This article was from the Melbourne Age from 2005. Sadly, I can't attribute it, as it is from my pre-blogging days but it does put the significance of Easter in perspective. There are statements in this article you're going to challenge.
The question is how our shared values might be kept from consignment to the museum if the faith that shaped them continues to decline in influence.
The cross, according to Christians, stands at the centre of history. On this day, about 1975 years ago, Roman soldiers scourged Jesus and nailed him to the cross. Christians believe this appalling piece of cruelty was God's deliberate plan, the supreme demonstration of his love and his identification with human suffering. The cross is used repeatedly in the New Testament as a metaphor to sum up the content of Christianity.
On the cross, the Bible teaches, humankind was ransomed, redeemed, reconciled with God and acquitted of guilt and sin. Sydney Smith, the 19th-century Anglican wit, was surely right when he observed that "man is certainly a benevolent animal. A never sees B in distress without thinking that C ought to relieve him directly." According to Christianity, God saw A, B and C's distress and acted, in the cross.
Non-Christians, of course, don't see it this way. Nevertheless, for them, too, the cross represents a defining historical moment because Christianity's influence has reached most of the globe. Certainly it has been the overwhelming force shaping Western culture and values, so much so that many humanists concede there is little in their ethical outlook that wasn't earlier in Christianity.
Sometimes the influence is obvious, as in the church's work among the poor and broken. Hospitals, for example, are a Christian invention, along with free public education. And sometimes the influence is malign, as when the church has helped to entrench injustice and endorsed the status quo.
Sometimes the influence is so deep it is taken utterly for granted. Take the ethic of love: Christianity took the Greek concept of unconditional agape and gave it new meaning, centred in human relationships. Or humility - perhaps the central virtue of a Christian - is by no means esteemed in all cultures. Agamemnon and Achilles, Homer's heroes of ancient Greece, fell out over the honour owed them.
Centuries later, Aristotle's great-souled man was duty-bound to trumpet his worth and require due recognition, so long as he did not exaggerate it. As Australia moves into post-Christian modes of living, humility is ever less valued, and most of us regret its loss (at least in other people).
The most enduring ethical bequest of Christianity is the belief that all humans are equal in dignity and have unique worth as individuals. That flows directly from the belief that every person is created in the image of God. Many can no longer use that sort of language today - opting instead for the discourse of rights - but most still insist that humans have individual value. Whatever else people might make of what Christians commemorate today, this enduring value flows from a Christian culture.
Most Australians, while valuing a pluralistic and multicultural society, also admire many other ethical values that linger from our Judaeo-Christian heritage - such concepts as compassion, love, forgiveness and redemption. The question is how our shared values might be kept from consignment to the museum if the faith that shaped them continues to decline. Some ethical capital remains but it is fast being spent.
One thing Christians note with interest is that though atheists and agnostics may reject the notion of a personal deity they admire the example Jesus set in his life and teaching. Non-believers often suggest that these ethical qualities can endure independently of religious belief. Christians have their doubts, because Jesus' ethical teaching flowed directly from his theological commitments.
But, in a pluralistic society, Christians should be glad that their values retain the purchase they do. Perhaps the biggest challenge facing the church is to present and preserve a world in which these values can flourish.
I think there is truth to the notion that many christian ethics have been adopted by non-christian thinkers... perhaps even unwittingly. The problem, however, is that Christ said that love is the greatest commandment, and the unbelieving thinker may have a similar opinion or he may not. Even if we simply took atheists and agnostics (forgetting about all the other non-christians in the world), they are admittedly a very diverse group among themselves, since the only thing they hold in common is simply a lack of belief in God. For them this means that while they may admire Jesus' teaching ( and yet they may not too), they don't necessarily possess the same sense that the christian does that love for others is the greatest requirement to fulfill in your life.
ReplyDeleteChristianity provides all sorts of teachings, commandments, instructions, exhortations and graces to direct a person to fulfill its ethics, but the world outside the church does not have anything approaching the same level of help to direct a person to be ethical. Christ taught that love is the greatest commandment, but the world outside the church teaches ethics just as readily as it teaches proper hygiene or work-efficiency; the world doesn't really treat love as the most important thing a person needs to do... it is just something that a person should do, but not necessarily the greatest, and that's a key thing that seperates the christian understanding.
God Bless,
Thanks for that, David.
ReplyDelete