Saturday, January 27, 2007

In the World? Of the World?

Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ. (Ephesians 5:21)


This verse, from St. Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, kicks off a lengthy passage that has always made me squirm. It includes the “wives, be subject to your husbands” business that men have wielded to justify all manner of bad behavior against women. According to later parts of the passage, children must be subject to their parents, and slaves to their masters.

Part of this was yesterday’s lectionary reading. Being confronted with it during Morning Prayer, I suddenly saw an entirely new side of St. Paul.

That “new side” shows up in his admonitions to those in power. “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.” “Masters…stop threatening [your slaves], for you know that both of you have the same Master in heaven, and with him there is no partiality.”

Consider that women, children, and slaves in ancient cultures were considered property at best, if they were considered at all. Paul’s exhortations require those in power to treat those without power as human. And how radical (for that time) is the idea that God has no partiality, so that all—adults, children, slaves, masters—stand equal before him?

I believe we’re looking at an apostle caught between two worlds. He admonishes women, children, and slaves because there is some need—especially given the precarious position of the first-century church—to maintain the social order. Paul himself is a fan of stability: “Let all things be done decently and in order” (1 Corinthians 14:40). Yet he also seems to yearn for the gospel in full flower: where love reigns, where children are nurtured to their full potential, where there is no partiality. He gives voice to that gospel when he writes, “There is no longer Jew nor Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28).

To be sure, human history has moved on. In most places, slavery is just a bad memory; in many, women have attained equal status. We’re getting closer to that “gospel in full flower.” Yet we too face the same tension between God and culture—between “in the world” and “of the world.” Isn’t that part of the dynamic that drives the divisions in the church over homosexuality?

Jesus knew that change would come slowly, because we couldn’t take instant transformation: “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now” (John 16:12). But we can continue to explore, to discern what belongs to “the way things are” and what represents the reign of God that should be. Indeed, we must continue to explore—for how else can we fulfill our mission to extend that reign?

3 comments:

olyguy said...

I have not read too much more than your profile and a few of your posts because of time limitations, but I identify with a lot of what I did read. For example, my spiritual path started with an Episcopalian childhood, sank to atheism, revivified in my early 30s, fanned out to an exploration of the world's great religions, particularly Hinduism, and within Hinduism particularly to Vedism, the Upanishads, Vedanta philosophy, and, more widely again, to the perennial philosophy and mysticism. More recently I attended RCIA for a year or two, exploring the possibility of becoming a Roman Catholic only to discover the church I was attending was more interested in my joining their particular church and giving them money than they were in my faith or lack of it. Several months ago I quit, with a little hostility toward a few persons entrenched there. Now I see I had very little interest in that particular church or that particular R.C. community, although I've retained a lot of interest in the wider religion, in Rome, and particularly the papacy under Benedict XVI. I too considered joining an Episcopal monastic order but did not. I'm concerned it's been mucked up with an overconcern with politics and the Eucharist, neither of which interests me. If you would like to correspond (I hope so), please leave a Comment.

John Backman said...

Thank you for the kind words. Your journey sounds very familiar to me: I've found a lot to like in Hinduism—especially the notion of a supreme being so completely beyond description or understanding. A friend once drew some parallels for me between Hinduism, with its pantheon of gods, and the Catholic panoply of saints and angels. Fascinating. I'd be interested to hear more about your interest in the papacy: while I’ve discovered quite a bit in Roman Catholicism that inspires my devotion, the papacy hasn't been an area of focus for me. Feel free to contact me here or directly through email.

olyguy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.