I. Jesus’ Ethics :
2. an equal; a person of the same class or rank; peer…
3. a man or boy… [emphasis added].
“Fellowship”:
Mutual association of persons on equal and friendly terms;
…familiar intercourse;…an association of persons having the same tastes…
142 For a more complete delineation of Plato’s ladder of love, see Plato’s “Symposium” in Great Dialogues of Plato, Eric H. Warmington and Philip G. Rouse, editors, W.H.D. Rouse, translator (NY: New American Library, 1984), pp.69-117.
Some modern Christian churches are returning to the ancient term koinonia for their fellowship groupings. Little do the hard working women in the Ladies Aid organizations within the Koinonia Fellowship Groups of the Christian churches suspect that Plato, who advocated homosexual love precisely because females were not worthy of love, explained that the three highest types of love - agape, philia, and koinoina - could never include love of the female because the female did not have a rational soul.143 Only the rational soul, Plato maintained, was worthy of love. Augustine and the other Church Fathers understood that quite well when they wrote systematic theology, for the majority of the Fathers were schooled in Platonic theory.144
Even though the laity values the fellowship within the Church, doctrine about the Church appears to value war just as highly. This war logic follows:
There is only one God – The Triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
There is only one true religion: Christianity.
Since there is only one truth, all other religions are heresies and should not be tolerated.
Therefore, crusades, “holy wars” (similar to jihads), just wars, and witch-hunts or inquisitions (or more modest modern versions of the same) are appropriate tactics to use in society.
Saint Augustine, circa 400 C.E., produced one of the first drafts of the “Just War”
doctrine in order to justify a war he personally instigated against fellow Christians called the Donatists. Most historians agree that Augustine’s clear logic and rhetoric promoting
143 Plato recorded his teacher’s assumptions in the “Symposium,” noted above in footnote #142. This teacher was Socrates who was married because he believed that it was a man’s duty to marry and raise children for the state. Thus, the teaching about love is in actuality a bisexuality: although only elite males are worthy of true love, a man is also required to marry and use women as baby-making machines –as Saint Augustine later said: as things to be used as necessary, but never loved.
144 Encyclopedia of Philosophy, categories “Patristic Philosophy” and “Platonism and the Platonic Tradition.”
war enabled the Church to carry out its Crusades and Holy Wars with thorough justification for the slaughter of infidels and heretics (even Christian heretics).145
When the church won the wars, it wrote the laws. By the sixth century, church and state were fully united with a common law (that is, a theocracy).146 In approximately that same era, serious disagreements erupted between Eastern and Western Christianity and continued for almost 500 years until 1054 when a Schism occurred:
“…and Christianity divided into two churches, the Eastern or Greek Orthodox Church [under the patriarch at Constantinople] and Western or Roman Catholic Church [under the pope at Rome].”147
In 1096, the Eastern Church called upon the Western Church to help the East fight the Turks and their Islamic beliefs.
“The First Crusade (1096-1097) marked only the beginning of a wave of military expeditions from Western countries to Palestine and Syria over the next two hundred years …The First Crusade was largely an idealistic enterprise, but very quickly crusaders became aware of the rich opportunities for political and economic gains in these eastern lands.”148 [emphasis added].
After more than six Crusades, all failures, the battles ended in 1291. But, corruption in the Vatican increased to such an extent that by the 1400s
“[i]ts ambitions and its aims were like those of other Italian rulers. The papacy became secularized as at no other period in its history, save possibly the tenth century…Political ambition took almost complete control of the papacy…”149 (emphasis added).
145 Encyclopedia of Philosophy, category “Augustine, Saint”; and Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo: a Biography (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967) 207-242.
146 Witt, Brown, Dunbar, Tirro, and Witt, op.cit., 263, 269-271.
147 Ibid, 270.
148 Ibid, 271.
149 Williston Walker, op.cit., 283.
Throughout the 1400s and 1500s many of the popes were extremely corrupt.
Reformers arose within the Church. So, too, did Inquisitions and witch hunts in order to suppress the uprisings and attempted reforms which the Church called heretical.150
Martin Luther, a priest who was one such reformer, succeeded where many other reformers had failed precisely because he was supported by his prince who had big political ambitions. Luther’s rebellion started the Protestant Reformation in 1517.
In spite of the rebellion, Luther, and other Protestant denominations that followed his lead, kept all of the six basic parts of the Christian systematic theology even though they modified or reinterpreted them in some ways. For example, since Protestants refused to follow the lead of the pope, Protestants changed the interpretation of Jesus installing Peter as the first pope of the Church (Matthew 15:18-19) as follows:
Although the institutional church is the locus of Christ’s power, Peter’s faithful insight – that Jesus is Lord – is really the Rock upon which the institution is founded.151
By the 1600s the Protestant Reformation had gained many followers and states began to gain more power than the church as religious and political wars raised havoc.
One compromise in Europe established the law that if one’s prince were Roman Catholic, the parishioner became Catholic, and conversely, if one’s prince were Protestant, the parishioner became Protestant. The persons at the bottom of the hierarchy as usual had no choice in the matter.152
By the time of the Enlightenment, secular universities were becoming large and powerful enough to disagree with the religious schools (under the control of the Christian churches) without fear of their scholars being burned at the stake.153 Biblical scholars
150 Ibid, 280-285. See also Margaret Deanesly, op.cit., 255-258.
151 Harper’s Bible Dictionary, category “Peter.”
152 Williston Walker, op.cit., 341-342.
153 Ibid, 429-430.
and theologians dared to form a more objective history of Christianity as well as begin to interpret the Bible from a critical, modern perspective without the fear of being hounded by the Inquisition. By the nineteenth century, American seminaries began recognizing the discontinuity or contradiction between Paul and Jesus’ messages. By the late twentieth century, scholars writing for the widely known Jesus Seminar were filling a new and very important niche by providing to the lay person up-to-date data on biblical interpretation and Christian history, in clear and understandable language.154
Just as the social history of the Church’s biblical studies followed a path of blood and struggle until modern times, so too, did the social history of separation of church and state. Given that Christian systematic theology was established for the purpose of the church maintaining control over the state by means of a theocracy with an hierarchical system of order whenever and wherever it was and is legally possible, Christian systematic theology did not and still does not value separation of church and state. Political and social realities, however, sometimes forced the church to
compromise over the two thousand years of Christian history. Many battles were fought for dominance. Sometimes the church won these battles; sometimes the state or king or prince won.155
In fact, the Christian Church and state originally viewed separation of church and state as a type of terrorism! Historian Williston Walker tells us of the first Christian group to practice separation of church and state. Nicknamed Anabaptists (Christians who denied the validity of their infant baptism and insisted upon being
154 See Appendix I on the Jesus Seminar. A book critical of systematic theology, such as this book, builds upon the work of the Jesus Seminar which is critical of biblical studies related to Jesus.
155 For example see The Encyclopedia of Politics and Religion, 1998, category “Freedom of Religion, Christian Beginnings.” See also David C. Korten, The Great Turning From Empire to Earth Community (Berrett-Koeher Publishers, Inc.) 2006, pp159-170 for a summary of separation of church/state in the U.S.
rebaptized as adults), this group at first followed Martin Luther and later moved beyond his reforms of the early sixteenth century:
They refused to have any part in state-churches…They chose rather to set themselves apart in free communities and conventicles of their own.
Thus they were the first to practice the separation of church and state. It was chiefly on account of this non-conformism that they were subjected to persecution [usually drowned as an appropriate punishment]. Their sectarianism was interpreted as an expression of hostility to ordered society.156 (emphasis added).
If we needed even more proof that the primary purpose of doctrine is political rather than spiritual, this bit of history, emphasized above, shows us that both church and state viewed separation of church and state as possible terrorism, even if no violence of any kind occurred or was intended. Today, some of our extreme right-wing political and religious leaders express similar sentiments.
The Encyclopedia of Politics and Religion tells us that “[m]uch of the history of Western Europe revolved around the relationship between the papacy (spiritual power) and various secular governments (temporal power)….[No matter which side gained the upper hand], secular rulers attempt[ed] to influence selection of religious leaders and enforce religious laws, and clerics attempt[ed] to influence the selection of secular rulers.”157 Finally, some leaders decided that separation of church and church was the way to proceed in order to solve the power struggle.
Often the church versus state argument centers upon whether moral religious or moral secular interests brought civil rights to the forefront. Many historians maintain that
ending of slavery,
granting of voting rights and civil rights to former slaves, Native Americans, and women,
156 Williston Walker, op.cit., 327.
157 The Encyclopedia of Politics and Religion, 1998, category “Separation of church and state: a potent, dynamic idea in political theory.”
access to public education (including education of women and of the lower classes),
acceptance of scientific advances,
prison and mental hospital reform, and
rights for labor
were brought about by secular forces and very liberal or even heretical Christian churches before conservative, mainstream Christian churches would consider such issues.158
We have seen that systematic theology’s doctrine of the Church is highly political with theocracy as its goal. That doctrine does encourage and sometimes even insists upon paying of one’s tithe (10 percent of one’s income) to the church. In a theocracy in which church and state are together, the tithe is a flat tax upon gross income that is paid to God (read His Church and priests). In turn, the church in a theocracy is to take care of the poor and other social problems. Historically, this is one of the main reasons that the taxes of religious institutions were waived.159 In the non-theocratic United States, however, three recent presidents have greatly restricted the state/nation’s role in welfare for the poor and needy, but churches have not picked up the slack even
158 Walter Rauschenbusch, Christianity and the Social Crisis, edited by Robert D. Cross (NY: Harper &
Row 1964), Chapter IV “Why Has Christianity Never Undertaken the Work of Social Reconstruction?;
Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia (NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich) 1936, entirety; Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (NY: The Seabury Press) 1970 entirety. See also: The Encyclopedia of Politics and Religion, 1998, categories: “Morality,” “Secularization,” “Human Rights,” “Separation of Church and State,” “Freedom of Religion,” and “Friends, Society of (Quakers).”
See also The Encyclopedia of Philosophy and its Supplement, categories “American Philosophy”
(especially its subcategories of Deism, Humanism, Transcendentalism, Dewey, Darwinism and evolution);
“Ethics, History of,” “Ethics, Problems of,” “Ethical Relativism,” and “Religion and Morality” (especially its subcategories of Christianity and western ethics, Supernatural sanctions and moral behavior, Religion and the content of morality, and Does morality point to religion?); “Feminist Ethics,” “Feminist Legal Theory,” “Feminist Social and Political Philosophy,” “Feminist Philosophy” (especially its subcategory Feminist values), “Women in the History of Philosophy,” “Religion and Science” and “Peace, War, and Philosophy.”
159 The fascinating topic of the tithe is covered in great detail in the International Standard Bible
Encyclopedia, vol.4, 1988, category “Tithe”; Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol.14, 1987, category “Tithes”;
The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol.6, 1992, category “Tithe”; The Catholic Encyclopedia, category
“Tithes”; and The New Catholic Encyclopedia, category “Tithes.”
Today’s religious taxation issue is far less clear and many contradictions and exceptions are noted in The Encyclopedia of Politics and Religion, 1998, category “Taxation”; Leo Pfeffer’s, “Religious Exemptions” and Dean M. Kelley’s “The Supreme Court Redefines Tax Exemption,” in Social Science and Modern Society, May/June 1984.
though they pay no taxes. President George W. Bush has instead initiated a faith-based social program in which some eligible churches and ministers receive payment from the government to help relieve poverty and other social ills! Scarily unfair!
Theocracy devalues social justice but loves social action and the tithe. Social action is charity connected to the desire to help the church save a person’s soul. Social justice, on the other hand, may or may not include charity, but always strives or works toward changing political and social conditions which keep people in poverty and ill health and unable to work or find affordable housing. Systematic theology does not promise, nor strive for, social justice in the Church. However, it does promise another type of justice, as we shall learn in the next chapter.
CHAPTER TEN: “We’re Marching To Zion”
(Christian Hymn about the Doctrine of End Times or Ultimate Things)
Christian systematic theology about End Times or Ultimate Things was culled from scriptures in both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible160 and written during the period preceding the miserable Dark Ages.161 In that period wars were almost a constant state of affairs. Many women died in child bearing. Twenty to thirty years was the average life expectancy for those in the lower classes who could expect nothing but drudgery, poverty, sickness, and mistreatment by the upper classes. Yet the people in the lower classes were expected to pay their tithe, a ten percent religious and secular tax of their meager income, to the Christian Church which was integrated with the state. To quell any grumblings, grievances, or any possibility of uprisings or rebellions, and to give the people at least some hope, Church doctrine developed a lively supernatural Star Wars-like scenario about Jesus’ Second Coming to the earth. This Second Coming was coupled with a promise that justice would come – sometime – in the future.
The Doctrine Builders who wrote this futuristic doctrine gave it three Greek names:
eschatology, the study of last, final, or ultimate things, such as death, judgment, end of the world, and immortality;
apocalypse, a future time when all secret things, all mysteries, would be uncovered and revealed – judgment, too, was prophesied for this future time; and
160 Texts are scattered throughout Ezekiel, Daniel, Joel, Amos, Zephaniah, Isaiah, II Maccabees, Malachi, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, some of Paul’s letters, and Revelation.
161 Carl Sagan, The Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence (NY: Random House, 1977), 236-237, notes that this doctrinal era causes and “marks the beginning of the Dark Ages in Europe.” For the entire quotation, see Appendix III on the Science-Religion Split.
parousia, a close presence or appearance; interpreted as the appearance of Jesus, coming to the earth for the second time in the Last Days.162
For this extravaganza of justice, judgment, and Second Comings, the Church Fathers blended together special controversial scriptures that were written in coded, metaphorical and fantastical language.
Ironically, what Christian systematic theology teaches about Jesus’ Second Coming at the End of Time opposes most of what the Church taught about Jesus’
message the first time he lived on earth.163 The Gospel or Good News stories in the Bible described how Jesus appeared as a newborn infant, that he came in love and meekness, that he associated with the sick, the poor, and the sinful – often without condemning or judging them. Finally, Jesus even willingly let himself be sacrificed for sinners.
BUT, it’s not going to be so nicey-nice the second time around! Christian systematic theology harshly proclaims that Jesus will come as a fierce warrior, a role he rejected the first time around. As a leader in battle, this warrior will no longer teach us that love is the way, but that war is the only way to solve problems! In The Second Coming, Jesus will not be a loving shepherd of lost sheep, but a frightening judge who decides which person gets sent up to heaven and which person is dragged down to the torments of hell. Finally, there will be justice, administered by a fearsome Judge who is no longer a loving Savior.
This warrior judge will put on a magnificent show: a great battle between good and evil will take place. But, if we’re saved, we don’t need to worry. There is no doubt
162 Harper’s Bible Dictionary, categories “Eschatology,” “Apocalyptic literature,” “Millennium,” and
“Parousia.”
163 Although the theology contradicts the message of Jesus, it does not contradict Paul’s message about Jesus as the Christ.
as to the outcome: good Christian nations will win; evil non-Christian nations will lose.
The world will end in fire – what a dreadful slash and burn anti-Nature view!
Still no need for the Christian to worry – Jesus will magically and miraculously create a new heaven and a new earth. As the divine Christ, Jesus will appear in the sky in a parousia, a Second Coming to the earth. The dead will be miraculously raised or resurrected from their burial plots. This will be Justice and magically easy ecology!
There is one catch to this coded worldview. This is not social justice.164 Neither is it sensible ecology. Rather, this is an other-worldly ecology and justice, which will occur magically or miraculously sometime – perhaps today, perhaps tomorrow, or perhaps in thousands or millions of years.
In addition, this scenario is filled with biblical contradictions. One of the contradictions that caused the most trouble (after the 1700s when some of the common people could read the Bible for themselves) had to do with the “Millennium” question:
[“Millennium”] refers to the [thousand-year] period
…described in Rev.20: 1-8 during which ‘the dragon, the old serpent, which is the Devil and Satan,’ was to be bound, making possible a universal blessedness. During this period Christ would reign…
…
Premillennarians and Postmillennarians divide on the question whether the return of Christ, the establishing of his universal reign, and the
resurrection of the redeemed, will precede or follow the millennium.165
When they wrote this doctrine, the Church Fathers did not make use of Jesus’
message. Biblical scholars tell us that much of Jesus’ own message did not emphasize the End Times, but instead focused mainly upon an earthly and a psychological Kingdom
164Some courageous Christian groups have worked for social justice in spite of the doctrine. For example, see Appendix IV on social justice movements including Liberation Theology. See also Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, category “Social Gospel.”
165 Harper’s Bible Dictionary, category “Millennium.”
of God.166 This kingdom could and would happen in the real world, but only if a person operated ethically. Jesus, more often than not, had made salvation dependent upon an
of God.166 This kingdom could and would happen in the real world, but only if a person operated ethically. Jesus, more often than not, had made salvation dependent upon an