Do we have a baggage-laden Christianity?

April 28, 2024

Paul, whose Jewish name was Saul, was one of the most influential leaders in the early Church. So much so that we find that nearly 50% of the non-Gospel New Testament writings are either about Paul or written by him. In fact the story of his conversion is such a central story in the post resurrection Church, that it is re-told three times in the Acts of the Apostles (9:1-19, 22:6ff & 26:12-23).  And yet, today’s first reading tells us that when Paul attempted to join the disciples, “they were all afraid of him, for they did not believe that he was a disciple”. They were not ready to assume that once a person claimed to be converted that everything the person said or did was to be accepted blindly. After all, how could a person who even stood holding the garments of those who were stoning Stephen,(Acts 22:20), who had a special mandate from the high priests to arrest and bring to Jerusalem anybody who followed Jesus, - how could such a person be allowed to enter the inner circles of the Church community. But Paul gradually did show that he had indeed changed in the way he lived his life, which is exactly what following Christ means.

But did Paul change completely? And is it possible for a person to shed all the baggage they carry, the prejudices they hold and suddenly become the perfect person? Was Paul able to do that? Or was becoming a follower of Christ just the beginning?  

For example, Paul obviously supported the patriarchy that was present in the world he lived in, where women in general, and wives in particular, were to remain subject to men/husbands.  This patriarchal mind-set of his is clearly expressed in various letters.  In his first letter to Timothy, he writes:  Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent.  (1 Timothy 2:8-15). Again, in his letter to the Ephesians, he writes: “the husband is the head of his wife” (Ephesians 5:23).  And justifies it saying: Just as the church is subject to Christ, so also wives ought to be subject  in everything to their husbands". (Ephesians 5:24).  And he teaches this even though he is quite aware, and admits in Romans ch.16  that there were multiple women (some of whom were certainly wives), like Priscilla, Phoebe, Mary, and even one whom Paul himself calls an Apostle (Junia), who were leaders and teachers in the early Christian Church .  

Again, Paul, unmarried himself, also pushed celibacy when he taught; “it is well for a man not to touch a woman” (1 Cor 7:1). And one of his justifications for this was that, according to  him  “the unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about the affairs of the world, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided.” (1 Cor 7: 32-33). Paul was quite aware that all the Apostles (except one) selected by Jesus himself were married, but that did not faze him from making such sweeping statements.  He was also aware that this preference for celibacy was not part of Jesus’ teachings, because he admits that “concerning virgins, I have no command of the Lord” (1 Cor 7: 25).

Then we come to his perspective on slavery.  Here we find that as a Roman citizen in a world where slavery was considered normal, when a Christian slave, Onessimus, runs away from his master and comes to him, Paul sends him right back to his Christian master, though of course he asks his master to forgive him and look after him with love (Letter to Philemon).  And so it would seem that he accepts slavery even though, in theory at least, he acknowledges that in the new dispensation of Christ there should be “neither male nor female, slave or free” (Galatians 3:28).  

So Paul’s background deeply influences his behaviour and his teachings.  Similarly we have Peter the leader of the Apostles, despite being selected by Jesus to be the Rock on which he would build his Church, bringing in his own  baggage of Jewish beliefs, and wanting to impose the Jewish practice of circumcision and dietary restrictions on the new followers of Jesus.

And so when we listen to the teachings of Paul or the other apostles, we must remember not to succumb to what we could call the ‘halo’ effect, where their holiness or saintliness becomes an all encompassing prism through which we view all their teachings, even those that were powerfully coloured by the baggage they brought with them.

We have many such examples from our contemporary world. Thus we have Mahatma (i.e. ‘great soul’) Gandhi who demonstrated powerfully to the world the power of non-violence, and yet we need not consider everything he taught to be valid. For instance, it was precisely because of Gandhi’s Hinduism-rooted baggage on caste issues that he and the famous Dalit (‘lower caste’) leader, Dr. Ambedkar, strongly disagreed, and rightly so, on various public issues.  Or we have Mother Teresa, a woman who was known world-wide for her unselfish love and care for those poor who were left on the street, who did not find any problem in accepting the Haitian Legion of Honour Award from Baby Doc Duvalier, the Haitian dictator known for torturing his people, or in offering unwavering loyalty to her lawyer and financier Charles Keating who gave her millions of dollars, even after he was convicted of fraud, racketeering and conspiracy - actions that resulted in destroying the savings of tens of thousands of people. So her views or advice on justice issues in our world would be deeply suspect, despite her great holiness exhibited in her works of charity.  

All this ought to make us reflect that the disciples of Jesus, the saints of the past and of today and we ourselves, are all significantly influenced by the baggage we bring even to our otherwise Christian lives.  I myself have grown up ingrained with a belief in monogamy, and in the importance and the permanence of marriage, with divorce being considered an aberration or a failure. This certainly influences me and I need to constantly keep that in mind when I engage with others who think differently. Similarly, a priest/seminarian who is embedded in a belief system that the priesthood was actually instituted by Jesus and that ordination gives him a sacral power, would find it very difficult to have these beliefs questioned. Maybe, these ingrained beliefs are valid, - but I need to be able to ask myself, whether I am willing to be open enough to allow them to be questioned. This is one of the reasons why science progresses faster than religion, because even strongly established theories like those of Newton could be challenged by Einstein, and the long established laws of physics that things cannot exist in more than one state simultaneously can be and is being challenged by quantum mechanics. 

So, if religion must continue to be relevant, it has to keep walking the pilgrim road. And for that we need to be able to question what we consider sacred and even those whom we consider holy - whether these are the teachings of the apostles, the teachings of our religious leaders, or our own understandings.  The inability to question our own beliefs can even affect our families. It is exactly what happens when parents, more than children (because parents have far more years of ‘conditioning’), find it so very very difficult to listen to, and reflect on, the newer perspectives (right or wrong) that the younger generation brings to the table. So whether in families, or in our faith, or in our world, let us, as Pope John XXIII taught, open the windows and let the Spirit blow where it wills. 

First Reading: Acts 9: 26-31

When Saul had come to Jerusalem, he attempted to join the disciples; and they were all afraid of him, for they did not believe that he was a disciple.  But Barnabas took him, brought him to the apostles, and described for them how on the road he had seen the Lord, who had spoken to him, and how in Damascus he had spoken boldly in the name of Jesus.  So he went in and out among them in Jerusalem, speaking boldly in the name of the Lord.  He spoke and argued with the Hellenists; but they were attempting to kill him. When the believers learned of it, they brought him down to Caesarea and sent him off to Tarsus. Meanwhile the church throughout Judea, Galilee, and Samaria had peace and was built up. Living in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it increased in numbers.

Second Reading: First John 3: 18-24

Little children, let us love, not in word or speech, but in truth and action.  And by this we will know that we are from the truth and will reassure our hearts before him  whenever our hearts condemn us; for God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything.  Beloved, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have boldness before God;  and we receive from him whatever we ask, because we obey his commandments and do what pleases him. And this is his commandment, that we should believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he has commanded us.  All who obey his commandments abide in him, and he abides in them. And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit that he has given us.

Gospel: John 15: 1-8

 “I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinegrower. He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every branch that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit. You have already been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me as I abide in you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me.  I am the vine; you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing.  Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers; such branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. If you abide in me and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit and become my disciples.