my best wishes for a full recovery as, indeed, I did at the time of her father-in-law's diagnosis. It is particularly cruel, then, that on top of all this she has been obliged to record a video statement to reassure the public. As if she didn't have enough to contend with already. But such is the unpalatable obligation placed upon any royal personage - noblesse oblige. Whic
Read more