 I recently attended a Methodist church service where the minister spoke on the subject of obedience, claiming that it was the foundation of faith and the only way to gain access to the Holy Spirit. It struck me how much of a difference a single word can make when talking about our faith journey and how words, as much as actions, can influence our view of religion and serve to define its relevance in our lives. No discussion of words would be complete without a quick trip to the dictionary. In this case, obedience is defined as "compliance with an order, request, or law, or submission to another's authority." The minister quoted Acts 5:32, which states, "And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him." The preceding passages deal with Jesus' apostles, namely Peter and John, who were spreading the teachings of Jesus and performing many miracles of healing, much to the consternation of the local high priest and "the party of the Saducees." When Peter refers to being "witnesses to these things," he's referring to the crucification of Jesus, which he expresses as "whom you killed by hanging him on a tree." Peter is making the case that the apostles, and by extension all those who are believers, "must obey God rather than men." But at what cost does obedience come? What the minister failed to share was how Acts 5 actually begins, which is with an introduction to a man named Ananias and his wife Saphira, who had sold a piece of property and "kept back some of the proceeds, and brought only a part and laid it at the feet of the apostles' feet." Peter responds by asking "why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land?" He goes on to ask, "How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God." At hearing his words, Ananias fell down and dead. A short while later, the wife is similarly confronted by Peter, not knowing that her husband had died, and Peter asks, "How is it you have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? Hark, the feet of those that have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out. Immediately she fell down at his feet and died." In both cases, Peter cites the Holy Spirit as the one to whom an injustice has been done, not for murder or adultery, or some crime against humanity for which capital punishment might be considered appropriate, but gather for the sin of not having turned over 100% of the proceeds from the sale of their property to the apostles, i.e., the church, so that it could be redistributed by Peter to those he deemed more needful. Mind you, this isn't one of Jesus' allegories where the husband and wife aren't real, but rather only symbolize the greed of mankind or man's capacity to commit sins. This is told in the historical context of the apostles' travels throughout the Holy Land. So when the minister quotes Acts 5:32 as, "...the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him," and then goes on to say that obedience is the ground on which faith is based and the only way to gain access to the Holy Spirit, while failing to mention that that same holy ground contains the bodies of those who were struck dead by the Holy Spirit for being disobedient, you have what might be deemed the key challenge of religious faith vs. purely spiritual faith: namely that the first is burdened by the inescapable weight of inconsistency and outright contradiction (God loves you, but will strike you dead if you disobey Him), while the second is true in so much as it can be experienced in the present moment through a spirit-felt connection with God, and through extension, the Holy Spirit. I can't help but find purely spiritual faith superior over the alternative and based on recent Pew Research that shows an increasing trend for individuals to identify as not religiously affiliated or "nones," I'm not alone. As much as I'd like to a part of the larger and more established religious community of faith, I find it hard, if not impossible, to do so when messages have to be so finely crafted so as to convey only the convenient parts--that which works to the advantage of the messenger--while consciously leaving out the unpleasant truths that weaken the messenger's ability to convert the listener. That's true of so many things these days: politics, news coverage, advertising, and sadly organized religion. The Course acknowledges that traditional religious beliefs interpret obedience in much the same way as laid out in Acts 5, while offering an alternative view on the topic in Chapter 11, Sec. 6, titled Waking in Redemption. T-11.6.5. Do not underestimate the power of the devotion of God's Son, nor the power the god he worships has over him. For he places himself at the altar of his god, whether it be the god he made or the God Who created him. That is why his slavery is as complete as his freedom, for he will obey only the god he accepts. The god of crucifixion demands that he crucify, and his worshippers obey. In his name they crucify themselves, believing that the power of the Son of God is born of sacrifice and pain. The God of resurrection demands nothing, for He does not will to take away. He does not require obedience, for obedience implies submission. He would only have you learn your will and follow it, not in the spirit of sacrifice and submission, but in the gladness of freedom. The Course seeks to have us replace the idea of submission and a focus on sacrifice and pain with the "God of resurrection," and the achievable goal of learning of the Will we share with God and then following His message of joy in daily practice through communion with the Holy Spirit and fellowship with our brothers and sisters in Christ. T-11.6.6. Resurrection must compel your allegiance gladly, because it is the symbol of joy. Its whole compelling power lies in the fact that it represents what you want to be. The freedom to leave behind everything that hurts you and humbles you and frightens you cannot be thrust upon you, but it can be offered you through the grace of God. And you can accept it by His grace, for God is gracious to His Son, accepting him without question as His Own. Who, then, is your own? The Father has given you all that is His, and He Himself is yours with them. Guard them in their resurrection, for otherwise you will not awake in God, safely surrounded by what is yours forever. It's through the grace of God, not for fear of Him, that we're asked to gladly offer our allegiance as a means of realizing the joy that He is in us. Allegiance, while similar to obedience, conveys a greater sense of loyalty, faithfulness, and commitment of a subordinate to a superior rather then submission through threats of withholding rewards or inflicting punishment. T-11.6.7. You will not find peace until you have removed the nails from the hands of God's Son, and taken the last thorn from his forehead. The Love of God surrounds His Son whom the god of crucifixion condemns. Teach not that I died in vain. Teach rather that I did not die by demonstrating that I live in you. For the undoing of the crucifixion of God's Son is the work of the redemption, in which everyone has a part of equal value. God does not judge His guiltless Son. Having given Himself to him, how could it be otherwise? I find it interesting that an antonym or opposite meaning for obedience is rebellion. To be disobedient isn't just to disagree with something or someone, but rather to be put into a position where one feels forced to outright reject and actively rebel against it. Seen in that context, religious obedience can be seen as an all or nothing proposition and for those who choose to "disobey" either through thoughts or actions, there aren't many options. It is this fact, in particular, that I think accounts for the rise of the nones in modern society.
I happily acknowledge that organized religion, and specifically local churches, temples, mosques, and synagogues serve an important function in both their members' lives and in the communities in which they serve. The church to which I refer in this post, and in particular, the minister whom I reference, go well beyond the norm in terms of serving the homeless and underprivileged, and I think that's much needed and highly admirable. That said, I also think it's true that if organized religion were less inclined to promote fear as a means of ensuring obedience, then religious affiliation might be on the rise instead of decline. Fortunately, with 68% of those who identify as religiously unaffiliated saying that they still believe in God or a universal spirit, a decline in church membership doesn't equate to a lack of belief in God or of faith in general, and that's good news. Comments are closed.
|
