Interrogating the Church, 07 – Forced Conformity:

We have a history with attempting to force others to adhere to our faith, our ways of doing things, our understanding of the world and reality. That’s not limited to Christianity. That was part of why Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 CE. The Jews had failed to keep up their bargain with Rome to sacrifice on behalf of Caesar and Rome. By not sacrificing to the gods or at least on behalf of Rome, they were deemed atheists, insurrectionists, and determined to bring down all Roman society by incurring the wrath of the gods. They broke the pact, so Titus marched into Jerusalem and sacrificed a pig on Yahweh’s altar before effigies of Caesar and the Roman gods.

Cattle ranchers and farmers battled over the use of land in the Western states, clashing over fences built to protect crops and a history of running cattle on a free range. Native groups clashed with settlers over land-use, water rights, encroachment, and questions of property rights and European authority to stake claim to lands already in the hands of other nations. Colonial interests in the Americas, Africa, and various island nations duked it out in attempts to exert power and force native populations to conform to European and American views of land rights, destiny, and sense of superiority. Either by considering ourselves superior due to white skin, wealth, or technological advance, we attempted to force others to bow to our ways of understanding the world and their place in it.

These clashes and confrontations may have at times been directed by people claiming some decree from one or another deity, but at heart they were always about economics. They dehumanized others to pave the way for an extension of wealth, power, and control. The Mongols, Norse, Normans, Saxons, Goths, Japanese, Chinese, Korean, and Arab nations all participated in the same or similar conflict, competing for resources in the hands of others and claiming some sense of superiority which allowed them to rape, murder, and steal. England commissioned privateers to steal goods and ships from France, Spain, Portugal, and others, leaving English vessels alone.

None of this follows the commission and charge Jesus laid upon those who would follow the way set out for us. We do not see the early disciples attempting to wield any kind of coercive power or force to promote the way of Jesus. When force is visited upon them, we find them following Stephen’s example of looking to Jesus and praying for the forgiveness of those killing him. We find Paul bowing to unjust treatment and orders from local authorities to depart a certain town or region by simply leaving. He does call out the injustice of his treatment from time to time, as in Philippi. He does not, however, even use Roman law on his behalf to protect himself from a beating or seeking compensation. Jesus tells Peter that the tax the Temple is requiring of them is improper. However, he instructs Peter on where to find the money and to take it to the authorities anyway.

There is no sense of acting on a perceived superiority among the early disciples. Even in the face of isolated times of persecution, they understand that following Christ requires them neither to revolt, nor to offer physical resistance. They take Jesus’ words to Peter about putting away his sword and healing the servant’s damaged ear as instruction akin to his words about turning the other cheek, not returning evil for evil, and loving one’s enemies.

Love is not coercive. Love does not wield fear and shame as weapons. Love does not have weapons. Love is, rather, the essential tool of the way of Jesus. Love listens to others. Love cares for the well-being of others. Love relinquishes violence and coercion as opposed to Jesus’ good news. Love recognizes that faith is built upon one’s freedom to choose. It hopes for others to make better choices. It encourages those better choices. It does not attempt to force itself upon others, however.

Jesus did not force the rich young ruler to sell all he belonged, give it to the poor, and follow him. He did tell him that was what was lacking in his life. Then Jesus allowed the man to go his way, even as Jesus grieved over the man’s own loss and entrapment by wealth. Jesus wept over Jerusalem, speaking of how often he would have gathered its inhabitants under wings of protection, but they had refused the ways of God. It is not the way of Jesus to force compliance with the gospel, for the gospel is love. It is not the way of Jesus to proclaim our superiority over others, for the gospel understands that we are all servants of God on equal footing. It is for God to judge between us, not for us to claim a status we were never granted.

If I attempt to force you to act as though you love me, I might gain compliance. I will not gain love by it. I can teach a child to follow a prescribed set of actions. I can set laws and policies in place to make people generally act in prescribed manners. I can’t, however, force love. I can’t force a desire to comply for their own good and the good of others. Legislation requiring people to wear seat belts may accomplish a level of compliance. What it does not do is change attitudes regarding seat belts and safety. The gospel is focused deeper than those external actions. It aims to change our attitudes, our values, our goals, our understanding of one another, our acceptance of each other, our becoming that beloved community.

Fear, force, coercion do not, indeed cannot, accomplish that kind of transformation. Only love can do that. Only grace can bring us to such a transformation. John tells us love casts out fear. It should be obvious that fear cannot serve to extend love. Love requires granting freedom to be rejected. Love requires we let go of power, privilege, and position. Love requires washing Judas’ feet and inviting him to the table. I also requires letting him go meet with those to whom he will betray us. Nothing could be further from our attempts to transform Christianity into the law of the land. Imposing my faith upon others makes no room for them to witness and respond to the love portrayed in Christ Jesus, who forgave the very ones who hung him on a cross to die.



— ©Copyright 2023, Christopher B. Harbin 



http://www.sermonsearch.com/contributors/104427/

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Gospel Is Not Conservative

Image
Fundamentalism and conservativism are intrinsically averse to change. They are tied with conserving a status quo or moving back to a former era. They seek a safe place, a respite from change and transformation in the world around them. They are threatened by new ideas. They fear that the foundations on which they base their lives will be uprooted, causing their view of reality to fall apart. Growth depends on change. Life requires change. Survival depends on responding to changes in our environment. It requires new ideas. It requires new answers to old questions, as well as new questions with even newer answers. Jesus was by no means conservative. Jesus challenged the status quo. He fought against the groundwork of much of the religious thought around him, as well as the structures erected to empower its values. He called out those who benefited from social, religious, and political power. He demonstrated God's love, forgiveness and grace to those deemed una...
Read more

God in the Hands of Angry Sinners

Image
Jonathan Edwards’ famous sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” set a very poor direction for much of Christianity in the Colonies. His Puritan tradition presented God as an essentially angry deity whose desire was to condemn and torture. Grace or mercy existed simply in regard to how long God waited until calling down judgment upon sinners. That is not good news. It never was. Such is not the message of Jesus whom the gospel writers claim as good news. They echo the words of the celestial messengers declaring Jesus’ birth as good news of great joy to all peoples. Rather than look to Jesus as the clearest example of God’s identity, character, and will, that tradition surrounding Edwards began with an altogether different understanding that could not account for what Jesus actually taught. The Puritan perspective began with angry sinners and projected that upon God. Anger begins with fear, uncertainty, discomfort, and the inability to control one’s environment, ot...
Read more

Our Language of Choice

Image
I woke up this morning and decided to be a woman. I really like the idea of earning less money on the job. I like the idea of being passed over for promotions. I like that I will be held more accountable for the care of my home and familial responsibilities than any of the men around me. I’m looking forward to having my expertise ignored. I like that I’ll more likely be treated as a lower-level assistant to male colleagues than an actual colleague. It should be a good experience to live as more of a target for domestic violence and abuse. It will be so freeing to let go of my bodily autonomy and place it in the hands of men who will not understand me. With so many voices in our society shifting back toward the attitudes of 70 years ago, I am really looking forward to setting aside all trappings of male privilege and power to live as a second class citizen whose voice and opinions are essentially irrelevant. Just look at all the advantages women have! They get t...
Read more