It's interesting to read a year of EfM for the second time. There's a chance to look at nuances and concepts that somehow swept by the first time.
Chapter 2 of Year 3 (church history) deals with the early days of the church in Rome and its empire. At first the Romans seemed to see Jewish and Christian as one and the same, not surprising since Christianity was evolving from its Jewish roots. Eventually, however, Christians were accused of mischief, superstition and eventually crimes including that of cannibalism, incest, superstition and even atheism (Christians denied the divinity of the Roman Emperor which made them athiests in the Roman eyes). As a result Christians were put through all sorts of torture including being put to death in the arena where their struggles were considered amusements for the Roman spectators or being hung on stakes and used as human torches.
The strength of the early Christians is a source of amazement to me. I know how I feel when people disagree with my religious beliefs and practices but how would I react if I were truly persecuted in the way the early Christians were? Could I have held the faith as surely as they did? Can I now, in a modern Western culture where persecution often means "You simply don't believe the right things and you should be excluded from the community of the true believers."
I posted this as my impression of the chapter on our discussion board and sure enough, one of the students gave me something to think about, namely, when looking at the position of the early church, perhaps we should also consider the Romans. The Romans were the majority in Rome (obviously -- otherwise we'd be talking about the Hittites, the Greeks or some other group) and were the ruling class in a good part of the rest of the Mediterranean world. The argument was made that perhaps the Romans were doing the best they could for the masses while dealing with a group that they felt were dangerous.
To me, that's a dangerous argument. It could be said that the Germans used the Holocaust as a way of dealing with a group they felt were dangerous and in a way that they felt were best for the masses. An older friend who lived in Germany for some years finally went to visit Auschwitz on a trip back to Europe years after having left to return to the States. She said that one room of exhibits particularly upset her, a room full of eyeglasses, and while describing it she still could not bring herself to say that the people whose glasses were there were exterminated. Her term for them was "had to leave their glasses behind." Well, that's true but coupled with the disappointment she stated she felt with herself for actually visiting Auschwitz and the statement that she didn't want to think the German people she was so fond of could have known about places like this, it points to the fact that even when faced with the truth of what happened she still could not accept the enormity of it.
I believe that we in the US are also guilty of being the modern equivalents of the Romans in the coliseum. There have been atrocities committed, often with the implied reason being the best interests of the masses, and we just sit in our place in the crowd and watch passively. Mention names like Cambodia, Argentina, Chile, Croatia, Darfur and we express our horror and empathy with the victims but what did we do to alleviate their suffering. These were the people in the arena, facing gladiators and wild animals with few if any defenses and we watched as they suffered and died. We tried sending aid in some cases but that aid was diverted by the powers that be in those countries to benefit their supporters while the exterminations, the starvation, the rape and murder, the kidnapping and torture, the forcible impression of young children into bands of soldiers went on, often without our saying a word.
The church was no better. Where was the voice of the church when all these things were going on? Seldom did a group that calls itself Christian speak out in a way that commanded attention to and assisted in the reversal of the horror and death. While one Roman may not have been able to stop the carnage in the coliseums but a number of them could have done and possibly did, quietly and at risk to themselves, try to rescue as many as possible.
While thinking of the Romans I have one thought: He may have had only one, but Cassius certainly had a point.
No comments:
Post a Comment