Death of Magdalene
I have decided to dismantle the blog due to being unable to express myself appropriately. I don't want anything I say or don't say to reflect badly on God. But the kind of disrespectful comment I was referring to is like the one that follows:
The funny (and sad) piece of history is when Americans took over the Philippines, all these Christian missionaries were really excited that they had a whole island massif of heathens to convert. So they all went there, and were very disappointed to find out that the population had already been converted to Christianity by the Spanish. What annoys me about Christian "activists" in the States is how they whine about being suppressed as if they are being thrown to the lions or something, when in reality they have much more influence in the States than any other group (religious or not). I mean, come on, there's "in god we trust" on every coin and bill. And the gay bashing by Christians is just despicable. Ah, that wonderful sense of entitlement to a universal validation of a particular type of psychosis. -
posted by peasantking
I hope I have not been as disrespectful myself.
The funny (and sad) piece of history is when Americans took over the Philippines, all these Christian missionaries were really excited that they had a whole island massif of heathens to convert. So they all went there, and were very disappointed to find out that the population had already been converted to Christianity by the Spanish. What annoys me about Christian "activists" in the States is how they whine about being suppressed as if they are being thrown to the lions or something, when in reality they have much more influence in the States than any other group (religious or not). I mean, come on, there's "in god we trust" on every coin and bill. And the gay bashing by Christians is just despicable. Ah, that wonderful sense of entitlement to a universal validation of a particular type of psychosis. -
posted by peasantking
I hope I have not been as disrespectful myself.
posted by Spleengrrl @ 11:11 AM
9 Comments:
At 11:42 AM,
Spleengrrl said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
At 8:21 PM,
waldocarmona said…
Didn't this happen once before?? I think it's sad, ultimately blogging is a very selfish excercise in narcissism. Some even think a pretty pointless one at that. The jury is still out.
At 10:55 PM,
Kathy said…
I've been waiting all day an evening to return to your discussion, and now I'm sad.
Here's the article I wanted to share. I really liked it.
JAMES CARROLL
The politics of the Christmas story
By James Carroll | December 21, 2004
THE SINGLE most important fact about the birth of Jesus, as recounted in the Gospels, is one that receives almost no emphasis in the American festival of Christmas. The child who was born in Bethlehem represented a drastic political challenge to the imperial power of Rome. The nativity story is told to make the point that Rome is the enemy of God, and in Jesus, Rome's day is over.
The Gospel of Matthew builds its nativity narrative around Herod's
determination to kill the baby, whom he recognizes as a threat to his own
political sway. The Romans were an occupation force in Palestine, and Herod was their puppet-king. To the people of Israel, the Roman occupation, which preceded the birth of Jesus by at least 50 years, was a defilement, and Jewish resistance was steady. (The historian Josephus says that after an uprising in Jerusalem around the time of the birth of Jesus, the Romans
crucified 2,000 Jewish rebels.)
Herod was right to feel insecure on his throne. In order to preempt any
challenge from the rumored newborn "king of the Jews," Herod murdered "all the male children who were 2 years old or younger." Joseph, warned in a dream, slipped out of Herod's reach with Mary and Jesus. Thus, right from his birth, the child was marked as a political fugitive.
The Gospel of Luke puts an even more political cast on the story. The
narrative begins with the decree of Caesar Augustus calling for a world
census -- a creat ion of tax rolls that will tighten the empire's grip on its subject peoples. It was Caesar Augustus who turned the Roman republic into a dictatorship, a power-grab he reinforced by proclaiming himself divine.
His census decree is what requires the journey of Joseph and the pregnant Mary to Bethlehem, but it also defines the context of their child's nativity as one of political resistance. When the angel announces to shepherds that a "savior has been born," as scholars like Richard Horsley point out, those hearing the story would immediately understand that the blasphemous claim by
Caesar Augustus to be "savior of the world" was being repudiated.
When Jesus was murdered by Rome as a political criminal -- crucifixion was the way such rebels were executed -- the story's beginning was fulfilled in its end. But for contingent historical reasons (the savage Roman war against
the Jews in the late first century, the gradual domination of the Jesus
movement by Gentiles, the conversion of Constantine in the early fourth
century) the Christian memory deemphasized the anti-Roman character of the Jesus story. Eventually, Roman imperialism would be sanctified by the church, with Jews replacing Romans as the main antagonists of Jesus, as if
he were not Jewish himself. (Thus, Herod is remembered more for being
part-Jewish than for being a Roman puppet.)
In modern times, religion and politics began to be understood as occupying separate spheres, and the nativity story became spiritualized and sentimentalized, losing its political edge altogether. "Peace" replaced resistance as the main motif. The baby Jesus was universalized, removed from
his decidedly Jewish context, and the narrative's explicit critiques of imperial dominance and of wealth were blunted.
This is how it came to be that Christmas in America has turned the nativity of Jesus on its head. No surprise there, for if the story were told today with Roman imperialism at its center, questions might arise about America's
new self-understanding as an imperial power. A story of Jesus born into a land oppressed by a hated military occupation might prompt an examination of the American occupation of Iraq. A story of Jesus come decidedly to the poor
might cast a pall over the festival of consumption. A story of the
Jewishness of Jesus might undercut the Christian theology of replacement.
Today the Roman empire is recalled mainly as a force for good -- those
roads, language, laws, civic magnificence, "order" everywhere. The United States of America also understands itself as acting in the world with good intentions, aiming at order. "New world order," as George H.W. Bush put it.
That we have this in common with Rome is caught by the Latin motto that appears just below the engraved pyramid on each American dollar bill, "Novus Ordo Seculorum." But, as Iraq reminds us, such "order" comes at a cost, far more than a dollar. The price is always paid in blood and suffering by unseen "nobodies" at the bottom of the imperial pyramid. It is their story,
for once, that is being told this week.
James Carroll's column appears regularly in the Globe.
At 8:33 AM,
Spleengrrl said…
Well that's a nice article but as I've said I am not in favor of the policies of George W. I am merely a Christian. Just as not all Latino women are ignorant sluts, not all Christians are biggots, war mongers or out to change the world by forcibly converting everyone into their religious views.
In other words, I'm not sure what this has to do with me.
At 11:41 AM,
Kathy said…
Spleengirl, I'm kind of shocked and offended by your comment on my comment.
I didn't post the article as attack on you. I really hope you don't think I meant it to disuade you from your support for GW. I know you don't support him.
I simply thought you might like it the way you like other essays. Think of it as a Christmas card from me to you.
Peace
At 5:11 PM,
Spleengrrl said…
I'm sorry, Kathy. I didn't mean to offend you. And this is not the time to be sad (over the demise of this blog) or offended by comments- tis the season to be jolly! I have been so busy at work I haven't even had the time to put myself in the Christmas spirit. But good thing a therapist I work with decided to give me and the other girl at the office these big baskets of food and a box (for each) with a turkey and ham. I don't know what prompted it but the first thing I thought of was that I don't need it. I felt guilty getting such a gift as there are people who are actually going to go hungry this Christmas and I was wondering who I could give it to. Then the answer came when my sister-in-law texted me today saying that she wondered if I had anything to give a needy family from her dad's church. Hoorah!
Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays from me to all (and thanks, Kathy for the card) and a very happy 2006!
At 10:27 PM,
Spleengrrl said…
Peasantking: Thank you for your apology. Godless is ok, but COMMIE? Thanks to you people, I lost all my riches in the third world country where I was part of the upper class! Bah!
But, you are forgiven, my child. You may go in peace and sin no more. ;-)
At 11:12 PM,
waldocarmona said…
HAHAHA
the biggest sin is waste according to Peter David
At 6:43 PM,
Spleengrrl said…
Isn't this blog waste? It's a waste of time, I'm sure.
Post a Comment
<< Home