The following is dedicated to Pope
Francis and was inspired by the film Quo
Vadiis.
Marx’s famous opium of
the people quote is really about the expression of a people who are suffering
in powerlessness against forces beyond their command. What was needed is more
control over the things that happen to us that brings about that suffering. The
goal is to expand real democracy to all aspects of life. Marx‘s claimed was
that religion would be necessary until that suffering could deal in real and
material terms. (Marx)
Engels would further
claim that in the beginning Christianity had many elements of a genuine protest
movement. It was an expression of an oppressed people. Like socialism of the time of Engels,
the appeal was to the bottom rungs of society talking about the approaching
salvation. The chains of repression and suffering would be burst asunder. Where
the Christian look to the next life for justice, the socialist looked forward
to the approaching revolution in this life to make things right. In the early
days of both movements the authorities had cracked down hard on followers. Just
like the red scares that periodically plagued American history Christianity
made an easy target for Roman authorities. But, in both cases the persecution
only created martyrs for the cause. (Engels)
Christianity began in
protest. But, it grew first in an area of protest. The Jewish revolt and the
destruction of the temple was the real origin of the spread of Christianity.
Jew vs. Jew, after the destruction
of the temple, only the Pharisee and Christian Jew remained, of the main
competing factions of Judaism. The Pharisee is the Rabbinical Judaism and as
God’s chosen they are the keeper of the law. Like most tribal people, who are
all God's chosen, they must remain separated from the other. (Myers)
Early Christians’ main goals were to
build communities of resistance to oppression. The Christians rejected armed
struggle. Romans would exterminate Zealots committed to armed struggle. The
Christians rejected the withdrawing from the Roman world like the Essen who the
Romans hunted down. The church in
Palestine was rural based and very much in the Jewish tradition. (Kautsky)
Paul re-established a modified
version of the law less rigorous. This version of Christianity was still Jewish
but designed for urban Rome, and also would open its doors to Greeks and Romans.
The Rabbis criticism of the Christians was similar to their criticism of the
Samaritans. Both were weak in following of the law therefore unclean. The
Christians criticism of the Pharisees was they were legalistic and too
intellectual. Soon Christianity spread to the non-Jew (Kautsky)
Christian Eschatological was central
to their theology. This includes the replacement of this evil world with a holy
world. To the Rabbinical Jew the next life remains unknown, and we are to focus
on living the law and how to be the best person we can in this life. God will
take care of us after we die. Both can lead to a secular movement of Socialism,
yet the revolutionary socialist share more in common with the Christian.
(Aptheker)
While in the past much
what we call organized religion have been a major ideological support for
established relationships of power. At times in history religious imagery has
been used in protest movements against those relationships of power. After
three hundred years Christianity became the official religion of Rome and a
source of oppression. Thus behind these confrontations were competing classes. (Engels)
The simple message equality
still lies deep within the teachings of the Church. The same teachings used to
justify power have been the source of inspiration for rebellion. From the early
Middle Ages through the early modern period in Europe discontent with wealth,
power and corruption borrowed from Christianity to express itself. An example
can be found in the liberation theology of Latin America of the late 1960’s on.
In Latin America Christianity and
Marxism (with a healthy dash of left anarchism) can be easily synthesized. Even
though many Marxist and Anarchist reject God, their tradition was an outgrowth
of Eschatological Christianity. To both Marxist and Liberation Christian their
focus is on the poor. To the radical Christian God loves the poor more than the
rich, because the poor are more in need of God’s love. Marxism tries to become
the voice of the poor. To the Marxist our duty is to struggle for political and
economic equality. To the radical Christian poverty is an abomination to God.
The cause of poverty is wealth; therefore to become overly wealthy is sin. (Gutierrez)
Liberation theology rightly condemns a tradition that
attempts to use God for its own ends but wrongly denies God's definitive
self-disclosure in biblical revelation. To argue that our conception of God is
determined by the historical situation is to agree with radical secularity in
absolutizing the temporal process, making it difficult to distinguish between
theology and ideology.
According to Gutierrez Marxism may
be a useful tool in identifying the class struggle that is being waged in many
Third World countries, but the question arises whether the role of Marxism is
limited to a tool of analysis or whether it has become a political solution.
Liberation theology rightly exposes the fact of oppression in society and the
fact that there are oppressors and oppressed, but it is wrong to give this
alignment an almost ontological status. This may be true in Marxism, but the Christian
understands sin and alienation from God as a dilemma confronting both the
oppressor and the oppressed. Liberation theology's emphasis upon the poor gives
the impression that the poor are not only the object of God's concern but the
salvific (having the
power to redeem) and revelatory (relating to revelation)
subject. Only the cry of the oppressed is the voice of God. Everything else is
projected as a vain attempt to comprehend God by some self-serving means. This
is a confused and misleading notion. Biblical theology reveals that God is for
the poor, but it does not teach that the poor are the actual embodiment of God
in today's world. Liberation theology threatens to politicize the gospel to the
point that the poor are offered a solution that could be provided with or
without Jesus Christ. (Gutierrez)
Liberation theology stirs Christians
to take seriously the social and political impact of Jesus' life and death but does
not ground Jesus' uniqueness in the reality of his deity. It claims he is different
from us by degree, not by kind, and that his cross is the climax of his
vicarious identification with suffering of mankind rather than a
substitutionary death offered on our behalf to turn away the wrath of God and
triumph over sin, death, and the devil. (Gutierrez)
The foundation of
Marxism is humanism. Early Marx’s writings were well within the tradition of
secular humanism. Later in his lifetime his study of political economy the
humanist root remained. Liberation theology can and will borrow from Marxist
sociology, but remains Christian to its core. The Marxist can find a friend and
ally in the Radical Christian, as long as the Marxist realized as a secular
humanist she and her Christian friends would never share the same worldview.
Bibliography
Aptheker, Hebert (1968)
Marxism and Religion in Marxism and Christianity Ed. By Hebert Aptheker: New
York Humanities Press
Frederick
Engels 1894
On the
History of Early Christianity
First Published: In Die Neue Zeit,
1894-95
Gutierrez, Gustavo (1988) A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation, Mayknoll,
New York; Orbs Press
Karl Kautsky Foundations of Christianity (1908)
Taken from Marxists
Archives
http://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1908/christ/index.htm
Works
of Karl Marx 1843
Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right
Introduction (1844)
Cambridge
University Press, 1970 Ed. Joseph O’Malley;
Myers, Ched (2003)
Binding the Strong Man: A Political Reading of Mark’s Story of Jesus,
Maryknoll, New York: Orbs Books
The early Christian faith at the time
of Nero, Peter and Paul held the leadership of the Church in Rome jointly. This
was important because until the Protestant Reformation the apostolic legitimacy
was central to the authority of the Church. The succession of spiritual authorization from the Apostles for the Church leadership was fundamental to the faith.
According to tradition Simon renamed Peter was a fisherman from
the village named Capernaum and was the first chosen by Jesus to be a disciple.
He was to end up in Rome and became the first Bishop there. It was the Roman
elder Clement that writes about Peter’s trial and Eusebius records that he was
crucified, and unlike Jesus Peter was crucified upside down, as Peter believed
he was unworthy to die in the manner that is lord died. Most of what we know
comes from Church sources.
We know very little about the early Church outside of scripture,
and Church writings of the second century. The epistles of Paul it appears to
predate the gospels. In the first two centuries there were many Christian
faiths and many competing stories and mutually exclusive descriptions of
Christ. Rome too was the seen of competing and mutually hostile sects. But, one denomination would win out over
the others. Not only did different faiths claim to have a special connection to
different apostles, different regions claimed their own connection to these
early Apostles. St. Clement of Rome wrote the apostles appointed successors to
continue their work in different regions.
Paul was closely connected to Antioch, John at Ephesus and Alexandria;
Mark in Alexandria, Thomas it was said went to India. In Rome both Peter and
Paul were venerated. In the second century the bishop of Rome was recorded in
sources independent of Church traditions. It was established, the apostolic
legitimacy of Peter as the first Bishop of Rome. But, earlier both Peter and Paul received benefaction of the Roman Church. It appears by
the beginning of the second century Peter was the first Bishop of Rome. Before
then in Rome, a council of presbyters controlled the church. Paul
remained the founding spirit of the Eastern Church. As the most important sect
of Christianity would slowly win out and became the Orthodox/ Catholic faith
differences began. Peter became more important than Paul in Rome, the Eastern
Church Paul became most important and John for the Coptic Church.
Paul (Saul
of Tarsus) was perhaps the true author of much of the orthodox Christianity, including
Catholics and Protestants. Though not one of the original Twelve he became the
untiring Apostle to the non-Jews of the Roman World after his conversion on the
road to Damascus. Even
non-believers say Paul existed and what survives of his writings predates the
gospels. Probably it was through Paul the Christianity spread to the non-Jewish
population in the Roman world. Paul wrote
at least some of the books of the New Testament accredited to him. Seven
letters attributed to Paul are undisputed, six more are in fact disputed, and most serious
scholars doubt the “Epistle” to the “Hebrews” as Paul’s work.
No comments:
Post a Comment