Revolutionary Messiah
“How can it be that it is not a news item when an
elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market
loses two points?” - Pope Francis
By J. M. Hamilton 5-26-14
Religion, with all its mystery and human foibles, has always mesmerized me. Besides one cannot study power, economics, and politics without studying the Almighty and the religious affect. My earliest memories of church involved attending Assemblies of God with my mother on Sunday evening, and Lutheran church service Sunday morning with dad. It was a study in contrasts.
For a child to take in Evangelical worship before the age of five... Well, maybe there are limits to what a child should be exposed to. I found those speaking in tongues to be not only surreal but ostentatious. (Then again, perhaps I was never given this gift?) Evangelicals, despite proclaiming the grace and promise of Christ's salvation, seemed to emphasize the "fire and brimstone" side of things. Always it seemed, was the emphasis on the law, obeying the God's law, being "saved/born again," or facing the eternal hell fires of the damned. Moreover, if you wanted to get to heaven, one best stay attendant to an Assemblies of God church, because all other protestant denominations were doomed, as were the Catholics. The entire premise of the church and the road to salvation appeared fear based.
So it was with some relief, not without some considerable guilt mind you, that my dad forbid my sister and I to attend my mother's church after ten years of age.
Dad's Lutheran church (Wisconsin Synod) was positively boring, compared to mom's church but it was staid and welcome. There were no raised hands in the air, shouts of "praise God" mid-sermon, and no praying in the aisles. Lutherans were also, a little more tolerant, since it was okay to drink. Lutheran communion, or the sacrament, was served with real wine, as opposed to grape juice. Not unlike the Evangelicals, the Lutherans too, felt that they had it all figured out, and that pretty much everybody else was going to hell, particularly those Pope loving Catholics. As for those of Jewish faith, despite both churches acknowledging that the Jews were God's chosen people, and they should always be treated with dignity and respect, there seemed to be a general belief that their failure to recognize Christ might prohibit admittance to heaven.
All this emphasis on the law, and "thou shalt nots," with a sprinkling of God's grace (but only if you were a member of the correct Protestant faith or sect) -some years later - struck me as the ultimate in branding/marketing. Think about it? How likely is your flock going to stray, when faced with damnation for joining an alternative religion or philosophy, such as Catholicism, Judaism, or even Zen Buddhism? All that "guilt," with an emphasis on Old Testament law, as opposed to the New Testament tolerance and Christ's salvation, also has a way of reinforcing church structures, hierarchy, and orthodoxy. Having fallen short many times, how are we, the church congregation, to question the church's hierarchy and patriarchal structures, since they, the church ministers and administration, are so close to God? (Or so we thought.)
Emphasis on the one true faith, to the exclusion of all others, also made me extremely curious about these other faiths and religions. After all, just how decadent and depraved were those Catholics, Hebrews, and other Protestants? What forbidden fruit was I missing? Being preternaturally curious, I had to find out. Eventually, quite by accident, I started dating a Catholic girl, and began attending Mass. Imagine my complete shock when I discovered that Catholic mass was nearly identical to the Lutheran service or sermon, w/just a few minor changes to the Lord's Prayer and the Nicene Creed. And it all made perfect sense. After all, Luther before he nailed his complaints against a Renaissance Pope, for selling indulgences to wealthy patrons, on the church door - in essence kicking off the Protestant Reformation - was a Catholic priest.
How bad could all those Catholics be? Later, going through Pre - Cana, I discovered that the older Catholic padres felt that the Protestants were the heretics, apostates, and the ones destined for Hades, while the younger Father I was dealing with, was more tolerant and ecumenical in outlook. Clearly, there appeared to be a generational divide within the Catholic Church: with older priests focused on the law and the younger generation focused on God's grace and salvation, or at the minimum, appeared more tolerant. As with the Protestants, however, it appeared that the Catholic hierarchy, traditionally, used fear and old testament law, as a means to keep the flock in line, strictly adhering to Catholic dogma, and keeping faith and allegiance with the Church in Rome.
Jesus Christ, however, appeared to have an altogether different plan. If one believes passages from the New Testament, Christ appeared to democratize faith and communion with God. He surrounded himself with the poor, the socially undesirable, prostitutes, and the lame and the ill. It's worth noting that nowhere in the Bible is Christ, specifically, quoted as speaking out against homosexuality. During biblical times, Jesus' following would have been the 99.999 percent. With the elite and the educated in Israel made up of nobility, Jewish religious leaders, a hand full of bankers and traders, and the Roman Prefect.... This was a time of extreme poverty, and Christ and his teaching would have been a direct threat to the Jewish religious hierarchy, and potentially destabilizing to the Romans as well. After all, if God is walking the earth, hanging out with the masses, feeding thousands, healing the lame and the blind... Why would anyone show up in synagogue on Saturday, or ever listen to the Roman or Jewish authorities/patriarchy ever again? Most importantly Christ offered salvation and hope, and the de-emphasis of the Old Testament and the law.
Christ states that he came into this world carrying a sword. Surely, that sword was not directed at the poor/the 99.999 percent, Jesus' following; but rather, it was aimed directly at the heart of the economic, political, and religious hierarchy/patriarchy in Jerusalem, who respectively, kept the poor fearful and economically oppressed. According to the scriptures, if we are to believe them, Christ entered Jerusalem triumphant on Palm Sunday. One day later, he drove from the temple the money changers and bankers. Two days later, he took on the city's religious leaders and the patriarchy. And for those "sins," of taking on the establishment, Christ was crucified that same week. By crucifying Christ, the authorities, both the Roman and Jewish elite, hoped to remove a threat to their mortal existence and their moral authority; but in crucifying Christ, they made him God and a revolutionary figure, who was a model for the ages to come. (In the 20th century, think Gandhi and MLK)
In particular, Christ's primary commandment, 'love your brother as yourself,' did not contain the caveat: but only if your "brother “was the same skin color, came from the same socio-economic background, attended the same schools, and worshipped at your local church or synagogue.
Since The Passion, Church hierarchy has often had a symbiotic relationship with the economic and political elite (in fact, if you go back far enough, church hierarchy was often the ruling elite in parts of Europe and vv. - here think of the Holy Roman Empire). Nobility and the economic aristocracy accepted, encouraged, and sponsored the church as long as it emphasized earthly and biblical law, kept the masses fearful of their immortal soul and in check; and above all, as long as the church recognized that kings and monarchs had a Devine right to rule, and/or at least on this earth, the primacy of various forms of earthly government. That is to say, the church emphasized to the lay the metaphysical: Christ's kingdom in heaven, the need to obey "Caesar" and biblical laws (laws the ruling class often rarely obeyed themselves, see Machiavelli's - The Prince), and do good works on this earth, in order to gain admittance into heaven. De-emphasized by the church was Christ's teaching that God was accessible, that one could pray and confess their sins directly to God, w/out intercession from the church or its administration, and that Christ had little tolerance for religious or governmental autocratic or patriarchal structures - that stood between him and his flock; nor, did Christ appear to have a strong affinity for the wealthy, who often exploited and oppressed the poor or 99.999 percent (through usury, and sometimes enslavement or indentured servitude, et al.).
By J. M. Hamilton 5-26-14
Religion, with all its mystery and human foibles, has always mesmerized me. Besides one cannot study power, economics, and politics without studying the Almighty and the religious affect. My earliest memories of church involved attending Assemblies of God with my mother on Sunday evening, and Lutheran church service Sunday morning with dad. It was a study in contrasts.
For a child to take in Evangelical worship before the age of five... Well, maybe there are limits to what a child should be exposed to. I found those speaking in tongues to be not only surreal but ostentatious. (Then again, perhaps I was never given this gift?) Evangelicals, despite proclaiming the grace and promise of Christ's salvation, seemed to emphasize the "fire and brimstone" side of things. Always it seemed, was the emphasis on the law, obeying the God's law, being "saved/born again," or facing the eternal hell fires of the damned. Moreover, if you wanted to get to heaven, one best stay attendant to an Assemblies of God church, because all other protestant denominations were doomed, as were the Catholics. The entire premise of the church and the road to salvation appeared fear based.
So it was with some relief, not without some considerable guilt mind you, that my dad forbid my sister and I to attend my mother's church after ten years of age.
Dad's Lutheran church (Wisconsin Synod) was positively boring, compared to mom's church but it was staid and welcome. There were no raised hands in the air, shouts of "praise God" mid-sermon, and no praying in the aisles. Lutherans were also, a little more tolerant, since it was okay to drink. Lutheran communion, or the sacrament, was served with real wine, as opposed to grape juice. Not unlike the Evangelicals, the Lutherans too, felt that they had it all figured out, and that pretty much everybody else was going to hell, particularly those Pope loving Catholics. As for those of Jewish faith, despite both churches acknowledging that the Jews were God's chosen people, and they should always be treated with dignity and respect, there seemed to be a general belief that their failure to recognize Christ might prohibit admittance to heaven.
All this emphasis on the law, and "thou shalt nots," with a sprinkling of God's grace (but only if you were a member of the correct Protestant faith or sect) -some years later - struck me as the ultimate in branding/marketing. Think about it? How likely is your flock going to stray, when faced with damnation for joining an alternative religion or philosophy, such as Catholicism, Judaism, or even Zen Buddhism? All that "guilt," with an emphasis on Old Testament law, as opposed to the New Testament tolerance and Christ's salvation, also has a way of reinforcing church structures, hierarchy, and orthodoxy. Having fallen short many times, how are we, the church congregation, to question the church's hierarchy and patriarchal structures, since they, the church ministers and administration, are so close to God? (Or so we thought.)
Emphasis on the one true faith, to the exclusion of all others, also made me extremely curious about these other faiths and religions. After all, just how decadent and depraved were those Catholics, Hebrews, and other Protestants? What forbidden fruit was I missing? Being preternaturally curious, I had to find out. Eventually, quite by accident, I started dating a Catholic girl, and began attending Mass. Imagine my complete shock when I discovered that Catholic mass was nearly identical to the Lutheran service or sermon, w/just a few minor changes to the Lord's Prayer and the Nicene Creed. And it all made perfect sense. After all, Luther before he nailed his complaints against a Renaissance Pope, for selling indulgences to wealthy patrons, on the church door - in essence kicking off the Protestant Reformation - was a Catholic priest.
How bad could all those Catholics be? Later, going through Pre - Cana, I discovered that the older Catholic padres felt that the Protestants were the heretics, apostates, and the ones destined for Hades, while the younger Father I was dealing with, was more tolerant and ecumenical in outlook. Clearly, there appeared to be a generational divide within the Catholic Church: with older priests focused on the law and the younger generation focused on God's grace and salvation, or at the minimum, appeared more tolerant. As with the Protestants, however, it appeared that the Catholic hierarchy, traditionally, used fear and old testament law, as a means to keep the flock in line, strictly adhering to Catholic dogma, and keeping faith and allegiance with the Church in Rome.
Jesus Christ, however, appeared to have an altogether different plan. If one believes passages from the New Testament, Christ appeared to democratize faith and communion with God. He surrounded himself with the poor, the socially undesirable, prostitutes, and the lame and the ill. It's worth noting that nowhere in the Bible is Christ, specifically, quoted as speaking out against homosexuality. During biblical times, Jesus' following would have been the 99.999 percent. With the elite and the educated in Israel made up of nobility, Jewish religious leaders, a hand full of bankers and traders, and the Roman Prefect.... This was a time of extreme poverty, and Christ and his teaching would have been a direct threat to the Jewish religious hierarchy, and potentially destabilizing to the Romans as well. After all, if God is walking the earth, hanging out with the masses, feeding thousands, healing the lame and the blind... Why would anyone show up in synagogue on Saturday, or ever listen to the Roman or Jewish authorities/patriarchy ever again? Most importantly Christ offered salvation and hope, and the de-emphasis of the Old Testament and the law.
Christ states that he came into this world carrying a sword. Surely, that sword was not directed at the poor/the 99.999 percent, Jesus' following; but rather, it was aimed directly at the heart of the economic, political, and religious hierarchy/patriarchy in Jerusalem, who respectively, kept the poor fearful and economically oppressed. According to the scriptures, if we are to believe them, Christ entered Jerusalem triumphant on Palm Sunday. One day later, he drove from the temple the money changers and bankers. Two days later, he took on the city's religious leaders and the patriarchy. And for those "sins," of taking on the establishment, Christ was crucified that same week. By crucifying Christ, the authorities, both the Roman and Jewish elite, hoped to remove a threat to their mortal existence and their moral authority; but in crucifying Christ, they made him God and a revolutionary figure, who was a model for the ages to come. (In the 20th century, think Gandhi and MLK)
In particular, Christ's primary commandment, 'love your brother as yourself,' did not contain the caveat: but only if your "brother “was the same skin color, came from the same socio-economic background, attended the same schools, and worshipped at your local church or synagogue.
Since The Passion, Church hierarchy has often had a symbiotic relationship with the economic and political elite (in fact, if you go back far enough, church hierarchy was often the ruling elite in parts of Europe and vv. - here think of the Holy Roman Empire). Nobility and the economic aristocracy accepted, encouraged, and sponsored the church as long as it emphasized earthly and biblical law, kept the masses fearful of their immortal soul and in check; and above all, as long as the church recognized that kings and monarchs had a Devine right to rule, and/or at least on this earth, the primacy of various forms of earthly government. That is to say, the church emphasized to the lay the metaphysical: Christ's kingdom in heaven, the need to obey "Caesar" and biblical laws (laws the ruling class often rarely obeyed themselves, see Machiavelli's - The Prince), and do good works on this earth, in order to gain admittance into heaven. De-emphasized by the church was Christ's teaching that God was accessible, that one could pray and confess their sins directly to God, w/out intercession from the church or its administration, and that Christ had little tolerance for religious or governmental autocratic or patriarchal structures - that stood between him and his flock; nor, did Christ appear to have a strong affinity for the wealthy, who often exploited and oppressed the poor or 99.999 percent (through usury, and sometimes enslavement or indentured servitude, et al.).
Not to put too fine a point on it,
often de-emphasized by the religious authorities through the ages was Christ's
enlightenment, his passion for the poor's physical needs, and his striving for
earthly economic and social justice.
Christ through his actions and his teachings demonstrated a revolutionary agenda, not just metaphysical in nature, but both economic and political in this temporal world.
Fast-forward to 1971, and Gustavo Gutierrez's book, A Theology of Liberation. This book marked the beginning of a new theology, refocusing on Christ's revolutionary zeal and advocacy for the poor. The theology was called Liberation Theology. Liberation Theology (LT) flourished in Latin America in the 50's, 60's and 70's (and even to this day), in response to the extreme economic and social injustice experienced by the poor. LT also spun off social justice movements for women, minorities and indigenous peoples. In the early to mid eighties, aspects of LT were condemned by the Church in Rome for being overtly Marxist, and for emphasizing institutional sin, the sin of the elite, (government, commercial, and economic systems) over the sin of the individual. In short, Liberation Theology was a direct threat to symbiotic relationship between church hierarchy, and the ruling economic and political elite.
What really got the Vatican's robes in a bunch, however, was LT identifying The Church in Rome as both sponsor and part of the cycle of crushing economic oppression, and The Church hierarchy as being members of the elite establishment, themselves. Liberation Theology also empowered the lay, who began conducting their own masses, and emphasized practice (or praxis) over church orthodoxy and dogma. Praxis being the interpretation of Christ's teachings, true to form, from the poor's vantage point. (Note: That would be as opposed from the vantage point of the plutocracy.) Under pressure from the lay, and the ruling power elite, this democratization of Catholic faith was a direct threat to both the Church in Rome and church hierarchy.
Enter Cardinal Ratzinger, Pope John Paul II's enforcer and oft described Pit Bull (later Pope Benedict XVI), who denounced Liberation Theology for its emphasis on praxis over church orthodoxy. Cardinal Ratzinger's words speak best for themselves: "(the) people is the antithesis of the hierarchy, the antithesis of all institutions, which are seen as oppressive powers. Ultimately anyone who participates in the class struggle is a member of the 'people.' The 'church of the people' becomes the antagonist of the hierarchical Church." Cardinal Ratzinger had also been critical of attempts to apply Christ's Sermon on the Mount to the modern day poor, and to the social, political and economic conditions surrounding the 20th century poor. As if the 20th and 21st century poor are somehow different than the biblical poor.
Despite The Church in Rome’s denunciation of aspects of LT, Cardinal Ratzinger was said to have went on to denounce the crime of colonialism and the scandal of the arms race. Pope John Paul II went on to decry the ever-growing expanse between the wealthy and the poor, and stated "expropriation"is not inappropriate as a remedy, despite affirming the legitimacy of private property rights.
As a result of the Cardinal's denunciation, in the 80' s and 90's, various Latin American priests were suspended, censured, and even ex-communicated. Moreover, aspects of Liberation Theology were strictly prohibited from being taught under Catholic Church auspices.
Like the Protestant comparisons of my youth, today presents a political, economic, and religious study in contrasts for global society as a whole. Perhaps never before in the history of man has the mechanizations and strategies of the economic and political elite been so exposed to double standards and hypocrisy. Where the poor or middle-class can go to jail for a victimless crime like marijuana possession, but the banking and financial elite can be caught in numerous acts of collusion, commit hundreds of billions in fraud, and never enter a jail cell; where approximately, twenty-five short years ago democracy with the fall of the Berlin Wall appeared to be on the march, and today, thanks to a Citizens United and McCutcheon SCOTUS decisions, democracy is for sale and purchase by the highest bidder. For the average citizen, the expectation is the same, often exhorted by churches, both Protestant and Catholic: follow church rules and obey the state. While for the wealthy, the expectations are also the same: break the rules, re-write the laws to achieve maximum advantage, and dodge paying taxes. For the elite, it's play nation states off one another in a regulatory, labor and tax arbitrage race to the bottom.... All in the name of unmitigated greed and at the 99 percent’s expense. Everyone saw in 2008, that socialism worked perfectly well, when it came time to bailout global banks and the wealthy, as well as, printing money in support of same; and yet, the socialism in the form of food stamps for the indigent, or healthcare assistance (at a fraction of the bank bailout expense), is all too often considered moral hazard by the GOP and global conservative and business interests. The economic elite want the masses to compete hourly for their daily bread and advocate free market principals for everybody else, while seeking out grants of monopoly and cartel from the government for the businesses they own and operate. In short, competition is good for everyone else, except the ruling plutocracy. Pointless wars are now fought, with fruitless and endless nation building exercises, that appear to profit immensely jingoist, the MIC and MIC supporters, while ignoring real threats and wreaking havoc within the federal budget.
Even the Catholic Church is faced with unprecedented pressures, between its obligations to the power elite - Caesar, and its obligation to reverse course and become true again to the teachings of the revolutionary messiah. Catholic and Protestant church attendance is on the wane in the West. Many Western Catholics are highly upset by the patriarchy that runs the Catholic Church, its treatment of women, and worse still, the abuse of children.
For the faithful, it's no surprise that Pope Francis has now appeared at a time when Christian religion, capitalism (what remains of it), and democracy are all at a crossroads. Pope Francis hails from Argentina, and assuredly was influenced by: the extreme poverty; economic and political cronyism/corruption; and right-wing oppression/death squads he saw in that country. That he was exposed to Liberation Theology is not in dispute; and that, publicly, he's the first pope possibly in centuries that emphasizes the grace and salvation of Christ, the promise of the New Testament, over the fear, loathing, and intolerance produced by Old Testament law, also appears not in dispute.
Like Christ before him, Pope Francis seems bent on lifting up the poor, and saving the souls of men.... even at the grumbling and possible expense of patronage and support from the wealthy and the powerful. He's put badly needed reforms within the church into review and play, at the risk of upsetting the Roman Curia. The pope has eschewed the vestiges of royalty in favor of asceticism, even removing a German bishop who sought to live like a monarch at the poor's expense. Pope Francis appears ready and able to champion the earthly and spiritual needs of his global flock, at the possible expense of the church's present hierarchy... And perhaps in doing so, is saving the Catholic Church in the process.
As such this pope appears more contented to embrace, teach, and live by the path established by Christ, than any political or religious figure that I have witnessed in my lifetime. His fire for economic and social justice in this world, along with his desire to save men's souls for the next, makes him a revolutionary pope. No matter your faith or beliefs, arguably, we should all pray for the pope's physical health, strength, moral clarity, and longevity. Above all let’s pray he stays the course, in both advocacy for the poor, and bringing about real reforms to the Catholic Church.
The pressure on this man to dial down his rhetoric, his actions, and his proposed and pending reforms will be tremendous from many sides. How far Pope Francis will go in walking the path of the revolutionary messiah remains to be seen. Right now - the Pope appears to be a gift from God.
P.S.
Christ through his actions and his teachings demonstrated a revolutionary agenda, not just metaphysical in nature, but both economic and political in this temporal world.
Fast-forward to 1971, and Gustavo Gutierrez's book, A Theology of Liberation. This book marked the beginning of a new theology, refocusing on Christ's revolutionary zeal and advocacy for the poor. The theology was called Liberation Theology. Liberation Theology (LT) flourished in Latin America in the 50's, 60's and 70's (and even to this day), in response to the extreme economic and social injustice experienced by the poor. LT also spun off social justice movements for women, minorities and indigenous peoples. In the early to mid eighties, aspects of LT were condemned by the Church in Rome for being overtly Marxist, and for emphasizing institutional sin, the sin of the elite, (government, commercial, and economic systems) over the sin of the individual. In short, Liberation Theology was a direct threat to symbiotic relationship between church hierarchy, and the ruling economic and political elite.
What really got the Vatican's robes in a bunch, however, was LT identifying The Church in Rome as both sponsor and part of the cycle of crushing economic oppression, and The Church hierarchy as being members of the elite establishment, themselves. Liberation Theology also empowered the lay, who began conducting their own masses, and emphasized practice (or praxis) over church orthodoxy and dogma. Praxis being the interpretation of Christ's teachings, true to form, from the poor's vantage point. (Note: That would be as opposed from the vantage point of the plutocracy.) Under pressure from the lay, and the ruling power elite, this democratization of Catholic faith was a direct threat to both the Church in Rome and church hierarchy.
Enter Cardinal Ratzinger, Pope John Paul II's enforcer and oft described Pit Bull (later Pope Benedict XVI), who denounced Liberation Theology for its emphasis on praxis over church orthodoxy. Cardinal Ratzinger's words speak best for themselves: "(the) people is the antithesis of the hierarchy, the antithesis of all institutions, which are seen as oppressive powers. Ultimately anyone who participates in the class struggle is a member of the 'people.' The 'church of the people' becomes the antagonist of the hierarchical Church." Cardinal Ratzinger had also been critical of attempts to apply Christ's Sermon on the Mount to the modern day poor, and to the social, political and economic conditions surrounding the 20th century poor. As if the 20th and 21st century poor are somehow different than the biblical poor.
Despite The Church in Rome’s denunciation of aspects of LT, Cardinal Ratzinger was said to have went on to denounce the crime of colonialism and the scandal of the arms race. Pope John Paul II went on to decry the ever-growing expanse between the wealthy and the poor, and stated "expropriation"is not inappropriate as a remedy, despite affirming the legitimacy of private property rights.
As a result of the Cardinal's denunciation, in the 80' s and 90's, various Latin American priests were suspended, censured, and even ex-communicated. Moreover, aspects of Liberation Theology were strictly prohibited from being taught under Catholic Church auspices.
Like the Protestant comparisons of my youth, today presents a political, economic, and religious study in contrasts for global society as a whole. Perhaps never before in the history of man has the mechanizations and strategies of the economic and political elite been so exposed to double standards and hypocrisy. Where the poor or middle-class can go to jail for a victimless crime like marijuana possession, but the banking and financial elite can be caught in numerous acts of collusion, commit hundreds of billions in fraud, and never enter a jail cell; where approximately, twenty-five short years ago democracy with the fall of the Berlin Wall appeared to be on the march, and today, thanks to a Citizens United and McCutcheon SCOTUS decisions, democracy is for sale and purchase by the highest bidder. For the average citizen, the expectation is the same, often exhorted by churches, both Protestant and Catholic: follow church rules and obey the state. While for the wealthy, the expectations are also the same: break the rules, re-write the laws to achieve maximum advantage, and dodge paying taxes. For the elite, it's play nation states off one another in a regulatory, labor and tax arbitrage race to the bottom.... All in the name of unmitigated greed and at the 99 percent’s expense. Everyone saw in 2008, that socialism worked perfectly well, when it came time to bailout global banks and the wealthy, as well as, printing money in support of same; and yet, the socialism in the form of food stamps for the indigent, or healthcare assistance (at a fraction of the bank bailout expense), is all too often considered moral hazard by the GOP and global conservative and business interests. The economic elite want the masses to compete hourly for their daily bread and advocate free market principals for everybody else, while seeking out grants of monopoly and cartel from the government for the businesses they own and operate. In short, competition is good for everyone else, except the ruling plutocracy. Pointless wars are now fought, with fruitless and endless nation building exercises, that appear to profit immensely jingoist, the MIC and MIC supporters, while ignoring real threats and wreaking havoc within the federal budget.
Even the Catholic Church is faced with unprecedented pressures, between its obligations to the power elite - Caesar, and its obligation to reverse course and become true again to the teachings of the revolutionary messiah. Catholic and Protestant church attendance is on the wane in the West. Many Western Catholics are highly upset by the patriarchy that runs the Catholic Church, its treatment of women, and worse still, the abuse of children.
For the faithful, it's no surprise that Pope Francis has now appeared at a time when Christian religion, capitalism (what remains of it), and democracy are all at a crossroads. Pope Francis hails from Argentina, and assuredly was influenced by: the extreme poverty; economic and political cronyism/corruption; and right-wing oppression/death squads he saw in that country. That he was exposed to Liberation Theology is not in dispute; and that, publicly, he's the first pope possibly in centuries that emphasizes the grace and salvation of Christ, the promise of the New Testament, over the fear, loathing, and intolerance produced by Old Testament law, also appears not in dispute.
Like Christ before him, Pope Francis seems bent on lifting up the poor, and saving the souls of men.... even at the grumbling and possible expense of patronage and support from the wealthy and the powerful. He's put badly needed reforms within the church into review and play, at the risk of upsetting the Roman Curia. The pope has eschewed the vestiges of royalty in favor of asceticism, even removing a German bishop who sought to live like a monarch at the poor's expense. Pope Francis appears ready and able to champion the earthly and spiritual needs of his global flock, at the possible expense of the church's present hierarchy... And perhaps in doing so, is saving the Catholic Church in the process.
As such this pope appears more contented to embrace, teach, and live by the path established by Christ, than any political or religious figure that I have witnessed in my lifetime. His fire for economic and social justice in this world, along with his desire to save men's souls for the next, makes him a revolutionary pope. No matter your faith or beliefs, arguably, we should all pray for the pope's physical health, strength, moral clarity, and longevity. Above all let’s pray he stays the course, in both advocacy for the poor, and bringing about real reforms to the Catholic Church.
The pressure on this man to dial down his rhetoric, his actions, and his proposed and pending reforms will be tremendous from many sides. How far Pope Francis will go in walking the path of the revolutionary messiah remains to be seen. Right now - the Pope appears to be a gift from God.
P.S.
As for my study of religion, I continued to broaden my horizons. Studying Zen Buddhism as a philosophy and reading the Koran, post 9-11. Contrary to what I was told in my youth, the study of alternative beliefs and religions only strengthened my faith in the Rabbi, Christ. Today, I see more similarities between Catholics and Protestants than I see differences. I believe the future of Judeo-Christian values in the West is one of tolerance, a return to the core message of hope and salvation, and advocacy for the poor - married with advocacy for real reforms in our present economic and political systems. Absolutely key to tolerance is a more ecumenical outlook among the clergy, of all faiths, including Judaism. Through the ages, it seems that we should not worry so much about God's word, as distorted as it may sometimes seem - handed down generation after generation; but rather, how man all too often shapes, manipulates, and perverts core religious values (for his own ends), that spans most successful faiths and philosophies. Unfortunately, religion, including Christian religion, has been used by man through out history to justify all manner of atrocities (including but not limited to wars and crusades) that are an abomination to the teachings of Christ.
Finally, western democracy has long held the importance of a separation between church and state, so that people of all faiths are free to practice their religion. In the last century worship of money and the material, in a "live for today" ethos, has taken on a religious dynamic, if not become a religion itself. So that democracies are often subverted by this new religion, faith in Ayn Randian greed. Perhaps it's time to introduce a new tenet or law to modern day democracy to address this new religion: the separation between commercial interests and state. Such a separation would save democracy and capitalism from the decay and destruction caused by today's movement towards crony economic and political systems, where an elite few benefit immensely to the near exclusion of everyone else.
Revolutionary Messiah was inspired and written in Munchen
and Berlin Germany, and Salzburg Austria.
Copyright JM Hamilton Publishing 2014
