Of course, the defense we hear the most when confronted with the truth of the atrocities in Christian history is, "It's in the Bible." Now, this article is not about the inspired vs. literal work of God debate, although that's a fun way to spend a decade. But I want to consider that defense for a moment. I believe there is something inside us all that gives us a sense of right and wrong. Whether we think this sense is innate (as some atheists might) or inspired by God (as Christians might), there is no denying that we can agree that some heinous acts are wrong. Murder and rape are utterly indefensible. So let's pretend that the Bible said murder was okay in certain circumstances. Oh, wait! It does say that! Logically then, the Bible is no more to be trusted than the National Enquirer as a source of literal truth.
This line of thinking is what makes people like myself distrust the Biblical defense of just about anything. Social psychologists have observed that people of my generation (with that oh so catchy label that makes us sound like relatives of Malcolm) are critical of dogma and primarily trust personal experience. We grew up at the end of the Cold War. Many of us came of age under constant threat of gang violence. Some of us will never know the uncle who was killed by AIDS. We're tired of the government's pathetic insanity. Institutions are not to be trusted, not by us.
Which brings me back to the original question. Why remain associated with the institution responsible for the subjugation of continents, genocide, and countless wars? Why wouldn't we feel totally alienated from this behemoth?
I don't know the entire answer. I can speak from my experience and from that of my friends. I would attempt the explain the attitudes of people my age in other, more conservative faith traditions, but this article is incendiary enough as it is. In my experience, the Episcopal Church allows me to take these positions without threat of personal attack. For the most part, we have an understanding in the Episcopal Church that we "agree to disagree." It sounds like "don't ask; don't tell," and it's just about as effective. But we know the Church is not static, and we pray for a better solution.
Go To Page: 1 2
| Here's the follow-up discussion on this article: | View all related messages |
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to Michael P. Spencer's Anglican - Episcopal topic, please visit the Discussions page.