The pop singer Madonna was criticized for being "offensive" in 2006 while performing with a large hanging mirrored cross wearing a crown of thorns on the stage. In her song "Live to Tell," advocate "interpreters" say she is performing "a woman's right to stand in Jesus's place."
Even if you are not a Christian, do you find this artistic expression offensive? As a follower of Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism) and as a person who doesn't believe in the historical Jesus, should we care if she offends anyone or any religious group? Would a symbol like this have been tolerated in the Muslim world? PLEASE DON'T MISUNDERSTAND, I DO NOT ADVOCATE THAT IT SHOULD AND DO NOT WISH TO OFFEND ANY ISLAMIC PERSON. But, isn't it interesting that there is a freedom to do this for the Christian religion?
Like Madonna, the line is somewhat blurry on other manifestations in society. For example, crosses are used as tattoos as body decorations. Are these for religious and spiritual reasons? Does the location of the tattoo have a special meaning? Is it a mockery or an expression of faith? If the cross is inked on your skin and you are marked, are you ever ashamed to display the tattoo?
In some ways the church is a lot like popular culture, especially when it comes to displaying the cross. It is a decoration. Something to hang behind the pulpit or in the hallway leading to the Sunday school rooms. It goes nice with the yellow paint or perhaps it provides symmetry to the wall hangings. It is a "no-brainer" for the most part. It does it's job, a symbol of Christianity. Nothing more.
In fact, for many reading this the cross is fine. What gives? It is nice to put on jewelry or whatever, but please don't talk about the meaning of the cross. Is it repulsive to go into the real meaning behind it. Perhaps even to even mention the cross brings up past experiences of being proselytized.
Perhaps you remember a "Catholic" school moment with a nun with a big cross hanging from her neck slapped a ruler across the rear seam of your jeans.
The cross seems too, well.... infantile. The cross, such a child thing. Any dummy would know what the cross is, so why go into it? After all, you are an intelligent human being and just reading this blog is rather insulting. We know what the cross is, so what talk about it?
OK, a disclaimer. I am not meaning to insult anyone's intelligence.I am not superior in my understanding of the cross, so I am not looking down my "religious nose" pointing fingers as to why we need to talk about the cross. In fact, often times I find it terribly uncomfortable to do so. It is just not the "social thing" not to do it.
No proselytizing here. All I ask is for an open mind.
However, (oh gosh, you knew that was coming) what is the real meaning of the "cross" and why is this particular symbol so polarizing?
Under Roman tradition the cross was not only a way to cause death, but to punish one with intense pain and suffering. The "gnash your teeth" type of suffering. The nails went through a certain part of the hand in order to support the body, but nails were also put in the feet. A person had to push himself up to get a breath of air on these feet or ankles with the nail (crucifixion caused one to basically die of suffocation because of the intense pain of doing this). One would ask, why would the historical Jesus even have to do this? I guess that is a deep theological question, one that I am not really qualified to answer. With that preamble, my answer would be that "he didn't have to do it."
We have a number of places in the bible where Jesus certainly had a opportunity to run. He didn't need to die on a cross or go through a trial (both a religious one and a civil one). Actually, the fact there was both a civil and a religious trial point to the fact that men don't do well with justice by either religious or judicial standards. This while "God is the Judge" thing or "Jesus paid for my sins" is a silly rationale to you. I hear you, ok? So why do we have a judgment anyway? God is a loving God and he wouldn't want to hurt anyone.
Why couldn't Jesus just preach a simple message like that? Isn't that what Christianity is all about? God loves us just "Let it Be" like the Beatles used to sing.
So, why didn't Jesus just take off? In the garden, that would have been a great place to say "Asta laveista, baby." Good luck with all that warm, fuzzy "God loves ya messages" I preached about the last 3 years.
OH, I know another place he could have taken off. When all the crowds gathered in Jerusalem for the Passover! What a strategic time for this carpenter to "take a fiesta." In fact, didn't his parents fill out a "missing persons" report in Jerusalem when he was 12 years old? After all, his disciples disappeared for the most part (although John was there). It could have been a remarkable end to this whole "good news" and "stop sinning" preaching if Jesus would have just disappeared.
As an academic, I really don't want to talk about the cross. In fact, you wonder why it is so central in the "gospels" as recorded in the bible. Why did the bible say it would be a "stumbling block" for many? Why is the cross so central that the Apostle Paul warned that if the Christian were to leave it out .. it would empty the message of gospel of all it's power?
We know this "leaving it out" happens today in modern churches. If a pastor doesn't want to talk about the cross, he or she just does a message on "getting healed" or "praise the Lord." Let's get the latest popular psychology textbook and base the sermon on that! Positive thinking, maybe something on "releasing negative energy" this week? That is what the people need to hear - a "feel good" gospel! Give everyone a smile and a healthy dose of self esteem! In fact, you are loved no matter what. Christianity should be about sin or hell or a judgment.
So, what does the cross mean to you? If you have" no spiritual interests," what do you think it means for Christians? Should we just leave it out? How does the cross, as you know it, conflict with these modern media messages?
No comments:
Post a Comment