Whether or not one subscribes to Jung's Theory of Synchronicity, one cannot deny that there are, in life, coincidences that at least appear to be meaningful. One such incident occurred recently, in which I found myself editing a sermon text from 1890 shortly after the 2004 US Presidential Election in which George W. Bush won a second term. The election was, according to most analysts and pollsters, one of the most bitter in modern memory. Prior to the results being announced, most pundits had focused their attention on traditional political issues, principally the state of the American economy and the war in Iraq. After the results were announced, however - and these results included substantial gains for the Republican party in both the House and Senate, as well as the re-election of a Republican President - attention focused on what many viewed as the deciding factor in the election: moral issues.
Morality is, of course, a rather murky issue to analyze from a political perspective. It is not as if one candidate for office declares himself to be for morality, and his or her opponent to be against it. No, Americans are all moral, or at least all declare that they think it wise to be so, a tradition that has endured ever since the first Puritan placed his plain and somber shoe upon Plymouth Rock. But there was no question that Americans who attended church on a regular basis were more apt in the Election of 2004 to lean toward Republican candidates.
This is not perhaps surprising, since church leaders were certainly in the forefront of leading the Republican charge. A few weeks before the election, I happened to attend a Catholic Mass at St. John the Baptist Church in Castleton, Vermont. The priest's sermon was circuitous in its logic and rambling in its delivery, but clearly centered upon the need for those present to develop (and vote with) a "moral conscience." No specifics were offered as to what might constitute a moral conscience, but there were vague hints that a person in possession of such a conscience would find unacceptable the legal right to have an abortion. The congregation was also told that this subject matter had been dictated by the bishop for this particular Sunday, and that similar sermons would be given in all of the Catholic churches in the State of Vermont. Other churches of various Christian denominations throughout the nation presumably did something similar.
There are many issues associated with such a situation, but the one that I would like to focus upon is not directly related to abortion, or to gay rights, or even specifically to politics. The issue that I am most concerned with is the direction and future viability of Christianity. This is where the sermon from 1890 comes in.
The text in question was delivered by Joseph Parker at the City, Temple in London, and is entitled, "Why Do We Inquire About Jesus Christ?" (The sermon is reprinted in full elsewhere on this website.) Parker covers a good bit of ground, but the part of the sermon we are concerned with here reads as follows:
"Can men lie about religious things? Yes. Can men say worship when they mean destroy? They say it every day. Can men be found who will put up a church for Christ and yet not know what they are building? Alas, it is not only possible, it is the saddest fact of our business, that we build temples, and curse the stones as we put them together. We set up ministers, not with songs but sometimes with profanities. There is a possibility of destroying Christ, under the guise of worshipping him, and there is a further possibility of destroying Christ more or less unconsciously, by giving false notions of him, by making him a class-redeemer, by setting him apart for sectarian uses, by attaching to him badges and labels, scarves, and memorials, that make him belong to one corner only, by narrowing his words down into denominational shibboleths - by a thousand such ways we destroy Christ's influence in the world. Know ye that Christ is a Sun which cannot be touched and also a light which plays with loving familiarity upon the one-paned cottage of the poor man and upon the stately palaces of royalty and wealth? He is a Sun not to be clipped by your instruments or rearranged by your eager fingers, and he is a light that will bless you, but never be trifled with."
Over a century has passed since these words were spoken to church-goers - moral folk, we must presume - in London. How sad it is that there is no Joseph Parker now alive in modern-day America, with the courage to proclaim the same message. For certainly, never has the risk of "destroying Christ, under the guise of worshipping him" been greater than it is at this time, and in this place.
If a man, who knew nothing about the life or teachings of Jesus Christ, were suddenly to find himself in the United States of today, what impression would he form of this religious figure? That he would learn of Jesus Christ would be inevitable. Driving a few minutes in any direction in any town or city, he would encounter one, and probably many, "Christian" churches. If he turned on the radio, he would hear the voice of "Christian" radio. If he turned on the television, he would see "Christian" programming.
And what would all these "Christian" sources teach our unschooled man about Jesus Christ? Would he hear of a figure who encouraged giving to the poor, feeding the hungry, comforting the sick? Would he encounter examples of "the meek," who are presumably blessed? Would he see examples of followers willing to "turn the other cheek?" Would he meet again and again with the message that one ought to "love thy neighbor as thyself?"
Sadly, he would not. He would, instead, be bombarded with images of the most sectarian Jesus Christ imaginable, a caricatured bumper-sticker Jesus who presumably came to earth two thousand years ago with the express purpose of ensuring that all Americans would one day vote against gay rights and certain medical practices. He would learn of a Jesus whose sole commandment must have been, "Devote your life to the criticizing of others." Parker warned of narrowing the words of Christ "down into denominational shibboleths," but a vast number of "Christian" Americans have gone well past that, not only narrowing his words but twisting and contorting them out of all recognition in order to prove their own fanatical viewpoints.
There are those, I know, who will disagree with such an assessment, and will no doubt do so loudly. Facts, however, speak for themselves. It is a fact that Jesus commanded his followers to feed the poor; yet how many men, women and children will go to bed hungry tonight in America? It is a fact that Jesus commanded his followers to heal and comfort the sick; yet how many millions of Americans now lack even the most basic health care insurance? It is a fact that Jesus advised those who would follow him not to seek to store up material wealth; come, I invite you, to any city in America to see how seriously that advice is heeded by "Christian" Americans.
It is also a fact that these American "Christians" donated millions of dollars to the 2004 campaigns in order to elect politicians to fight for their particular conception of "moral issues." Could not these millions of dollars have been better used to provide shelter for the homeless, food for the hungry, warm clothing for the needy? Is not America a country where homeless persons still freeze to death each year on winter streets, and where people without adequate health care insurance continue to suffer needlessly and die prematurely?
The United States is a country where every third car seems to sport a bumper-sticker asking "What Would Jesus Do?" My question to the drivers of those cars - to all Americans, for that matter, who call themselves followers of Christ - is, "What, indeed?"
Copyright © World Spirituality · All Rights Reserved