Ephesians 6:5-9Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart.
Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men,
because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free.
And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.
Debate still rages as to whether this was a cynical move on Paul's part, to curry favor with slaves and masters alike, or a statement of principle. In any case, Christianity did champion emancipation for a while, and periodically from then on, but as I said, the debate goes on. Was Jesus a man who stood up to the powerful, or who loved emperors and slaves alike and left political matters alone? We know Paul took the latter, as did Peter's church and most traditions so descended. Radical as a youth, establishment in age. As with individuals, so with institutions.
I'm having a couple of thoughts in my head. I'm engaged in a discussion with a pious friend of mine over
the pope's recent comments. For me, the matter isn't even so much a pushing of abstinence, sexual prudence, and marriage. That's fine. But lying about the benefits of condom use which, I'll grant you, isn't a sure thing but which has tremendous benefits to health and life itself? That's another matter, and it's negligent. It's wrong. But according to doctrine, it's moral.
What it comes down to is how things are
supposed to work, and how things
do. And certainly, things can change and things that once were may not be any more. A little bit of hope is needed. A bit of moral zeal is needed. We need to think in the potential and the ideal. We need to dream. We need to inspire and be inspired.
I read the ancient works of Christianity or Islam and Hinduism and I see consistent teachings of how the powerful are supposed to act. Hell, you find it in communism, too, or Objectivism. On reading or hearing it, one might be moved to say how wonderful it all would be. But you know, that's not enough for me. I want to see the plan in action, because over my short life I've learned enough that you shouldn't ever get snowed by a sales pitch or a homily unless you know not what
they say is going to happen, but
how it's going to happen.
And I know, I know. That's doesn't mesh with true faith. Well God gave me reason; don't blame me for using it.
So the old Hindus said don't question the slave's place because karma put him there. And Buddha said don't rattle chains because it's all transitory anyway. And Islam said don't do what's in your power to do, just like Christianity said. And communism said make the laws perfect, never mind if anyone's going to follow them, and capitalism says that we're all free anyway and we'll get where we need to go and if you don't have it, you don't deserve it.
Me, I'm not perfect, and I don't know it all, but I don't believe in things I don't have reason to believe in. I'm stupid so much and I hope to change it, but if I can take pride in something it's that you're not going to find me before any golden calf. And you see, I know I'm right because I watch the world and I know,
I have utter faith that the strong man is going to do what he
likes and the weak man's going to resent him. And so it's no good for me to hear the sermon or read the pamphlet about right action and right intent because-- Well, let me get right down to it.
Changing society is never going to happen by urging the master to stay his hand. The only way you can have justice is if the slave can stand up and strike blow for blow. And maybe there is a time to do no violence. Maybe there is a place for love and restraint. Maybe the faiths have something to teach us, but until we fix the basic things that are wrong, reassert the strength of the powerless, and learn to have power for ourselves, anything else is distraction or sabotage. I imagine that, in a just world, I might have room for religion. But right now, as it's been revealed to me, it speaks too much of the ideal and not enough of the real. No "fear and trembling" ever shook a master's conscience, and the preachers of such ethics ought to be called on what they truly are: friends of the status quo.
If they cannot even imagine a better world here, how could we think they might lead us to heaven? I follow no moralist who is not also a materialist.
