Monday, May 15, 2017

When Christians Were Divided Over Slavery

Lola in The Atlantic June, 2017

Lola was the slave next door. An American author, Alex Tizon, tells the story of his family slave--a gift from his grandfather to his mother. The troubling story of the unpaid household servant appears in the June 2017 edition of The Atlantic.
Christians were “A House Divided” regarding slavery. As with most other moral issues, Christians quoted the biblical texts to support and condemn slavery. From the perspective of the 21st century it seems absurd until you realize that a particular approache to scripture provides the moral foundation for slavery. A look back may help some Christians be more careful when it comes to slavish biblical interpretation.

When Christians Argued the Moral Case for Slavery

The Christian moral case for slavery can be found in the laws of Moses and the biblical leaders who owned slaves. It is perhaps ironic that the Exodus experience used as a metaphor for God’s deliverance from slavery during American history should contain the laws governing the institution of slavery.

‘’2 When you buy a Hebrew slave,[a] he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. 3 If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out alone.5 But if the slave plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’ 6 then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost. And his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall be his slave forever.” Exodus 21 ESV.

Christians could of course point to support from the Apostle Paul who advised slaves to “obey your masters” (Ephesians 6: 5-9).

Paul’s advice in Ephesians is consistent with his general moral approach, which emphasizes the moral foundation of authority. Other writings provide examples of the moral foundations of purity, care-harm, loyalty, liberty, and equality. In short, Paul provides an example of a conservative approach to Christian morality by integrating Scripture into his thinking to create a Christian worldview and emphasizing certain moral foundations in his discourse.

Paul’s teaching about slavery occurs in the context of rules about households. The meta-metaphor is the relationship of God to the church via Christ who is the head of the church. God is the quintessential Father and all Christians are his children who have the right to a divine inheritance. In Ephesians 5-6, he turns from the spiritual kingdom to address more practical concerns in the Christian household, which reveals his respect for authority and order. Like Christ is head of the church, wives submit to husbands, children honor their parents, and slaves obey their masters.

When it comes to slaves, Paul emphasizes two moral foundations: authority and care-harm. The authority emphasis is evident in the words about submission and obedience. People focused on authority will look for evidence of "moral authority."

The Christian Moral Case Against Slavery

Interestingly, the moral case against slavery can also be derived from the words of Paul. At the immediate level of living within a slave-holding Roman culture, Paul does not just encourage obedience but he directs masters to treat their slaves as they would be treated in recognition that their Master in heaven is the Master of both earthly masters and slaves. The case of Onesimus is often used as an example of Paul’s pleas for Onesimus’ freedom from his master, Philemon. It is frustrating from a contemporary perspective to read Paul's call for slaves to obey their masters.

The moral foundations found in the words of Jesus and Paul provide two bases employed by progressives when they argued against slavery. The love ethic of Jesus, most obvious in the commandment to love one’s neighbor as oneself (Mark 12:31), is the preeminent principle. Before advising men about how to treat their slaves, Paul has reminded them of the love of Christ for the church (Ephesians 5). Paul makes the case for Christian love in his writings. Unfortunately, for many, Paul did not condemn slavery as a practice not characterized by love.


Perhaps most relevant to the discussion of slavery is the moral foundation of equality in God’s household where Paul finds“there is neither…slave nor free…for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Galatians 3:28. Here in Galatians there is a glimpse that Paul could envision a better world where there would be no ethnic, gender, or class distinctions. 

It would be many centuries before people would make significant progress in reducing inequality among people. Battles have been fought and won but the war is not over.

Twisted Texts

It is easy to accuse Christians who quote scripture when disagreeing with us of twisting biblical texts (e.g., Keener, Slaves and slaveholders). No doubt some play fast and loose with scripture to serve their own ends. Slaves benefit their masters and entire nations as sources of cheap labor. Selling children provides poor families with funds for survival. However, in the case of slavery and scripture, the argument for twisting scripture is not so evident. People who wish to remain true to a close reading of the Bible easily find support for slavery and do not find any condemnation of slavery. It is little wonder that slavery persisted for centuries in Christian cultures.

Justice as Fairness

The case against slavery is derived from the moral principle of justice as fairness and the moral foundation of equality. The case is bolstered by the common accounts of horrific treatment of slaves as less than human property subject to the whims of men motivated by greed and selfishness concerned only with satisfying their own appetites and freely expressing anger upon nearby possessions when some aspect of their desire is frustrated. Alas, principles of morality rarely hold human nature in check. Laws backed by force and informed by moral principles are needed to protect the vulnerable from abuse.
(For readers familiar with philosophy-- I am influenced by John Rawls.)

Notes on Israelite Slavery

Slavery has been common in the world since ancient times. The formation of the nation of Israel from expanded tribal families begins with the well-known story of Moses who leads his enslaved people to freedom.

The Exodus story continued to inspired enslaved people for centuries.

Soon after the Israelites entered their promised land and kingdom formation got off the ground, we see rules governing master-slave relationships. Slavery was indeed a part of Hebrew culture.

Using the Ezra text, scholars figure the ratio of free people to slaves was 5 to 1.

The Bible does not condemn slavery. But the Hebrew laws do identify slave rights and Paul warned against abuse.

References


Notes on Roman Slavery

Slaves were foreigners, which included POWs and people bought outside Roman lands.

Fathers could sell their children into slavery.

Owners could sell or rent their slaves to others.

Treatment included whipping and branding.

They worked everywhere e.g., homes, farms, mines, roads, buildings

Manumission was a practice of freeing slaves. If by court order, they could become Roman citizens but could not hold office. Any children they bore would be free. PBS

Moral Foundations and Christian Cultures


To read more about moral foundation theory and divisions within Christian cultures, read A House Divided.






Lest we Forget...

“...I therefore hate the corrupt, slaveholding, women-whipping, cradle-plundering, partial and hypocritical Christianity of the land... I look upon it as the climax of all misnomers, the boldest of all frauds, and the grossest of all libels. Never was there a clearer case of 'stealing the livery of the court of heaven to serve the devil in.' I am filled with unutterable loathing when I contemplate the religious pomp and show, together with the horrible inconsistencies, which every where surround me. We have men-stealers for ministers, women-whippers for missionaries, and cradle-plunderers for church members. The man who wields the blood-clotted cowskin during the week fills the pulpit on Sunday, and claims to be a minister of the meek and lowly Jesus. . . . The slave auctioneer’s bell and the church-going bell chime in with each other, and the bitter cries of the heart-broken slave are drowned in the religious shouts of his pious master. Revivals of religion and revivals in the slave-trade go hand in hand together. The slave prison and the church stand near each other. The clanking of fetters and the rattling of chains in the prison, and the pious psalm and solemn prayer in the church, may be heard at the same time. The dealers in the bodies of men erect their stand in the presence of the pulpit, and they mutually help each other. The dealer gives his blood-stained gold to support the pulpit, and the pulpit, in return, covers his infernal business with the garb of Christianity. Here we have religion and robbery the allies of each other—devils dressed in angels’ robes, and hell presenting the semblance of paradise.”

― Frederick Douglass, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass

Friday, May 12, 2017

Paul’s View of Gender Inequality

Image result for prince charles diana stamp
Both were 1.78 metres tall

I support gender equality.

Whether Christian, an adherent of another religion, or having no religious affiliation, I think it important to consider the influence on contemporary attitudes toward women based on interpretations of the Christian texts.

What's the significance of the photo? I will comment below.

I understand the arguments conservative Christians make for supporting different roles for men and women in church, society, and the home. In fact, I think conservatives can find much more support for male superiority in the Bible than progressives can find for gender equality.

I think it’s time for Christians to take a fresh look at the texts that have driven gender inequality for millennia and decide anew why they think women and men should not be equal is all aspects of life. In my view, twisting ancient texts into an agreeable equality-for-all pretzel lacks integrity. I say, give the texts their due, make your peace with some notion of inspiration, and commit to a moral stance—one that declares all people are equal.

The stimulus for this post is my pending talk on the family relationships in the New Testament document knows as Ephesians—the first century letter, imperfectly carved up into six chapters by some Christian about 500 years ago.

OLD CIVILIZATIONS

"[T]he male is by nature superior, and the female inferior; and the one rules, and the other is ruled; this principle of necessity extends to all mankind..." Aristotle in Politics.

My first task is to look at the little verse about submission, which causes no end of consternation for contemporary evangelical women not wanting to plunge into the freedoms offered by progressive believers yet somehow hoping they can convince their conservative brethren to get over the submission doctrine and support full equality. In evangelical Christianity, women’s suffrage often suffers from a lack of support. Fundamentalists control the gates of evangelicalism.

To my frustrated female friends and their erstwhile male supporters, I say, consider what you are up against. Let’s be honest. If the problem of inequality could be solved by an honest battle over the true interpretation of the Greek word for submit, the war for equality would be over. But the battle is not just about submission. The battle involves a moral stance that consistently asks women to submit to the authority of scripture as written and interpreted by men for thousands of years. And when it comes to submission, the Israelites shared beliefs with Greeks and Romans.

I have seen arguments about where to carve the submission verses (Ephesians 5:21-22) but those aren’t going to help. The context is far beyond the short letter to the Ephesians. The context is as large as the Bible itself. And the Apostle Paul is just one more man continuing the interpretation of the differences between the sexes as having implications for cultural differences, which create stained glass ceilings in all cathedrals of culture from government to church and the 21st century home. The only window of equality in this massive edifice is the notion that in Jesus humble abode there is no male or female (Galatians 3:38). Other than that window, and a few other holes in the wall, the biblical world is a man’s world ruled by Kings—not queens, Priests—not priestesses, and fathers and husbands not mothers and wives.

The morality of the Apostle Paul conforms to the typical pattern of conservative views. He emphasizes respect for authority. For Paul, as for the Jewish scholars before him, God is the ultimate authority. Like Jesus, Paul quotes from, or paraphrases the words of Moses and the Prophets--perhaps dozens of times—it depends on what you want to count as a quote or paraphrase (Keener, 2014). Authority is important to Paul on a personal level. His authority as an apostle was challenged. He claimed to get his authority directly from Jesus the Christ (Messiah) and from God (2 Corinthians 12: 11-19; Galatians 1:1).

Paul consistently encourages men in the churches to submit to the authority of government (Romans 13; Titus 3:1), which is consistent with the words of other men (Hebrews 13:17; 1 Peter 2:13-14). When Paul writes that women should submit to their husbands (Ephesians 5: 22-25; Colossians 3:18), it is in the context of an orderly hierarchy from God to Jesus to the church. His analogy is that Christ is the head of the church and the man is the head of the woman. Christ does not submit to the church and husbands do not submit to their wives. Paul’s analogy does not permit the notion that Christ is going to be in a mutually submissive relationship with men.

A challenge is sometimes raised by referring to Ephesians 5:21—that’s the verse about “mutualsubmission. Perhaps Paul is confused or perhaps those who want the verse to mean otherwise are ignoring the consistent teaching about wives submitting to husbands. Logically, the 5:21 verse about mutual submission fits with the previous section directing men within the church to submit to each other. True, a few women are mentioned in Paul’s letters (e.g., Romans 16). But let’s be honest, Paul makes some specific comments about women, which are not very supportive of equality in the church (1 Corinthians 14; 1 Timothy 2). It really isn’t any wonder why Christians have not supported equality for centuries—and many still don’t.

Paul’s cultural context has a history of not supporting women as equal with men. We have already noted that Paul quoted from the books attributed to Moses and the Prophets. He knew the scrolls we call the Old Testament. Paul takes readers back to the beginning to establish his concerns about women. He reminds the Corinthians (2 Cor. 11:3) that it was Eve who was deceived by the serpent in Genesis. And he reminds Timothy (1 Tim 2:13-14) of the same point-- making it clear that it was Eve and not Adam who was deceived. Think about Paul’s view of women through the lens of Eve’s deception. It’s as if Eve is a prototypical woman.

As I have written elsewhere (A House Divided, 2016), biblical teaching on women makes it clear that they were under the authority of their fathers who then transferred authority to their husbands. In the Law of Moses, Fathers—not daughters-- were to be compensated if their daughters were violated (Deuteronomy 22:29). There isn’t much concern for women in this law is there? Yes, I know there’s a very nice chapter in Proverbs 31 where a husband, at the city gates with the other ruling men (v. 23), is blessed because his wife takes on all kinds of responsibilities from early morning to late at night.

I support equality for women. I just don’t find support for equality in Paul’s writings. The summary in 1 Timothy 2:11 is pretty consistent with his teaching on women and the preponderance of Scripture before Paul sailed around the Roman Empire: “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man…” (emphasis added). The Timothy text is consistent with Paul's teaching, Israel's old laws, and Roman culture-- women have limited roles in life compared to men.

PUTTING OFF THE OLD MAN'S CULTURE

In my view, Paul’s ethical stance on love is consistent with Jesus’ love ethic. In the context of his culture, Paul likely elevated women in the Christian community through his recognition of them and his consistent warning to husbands to love their wives. The teaching and actions of Jesus and Paul revealed a counter-cultural transformative love-based shift to consider women as people rather than property. While not attacking the cultural norms governing life on earth, Paul made it clear in that in the Kingdom of Heaven women and men were equals.

Paul was no misogynist. But he was no supporter of gender equality either. Like all humans, Paul was a product of his culture. I don’t doubt he was inspired. And he often pointed readers in the direction of living a virtuous life—a life bearing fruits that nourish relationships in love, kindness, generosity, and so forth.

It’s no surprise that sincere Christian fundamentalists, adhering to biblical texts, want to be kind and loving toward women but cannot get past the texts. They see the texts clear enough. They are not lacking intelligence nor do they lack integrity. Instead, those evangelicals who try to bend the texts to support biblical equality walk the more precarious path for their path teaches people to look for loopholes, textual inconsistencies, mistranslations of Greek words, and small hints that a wealthy woman here or there got some respect and seemed to be a leader.

To me, the only honest way to get around Paul’s teaching about women being silent and submissive is to take the cultural route-- put off the old man in Paul's language. Paul spoke to men in a male-dominated culture, which has been true of human relationships in most places during human history. The rare places where women were honored are few and far between in the extant historical records. The principle of loving God and one’s neighbor and the principle that regardless of ethnicity, gender, or social status, all are children of God are the kind of principles on which a progressive moral stance of equality has a firm foundation. This moral stance does not attempt to challenge biblical authors for their inconsistencies nor does it seek to locate other proof texts like a child seeking a treat from one parent when the other has said no.

A principled morality requires the courage to discover moral principles and apply them within their cultural milieu. In this way, people can still say they know Christians by their love (John 13:35).

Some Additional Thoughts

Submission is a Serious Concern

I have a serious concern about the doctrine of submission as it has sometimes been practiced. In fact, Paul’s teaching that men must love their wives is crucial to the well-being of women encouraged to submit to men. Other biblical teachings that limited divorce options for women have kept submissive women chained to abusive men out of fear of eternal damnation for sinning against God. It is one thing to remind men of their duty to love their wives but it is quite another thing to ensure that men do not abuse their supposed authority to keep their wives in submission by force.

The Unchained Progressive Christian Approach

It might be tempting for fundamentalists and conservative evangelicals to think that progressive Christians, untethered by the literalistic interpretations of biblical texts might as well be agnostics or even atheists. Supporting their fears, some free from the chains of fundamentalists and their close kin in the evangelical community might find their way out of Christianity altogether. Despite those fears, many progressive Christians sincerely attempt to live a moral life informed by the principles of Scripture and shouldering the responsibility to love one another as worked out in the nitty-gritty of contemporary dilemmas that often shroud potential harm and unjust outcomes ignored by Christians who just follow rules with a "Hey, that's what God said" mentality. Progressive Christians are tethered by principles not bound by chains.

Women in Roman Culture

You can learn something about women in Israelite culture from the biblical texts. These would of course be part of Paul's culture as a Jew. But Paul also lived as a Roman citizen so to understand his culture and that of the people he wrote to, it is important to understand Roman culture. I have included a few notes along with references where you can read more.

Roman women were citizens but they could not vote or hold political office.

Women were under a man’s authority. First their fathers then their husbands.

Some wealthy women had more freedom than did other women.

Women could inherit and own property and engage in business.

They could be priestesses.

Marriage age was early teens for women, twenties for men and marriages were arranged.

Unfaithful wives who were divorced could not remarry.

Wives could be divorced if they did not bear a son.

Childbirth and disease risk meant many died in their 30s.

They were expected to be wives who cooked and raised children unless they were wealthy and had slaves.

Women and Ancient Cultures

I quoted Aristotle's view of women's inferiority from the Politics. There are other quotes that sound familiar to the teachings of the Apostle Paul. Recall Paul's comment about silencing women. In the Politics, Aristotle quotes a poet: "Silence is a woman's glory." (See Dudrey, 1999).

Dudrey quotes a neo-Pythagorean text about the importance of a woman's chastity. He obsrves that the worthy woman of Proverbs is similar to the descriptions of the wives of Homer and Plutarch among others. Dudrey concludes that households were fundamental to ancient cultures, which continued through inheritance and succession via worthy sons born to worthy women. The pure, obedient, worthy woman who honors and submits to her hunsband is a pervasive teaching of multiple cultures and shows up in Paul's guidance e.g., Titus 2:3; 1 Corinthians 14:33.

Dudley's article also supports other comments indicating that women were treated as the property of men in ancient cultures. Men had a primary interest in the children born to their wives. Dudley also notes that in ancient Athens, fathers even had control over their married daughters to the extent that they could terminate one marriage and marry the daughter to a more desirable husband.

Text Note

Some of you may be aware that a number of contemporary scholars do not consider the Apostle Paul to be the author of the epistles attributed to him. Those arguments are complex and deal with an analysis of texts beyond the scope of this post. I suggest that even if we were to rely on the texts most agree can be attributed to Paul, women still do not get much support when it comes to equality. Read more on this issue (Ostling, 2015). I also recommend The Moral Teaching of Paul by Victor P. Furnish.


In A House Divided, I write about gender issues, including submission, in Christian cultures. In Chapter 8 I write about Christian marriage and in Chapter 10 I discuss biblical views of women and men.


A House Divided is available from the publisher, PICKWICK, and other booksellers, including AMAZON. The book is used in seminary and university courses.

If you are a professor, get a free examination copy from PICKWICK.




References

Dudrey, R. (1999). 'Submit Yourselves to One Another': A Socio--Historical Look at the Household Code of Ephesians 5:15-6:9. Restoration Quarterly, 41(1), 27-44.



References by Hyperlink



About the photo: The prince and princess were about the same height but Prince Charles is pictured above his wife revealing a culture of male superiority.

Connect

www.suttong.com

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

SUBMISSIVE WOMEN DOMINATE





The rise of women to diverse positions of power in many world cultures marks a change in the historical record of male domination. Yet, in politics, religion, and family life, the predominant role for women is less than equal.

Pictures of Muslim women wearing the Burka, Niqab, or Hijab remind us of the powerful role of religious traditions in prescribing what women wear.

In preparing a presentation about biblical gender roles, I was reminded again of the consistent pattern of male leadership in the Bible­­—including those specific verses telling women to submit to their husbands.

In this post, I want to look at some ways women have emerged from the stifling grip of male-dominated Christian traditions. I will leave it to others to examine what is happening in other religious cultures.

Men Rule by God!

In the opening biblical stories, it is not long before Eve finds her place in a narrative that keeps women in submission for thousands of years. Paul, the traditional author of 1 Timothy 2, takes his readers back to the first few chapters of the Bible to explain the importance of “full submission” for women.

Of course, one text doesn’t make a doctrine. But the pattern of female submission, based on the order of creation, the teaching that the first woman led a man into sin, and the God ordained male leadership role (Genesis 3:16) remains the norm for male-female relationships in much of Christendom.

“Wives, submit yourselves…” (Ephesians 5:22 NIV). In this New Testament document, Paul explains the biblical hierarchy for family life as part of his teaching about the church. The message of wives submitting to men is repeated in Colossians 3 and 1 Timothy 2 as well as 1 Peter 3. The words are pretty similar so, it is easy to see why Christian women have lived in submission to men for thousands of years.

People used to joke about marriage being a “ball and chain” for men. In truth, women were the ones in bondage. Their only biblical methods for escape from a bad marriage were the death of a husband or divorce based on the husband’s adultery (e.g., Matthew 19; 1 Corinthians 7). In reality, men controlled political and religious power and thus determined who could divorce whom. And because women could not be in authority over men and were relegated to salvific childcare by God (1 Timothy 2:15), there was not much of a chance for women to live independently of a man.

Women as Helpful Property

We should not forget that women were created to be helpers for men (Genesis 2). In the “rapist rule,” women had no obvious control over their life. In Deuteronomy 22, a rapist must pay the girl’s father and marry his raped girl-victim for life. It’s common knowledge in Christian cultures that only men could have multiple wives and concubines. The biblical accounts make it clear that having a lot of beautiful women was evidence of God’s blessing.

Revising Men’s Bibles

So many things have happened in the past century in terms of male-female relationships that it is impossible to point to any one event as the primary reason for women approaching equality with men.

The links in the chain of submission include education, employment, and birth control. Ironically, two World Wars enhanced the role of women in those nations most involved in the wars. It’s only been about 100 years that women have gained the right to vote.

Following the revision of societal traditions of male dominance, women and men have begun to tackle the Christian submission narrative. Liberal divorce laws enabled women to separate from abusive men. In the last few decades, divorce among Christians has risen as it has in secular cultures. Divorced and remarried Christians are welcomed in most churches. The biblical text hasn’t changed but the narrative of condemnation has been silenced.

A number of churches hire women as clergy and support women in higher leadership positions. Religious people depend on text-linked arguments to justify changes. Women and men have promoted the few biblical examples of women in various leadership roles in ancient Israel (e.g., Miriam, Deborah) as well as during the early church (Mary, Tabitha). And they point to some examples of how Jesus interacted in kind and respectful ways toward women.

Revisionists highlight bits of text to show that there is no difference in God’s kingdom between men and women (Galatians 3:28). They remind congregants of mutual submission (Ephesians 5:21). And argue that many biblical teachings were specific to a godly life within an ancient culture or even a subculture.

A quick look at challenges to the restrictions in 1 Timothy 2 can be found at the Junia Project post by Gail Wallace. She makes five points worthy of consideration: 1. The translation of the word authority, 2. Failure to apply literal interpretations to other texts, 3. Ignoring the personal letter context, 4. Elevating these verses above other verses, 5. Logical problems in putting the text into practice.

Some like Karen King take an even stronger approach as she challenges men’s views of the Biblical texts. Not only does she point to leadership roles for women and challenge the negative narrative about Mary Magdalene, but she also refers to other texts (e.g., Gospel of Mary) left out of the Bible.

Will Christian Women Ever Attain Full Equality?

It is hard to imagine a world in which the Pope and Patriarchs of Christian Orthodox churches will be women. But it is not hard to see that women will continue to increase in shared decision-making power with men in many Christian groups, including the Catholic Church.

I suspect there will always be groups of Christians who will remain bound by traditional understandings of the biblical texts. Even in these conservative groups, the recent revisions in narratives have emphasized the importance of love and respect such that men are taught that leadership in homes requires them to love their wives as Christ loved the church.

Men have found crafty ways to maintain control or perhaps a semblance of biblical leadership. For example, women may be the pastors of churches or the CEOs of Christian organizations and Christian colleges but the denominational leader or head of the board is still a chairMAN.

When pressed about love, some men are  quick to point out that love is sometimes tough and that, as in medical care, sometimes pain is justified to save a life.

Notes

An interesting documentary, The Ascent of Woman, looked at the history of women and provided many examples of women left out of dominant narratives of history.

In A House Divided, I cover submission in the context of marriage in Chapter 8. In Chapter 10 I discuss biblical views of women and men.

A House Divided is available from the publisher, PICKWICK, and other booksellers, including AMAZON.



See the Gender Inequality Index for a general view of women and men in the world.

The conservative publication, Christianity Today, often includes stories of women in ministry.

After writing this post, I noticed that George Paul Wood posted a Podcast of an interview with Waldemar Kowalski questioning limitations to women's leadership in churches based on 1 Timothy 2:8-15.






Saturday, February 11, 2017

When Christian Cultures Clashed

Image result for Difference Between Catholics and Protestants




FIVE HUNDRED YEARS AGO, Martin Luther was at the forefront of an attack on a dominant Christian Culture, the Roman Catholic Church. As most Christians know, Christianity has since splintered into many subcultures, which often do battle over matters of belief.

Although the contentiousness between Catholics and non-Catholics has considerably abated in North America and Europe, there were times in the UK and its large North American colonies (after 4 July 1776, the United States), when Catholics were treated as outsiders—as people of a foreign religion.
Some features of the acrimonious verbal and physical battles between Catholics and non-Catholic Christians bear a similarity to current concerns aimed at people whose religion is suspect.

Catholics are of course those Christians under the leadership of the Pope. Non-Catholics are a diverse group consisting of several Orthodox traditions, Anglicans, Protestants, and a few other groups. In social science research, various classifications are used. I find in the US that people often think of Christians as either Protestants or Catholics.

I’m focusing on the United States because recent rhetoric in the world’s foremost superpower reminds me of previous battles between ruling Protestants and minority Catholics. And I wonder if people with sharp religious differences may one day live peacefully as most Catholic and non-Catholic Christians do today. Of course, I am mindful of the more recent horrid clashes between Protestants and Catholics in Ireland but that deserves a separate investigation though it is relevant to a broader understanding of religious conflict.

There are probably many ways to categorize the historic animosity between U S Catholics and Protestants. I’ve chosen a few based on Haidt’s analyses of moral-political values (See more in Chapter 4, A House Divided).

HARM AND DANGER FEARS

The recent concerns about unchecked immigration in Europe and the United States have been leading reasons for political change in the UK and USA. The attempted immigration ban by President Trump has been attacked as a thinly veiled attempt at keeping out Muslims because of the high percentage of Muslims in the countries named in his executive order. I won’t debate the issue of religion and the order here (see links below for related stories). My point is that many Americans fear Muslims because of the 911 attacks and the ongoing war against people who claim to be Muslims and often use the language of their faith in battle cries.

Pope Day” in the U S colonies was celebrated by burning effigies of the Pope on 5th November when the English remembered the Catholic, Guy Fawkes, who attempted to blow up the House of Lords and assassinate King James I, considered by some to be a Catholic sympathizer. That celebration in the US officially ended in 1775 when George Washington issued an “executive order” banning the event to obtain assistance from Catholic France to defeat the British forces.

JUSTICE FEARS

As recent as the 1990s, the Catholic faith of Justice Clarence Thomas was an issue. In 2010, Coffman in the conservative Christianity Today magazine asked: “Does it matter that there might soon be no Protestants on the Supreme Court?” Obviously, it mattered enough to warrant an essay, which noted only Jews and Catholics were on the court. Ironically, the current nominee, Neil Gorsuch, is an Episcopalian and former Catholic (Denver Post).

As I note in my book, A House Divided, the research supports the view that judges take their faith to court.

The U S has come a long way since 1641 where the “papists” were not permitted to hold a public office or even serve on a jury in Virginia.

AUTHORITY FEARS

Writers like Samuel F. B. Morse (Morse code fame) and Lyman Beecher (famous Beecher family) warned US citizens in the 1830s of Catholic plots against Protestants brought about through immigrants from Catholic countries and the Catholic parochial schools. Anti-Catholic violence was evident in the 1834 burning of the Ursuline Convent in Charlestown, MA- the day after Beecher preached his third anti-Catholic sermon.

Authority fears continued into the 20th Century. I recall the anti-Catholic rhetoric hurled against Catholic Presidential Candidate, John F. Kennedy who had to address the issues in a famous speech given 12 September 1960. Here’s a quote:

“I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish; where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source; where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials; and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.

LOYALTY FEARS

Loyalty fears can overlap with authority fears as evident in the concerns about President Kennedy’s religion. The fears may be construed as loyalty to the rules of the church vs. the laws of the US.
Such fears continue in the form of the Sharia law followed by Muslim groups. Here’s a 2012 quote from Presidential Candidate, Newt Gingrich.

“We should have a federal law that says under no circumstances in any jurisdiction in the United States will Sharia [law] be used in any court to apply to any judgment made about American law…”(Source TIME, 2016).


PURITY FEARS

Purity concerns are common to many religions and Christianity is no exception. Purity fears can take on various dimensions including basic fears of contamination from impure hands and foods to more abstract notions of impure, unholy, and untouchable people and doctrines (aka heresies and cults).
According to Massa, a salacious best seller of 1836, Maria Monk’s, Awful Disclosures of the Hotel Dieu Monastery in Montreal, told of a Protestant girl who escaped from a Catholic convent where she was a victim of sexual abuse. 

The recent exposure of sexual abuse by Catholic priests has fanned suspicion of celibacy and questions of the link between celibacy and sexual abuse (e.g., Power, SMH, 2014) despite some research (e.g., Oddie, CH, 2014;  Peralta, npr, 2011).

Doctrinal heresy is another form of purity. It is no surprise that various religious groups wish to distance themselves from others who commit some act considered at the time to be socially undesirable or worse. In the “Pope Day” festivities mentioned previously, the Pope was sometimes considered to be The Beast in the Book of Revelation.


 REFLECTIONS

I would not be surprised to find people capable of disputing all of the points I have made. Nevertheless, I think it reasonable to conclude that Protestants and Christians have had sharp disagreements in the past 500 years that have led to violence.

People care to distinguish their tribe from other tribes. Religious people are no exception. If we are not talking about  walls around castles and nations, we may be talking about psychosocial walls or boundaries of beliefs that identify members as inside or outside.

Often religious leaders establish boundaries based on belief or practice-linked belief (e.g., baptism). Although the harsh rhetoric in the West is often voiced by Christian and Muslim conservatives, harsh words, suspicion, and discrimination is not limited to fundamentalists. Moreover, when more salient clashes are less in the news, Christians find themselves at war against other Christians over issues such as women’s rights, LGBT rights, capital punishment, and so forth.

My hope is that understanding, promoting civil discussions, and bringing people of different beliefs and practices together, can lead to a safer and less contentious society as usually happens when Catholics and Protestants currently interact without concern for their religious beliefs.

Links to related articles I read (see intext links for other sources).






Friday, December 23, 2016

How Gifts to God Heal Divides

Serving Others





"Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 

When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 

When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?"

How is it possible to give God a gift?

In his lesson (Matthew 25: 31-46) Jesus answers:

"Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me."

I was with a group of students visiting an orphanage. At the end of the day we stopped for a meal. That's when I noticed one of our young men had no shoes. During the day, he noticed a young man's shoes were falling apart. In response, he took off his shoes and gave them away.

The poverty in this world can be overwhelming. In Western nations many have their needs met in abundance. We can take the Matthew verses literally to give food, water, and clothes to the needy. We can visit the marginalized.

We can also respond to those who needs aren't so literal but nonetheless need assistance to cope with illness, loneliness and so on.

How Does Giving Heal?

I have written and spoken about the problems in Christian Cultures, which often appear as A House Divided.

The lesson in Matthew 25 reminds us of God's commandment to love others. Acts of love build relationships even as needs are met. Building relationships is one antidote to creating divisions.

Christians caring for others are busy people. Their work will never end. The poor will always be with us. Human needs are everywhere. I suspect those busily doing what they can have little time to invest in dividing the church by arguing about different interpretations of Scripture.



Buy from Wipf and Stock    Buy on Amazon  




Wednesday, December 7, 2016

Masturbation and Christianity Part 2 About Men



I didn't know what to say. Most of us got quiet... embarassed in fact. It was a weekly meeting. It was normally a time to share some inspiration and pray. Mostly a rowdy bunch, these guys were Christians. The unusual event was the time when Rob (not his real name) apparently felt considerable anguish. With head down, he was crying real tears. He seemed to feel so unworthy. He confessed to all of us that he masturbated. He felt called to become a pastor. It wasn't long before he left our group. And I never knew what happened to him.

John Piper's comment about masturbation and men in ministry (see quote below) is likely the trigger that reminded me of this story. In any event, Christian leaders have given young men different advice for years. In this post, I look at a sample of comments and offer some thoughts on the subject.

PART 2

“Christians need a theology of masturbation.” Really?

In the previous post, I considered what Christian thinkers wrote about female masturbation. In this post, I look at comments focused on men. And I look at how they use the Bible and reasoning to reach conclusions.

What do we know from research?

According to research summarized by Hyde and Delameter (2017), some 40% of college students recall masturbating before puberty. Data from a 2009 survey indicated 80% of boys reported  masturbating by age 17. The data for married men (ages 18 to 49) was similar to that reported in the previous post for women (41 to 61%) reported masturbating in the past 90 days.

What the Bible says about male masturbation:
(The Bible does not address male masturbation unless Judges 3:24 is an indirect reference.)

What do Christian leaders say about masturbation?

They say a lot of things about sex. And some have opinions about masturbation.

John Piper (8 April, 2008) “votes no” in a simple and straightforward commentary. My understanding of Piper’s reasoning is that male masturbation involves imagery of a woman, which treats her as a sex object. Masturbation creates guilt that interferes with obeying God’s will. He acknowledges that most people masturbate but encourages men not to let this sin keep them from their calling.

Jesse Eubanks and Josh Hatcher of Relevant Magazine (2 July 2009) combine the issue of masturbation with lust and sexual immorality. Amidst the back and forth comments on concerns about lust and addiction, Jesse wrote: “Masturbation has the potential to be healthy and even a continuation of worship in our lives. It also has the potential to destroy life and fellowship with God.” Josh responds with several concerns such as the effects of masturbation on a married couple’s relationship. In the next to the last paragraph he writes: “Ultimately, the decision must be made between the individual and God.”

Driscoll and Driscoll say a lot. I searched the digital version of their book, Real Marriage, and found 100 matches to the term (several are to the reference section). They provide statistics consistent with what you will read most places -- most men masturbate—especially young single men. You will read about the neurological and biochemical components of the sexual pleasure involved in the motoric act of masturbation usually coupled with pornographic imagery. They address the issue of pornography, which is likened to prostitution.

Finally, they consider the Bible and affirm what was said above: “The Bible does not forbid masturbation (p. 182).” There is a reference to possible masturbation in the Song of Songs but again-- no forbidden act. Additional consideration is given to questions about the helpfulness of masturbation and deciding if it is enslaving. My take is that the bottom line advice is masturbation become sin when it interferes with God’s design for sex between a married man and woman. (Read the book for a full context.)

Billy Graham Evangelistic Association (24 May 2016). In response to a question “…is masturbation a sin?” The BGEA advised abstaining from masturbation as follows (see the link for details):

Masturbation is not specifically referred to in the Bible. However, several scriptural principles indicate that it is a practice from which a Christian should abstain. First, it is usually accompanied by the sin of willfully entertaining lustful thoughts and desires which are clearly forbidden by the Lord (Matthew 5:28). The more one dwells on such fantasy, the more likely it is to become a reality in behavior (James 1:14-15). Second, masturbation easily becomes a habit that people become dependent on (Romans 6:12-14). Third, self-directed sex violates God’s creation design for the right use of His good gift of sexuality (Genesis 1:24, 1 Corinthians 7:3-4, 9). Persistent, compulsive masturbation can also be the symptom of deeper psychological or spiritual problems, such as destructive feelings of inadequacy, rejection and loneliness.

James Dobson answered questions about masturbation and many other issues during his career. In an old letter, he observed that Bible scholars disagreed on the subject. He asserted that from a medical perspective, the act is not harmful. He focused on four problematic issues: Guilt, obsession with masturbation, addiction to pornography, and a habit that can continue into and affect marriage. Read the short letter to get the details and context.


1. As in the previous post, Christians won’t find biblical rules specifically addressing the sex act of masturbation. I suspect this would pose a problem for those who usually take a biblical rule and apply that rule in a literal fashion.

2. As with many matters, Christians must use reason if they wish to create a life principle form biblical texts. As we can see, Christian thinkers in a position to influence large numbers of people, offer different opinions about masturbation.

 3. I continue to think that analyzing the morality of masturbation and other topics requires some sort of rubric. That’s why I still recommend the six-factor approach (harm, fairness, loyalty, authority, liberty, purity) based on the work of Jonathan Haidt and his colleagues. This approach promotes understanding of an issue. It does not answer the question as to whether it is right or wrong. Most of my comments on masturbation can be found in chapter 7 of A House Divided.

4. Dobson’s comment about obsession indicates a better term for a problem with sexual behavior that interferes with life functioning than the term addiction.

5. Concerns about guilt are not uncommon. Guilt can interfere with well-being thus it must be removed. Those who feel convicted of sin will find God forgives. Those who feel guilty of violating personal standards may benefit from self-forgiveness. Those who continue to struggle with guilt and other distress related to any form of sexuality will be best served by seeking counseling.

6. The conservative Christian sources I read focus mostly on boys or men and the problem with pornography. That’s an important concern but Christians will need to realize that the human sexual response varies from person to person. Movies considered acceptable by contemporary Christians would be considered pornographic by Christians a few decades ago. Advertisements for women’s wear can stimulate a sexual response in men yet not violate any laws of decency in some countries.


I’ve seen posters about porn designed to scare young Christian men. An intelligent approach to the pervasiveness of porn requires setting principled standards of decency. Treating people as sex objects, exploitation of vulnerable persons, and depictions of rape and harm are common starting points for setting limits. The problem of deciding what is porn and what is not porn should not hinder efforts to set moral boundaries.

8. I still think every church and Christian school needs a sex education program with age-appropriate details. Sex education needs to be a life-long process. Masturbation is just one topic to include. I cannot imagine how pastors and psychotherapists can do their job if they haven't studied human sexuality.

9. I still don’t see any writers offering opinions about masturbation and sexual minorities. I wonder if those who identify both as a Christian and as a sexual minority and feel committed to a single life find masturbation to be an alternative to marriage?

CONCLUSION: Christian Theology, Sex, Masturbation

After considering what others have written, I think a theology of masturbation and even sex might not make sense because there is insufficient context to provide a meaningful framework. I have given some thought to the NEA booklet, Theology of Sex, which I still recommend as a basis for considering views about sex from a conservative Christian perspective.

 Although the NEA referred to love in the booklet they do not establish sexuality on a foundation of love, which I consider vital to an integrated Christian-Faith perspective.

When Jesus summed up the law he gave two commandments pointing us to love of God and others (Matthew 22: 36-40). We know Christians are to be marked by love (John 13:35). Love is the foundation for a theology of sex, more appropriately viewed as a Theology of Human Relationships.

Healthy relationships are characterized by love with attributes of caring and sacrifice. Marital relationships include the gift of sex. And sex is one aspect of love that helps bind couples together. Strong healthy relationships provide a supportive setting for those couples whose sex produces children. 

This love-sex connection that brings couples together in a strong relationship ideal for raising children provides not only a basis for a theology of healthy relationships inclusive of sex but it also provides a basis for integrating theology with biopsychology.

As several have pointed out, the Bible does not address the sex act of masturbation.

Unfortunately for sincere young Christians, when Christian leaders offer reasons to consider masturbation as an acceptable or unacceptable alternative to marital sex they disagree. And several writers want to make a point about pornograhpy, which is understandably denounced. No one supports pornography; though no one provided specific guidelines as to what should be off-limits. 

For practices neither mentioned in Scripture nor clearly violating general moral principles prohibiting harm, infidelity, and so forth, Christians are left with the commonly quoted "law of liberty" offered by St. Paul in regard to disagreements over the Sabbath (See Romans 14: 5-6). For those feeling distressed over masturbation or related issues of lust and porn, several writers wisely remind readers about forgiveness.

There are some weak points in the various arguments but I did not consider the critiques worth pursuing in providing any more definitive guidance for Christians. So much has been said. 

Previous posts



Theology of Masturbation (Women)
    http://dividedchristians.blogspot.com/2016/12/theology-of-masturbation.html


Resources

Of course, I want you to buy my book, A House Divided available from the publisher, Pickwick, and inexpensively as a Kindle ebook on Amazon. I refer to the scriptures on masturbation and many other sex topics.

If you are leading a book study group, there's an inexpensive discussion guide for A House Divided on AMAZON.

I hope it helps with personal study, book study groups, and related courses at Christian schools and colleges. 

There’s also a free website with more information about sexuality and morality in Christian cultures. https://sites.google.com/site/dividedchristians/

Book ad: Read more about Sexuality and Morality in
 A House Divided


References
Hyde, J. & DeLamater, J. (2017). Understanding human sexuality (13th Edition). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.  ISBN-13: 9781259544989

Sutton, G. W. (2016). A house divided: Sexuality, morality, and Christian cultures. Eugene, OR: Pickwick. ISBN: 9781498224888

Please keep comments respectful and dignified.