Whatever we might think of religion, we cannot deny that it fascinates us. Almost any post on the subject, except the most anodyne, risks attracting undue attention. That, I think, is a sign of our times, which bear an uncanny resemblance to former, pre-Christian ages. And yet, religion endures as ever. Perhaps that is because its writings contain some ideas which still have the power to rather startle us – after we have had first thoughts about them.
“Whatsoever you did to one of the least of my brothers, you did unto me.” Fr Werenfried van Straaten, of the ACN, thinks these words should be dearer to us than all earthly wisdom
It is generally taken for granted now that Jesus was referring to the weakest members of a society – the poor, the humble, the incurably sick, and so on. Whether we be religious or not, we generally see now the merit of the sentiments involved ; but it was not always so.
At around the time of the Incarnation, it was common to live life with a starkly Darwinian perspective on life – although that name was unknown to people then. In Greece, for example, weakling babies would be taken to the hills and ‘exposed’ ; left to die either of starvation or aided by the teeth of animals, to be consumed and forgotten. And, for the Romans, any manifestation of weakness was despised ; their world was only for the strong, the ambitious and the ruthless ; and the more one fell from those ideals, the less regard was paid.
And, even in that gentlest of all religions, Buddhism, it is still held that a person does not live so as to help the poor and the weak, but for his own personal advancement towards a state of blessedness – and forgetfulness. “It is my destiny that matters, not yours.” Similarly for Hindus. This explains, I think, the abject misery of so many amid the fabulous riches of the better off.
Taking all this together explains the extraordinary resistance to the Gospels in the early days ; for the message, the Good News, ran counter to the prevailing orthodoxies. It was subversive and threatened the powers of the great. A pacifist, a do-gooder was not merely someone to be derided, but someone who had to be eliminated along with his dangerous notions.
Many questions arise from this doctrine concerning “the least of my brothers.” But, of all the questions, perhaps the most puzzling is this, “Why on earth should almighty God be in the least concerned with the least of his people?”
Jamie
Well, you done it; not many others will try doing what you have done or your method of leaving it in the form of questions.
I have only one question and would like to see others. I accept the fact that religion also leads to much strife and disagreement between various Faiths, even war, or even differences about doctrine in the same Faith. It is to me not something that worries me all that much, or to lose faith because of that; faith it is an emotional issue. Religion and what one wants from it is not a science; was never meant to be.
Same with all the questions; doesn’t matter what the question is or the answer given, somebody is bound to have a different one.
Shouldn’t we all just try to accept that each one has his own reasons and the right to exercise religion in the way he chooses, provided only that he doesn’t deliberately hurt or harm his neighbor by doing so? That’s my only question.
All violence is a deep stain on man’s character, Ike. And violence leads to more violence ; the victor in a war resorts to more violence because it has worked for him ; the vanquished resorts to violence in the belief that it will work for him too (next time!). This the biggest problem for any religion – indeed, the desire for peace is the very reason that justifies some religions.
It would be grand if we all lived in peace and minded our own business, but that’s an ideal that will probably never come about universally, no matter how civilised we might become. The best religions try to tame human nature ; but nature is strong and subtle. We can do our best, though!