Blocking abundant life

Yeah, the presidential campaign debates were last night. I didn't watch. My tolerance for GOP nonsense is too low to listen to that much of it, even if it is followed by (some) rebuttal. Since I didn't watch, I'm not going to talk about it. On to something else.

I've now read four books by Bishop John Shelby Spong. He is quite critical of the way Christianity is currently practiced, and that includes a good chunk of its doctrine. I won't get into the far reaches of Spong's critique. One aspect is enough for now. This is from Spong's book Jesus for the Non-Religious.

The Gospel of John, chapter 10, verse 10 says "I have come that they might have life and have it abundantly." An abundant life sounds similar to my ideas that the goal of following Jesus is to enhance mental health and build community. Spong goes on to say that an abundant life should be the way we measure what and how well the church is doing. Christianity's pervasive prejudices -- against those of another race, gender, or orientation -- do not lead to abundant living.

That leads to interesting questions. Why have those prejudices been supported by the church for over a millennia? (I have a little quibble with Spong. From my reading of the book Saving Paradise I'm not convinced that these prejudices were around during the first millennia of Christianity. But that doesn't lessen Spong's argument).

Second question: Why didn't society deal with these prejudices until the church's grip on society began to lessen? (Perhaps an unanswerable chicken/egg corollary: Did the church's lessening influence allow society to forge ahead with women's rights and civil rights? Or did society's work in these issues lead to the lessening of the church's influence?)

Related question: Why does Christianity seem to require a perpetual victim?

Spong documents the church's ongoing push for prejudice: attacks on gays, attacks on women's reproductive rights, hostility when the church is challenged, the replacement of slavery with segregation and the violence when Jim Crow was threatened, the glee and enthusiasm that appears when describing the fate of the unbeliever, and attacks on Jews in the past and Muslims today. Spong writes:

Prejudice operates through an overt act of human projection, which involves three steps. First we designate the victim. Next, onto that victim we project all our inadequacies, hurts, and fears. Third, we reject the one onto whom these human feelings are now projected. We are thus not to be blamed for these things, the victim is.

It is the fault of Jews that prevented Christianity from dominating the world. Blacks caused the Civil War. Communism caused the Great Depression. Women caused the decline in family values. Gays caused the decline in marriage.

All that prejudice is the result of a great deal of anger among Christians. And a great deal of self-hatred. No, this is not good mental health. Or abundant life.

Spong identifies the source of this anger and hatred. Examples from hymn lyrics: "Saved a wretch like me." "Who was the guilty? … I crucified thee." From the Mass: "I am not worthy to gather up the crumbs" from the divine table. And in every service a prayer of confession listing things we did and shouldn't have and things we didn't and should have. We're told repeatedly how hopeless, wretched, inadequate, and evil we are. Guilt seems to be an essential ingredient. Christians believe that God's punishment is deserved and that punishment is turned aside only because God allowed his son to be killed.

That makes God an ogre, Jesus a victim, and Christians grateful and thus dependent. That is neither maturity nor abundant life.

We need prejudice to counteract all that self-hate. Project it all on someone else and banish it. We need it because we've been beaten down by our religion and grasp at anything to help us feel better. We're so beaten we need to at least feel superior to someone else. I've noticed this intense desire for some to proclaim their superiority to others (a lot of this blog is in response to that).

If the Christian God sees humans as "broken, fallen, sinful, inadequate, weak, dependent, and childlike" won't a man, trying to emulate God, feel justified in viewing women as "broken, fallen, sinful, inadequate, weak, dependent, and childlike"?

The way out, suggests Spong, is to look at Jesus differently. Instead of saying he came for salvation, emphasize instead his work to eliminate tribal boundaries, religious boundaries, and prejudices and stereotypes. Spong devotes a chapter to each of those.

All those boundaries and prejudices are a desperate need of security. That need of security lessens when we emphasize abundant life, when we work to develop mental health for all and community that includes all.

I’m pretty sure my friend and debate partner would not describe me as perpetually angry, full of self-hatred, and seething with prejudices. So obviously the comments above about Christianity do not apply to every local congregation or perhaps even every denomination. It may depend on how much the liturgy emphasizes all I mentioned above. In the case of my own congregation, yes, we have a confession during the service, but it is rather mild. Yes, we occasionally sing some of the songs about being a "wretch." But the sermon is not focused on how evil we are. However…

Hearing the way my congregation bickers and seeing the hatred towards gays (and women) at General Conference, perhaps that little exposure in my church and denomination does have its effect.