Harpur, the church, & the marginalized
In Tom Harpur’s book, The Pagan Christ. Recovering the Lost Light
“As we shall see, the ‘Pagans’, who were persecuted, decried, killed, and ultimately utterly vanquished by the Church, held views of ‘the Christ within’ that the Church was to plagiarize blatantly—and then cover up with book burning, anathemas, and murder.” Because the root meaning of “pagan” is “peasant”, I can agree with Harpur that the institutional Church has frequently and consistently been guilty of alienating outsiders, fringe people, and the marginalized. I see it in our own time and town! Everyone has to agree that it has been the official mainstream Church that dominates the Christian landscape.
I’ve yet to finish the book, but I would contend that the Church isn’t so much guilty of the blatant plagiarism to the extent of his claim, as it is influenced. I remember when Coldplay was interviewed. The interviewer expressed his opinion that they were copying Radiohead. Chris Martin responded that they may have been influenced by Radiohead, but nothing was copied. I agree. Music is always influenced by what goes on before and around. In the same way, I believe the church emerged in a highly charged spiritual climate in which there were all kinds of symbols and meanings the culture of its place and time understood and used to communicate the ultimate mysteries.
However, I’m looking forward to reading his critique of the Church. I believe in the Church so much so that I invite and welcome the severest criticisms because I am convinced that much of it may be valid and that the Church needs to be prophesied back into its original humble posture.
Share This
I think you will find that Harpur believes in the Church as well. There is a reason why he has chosen to offer his views and critiques from inside the church rather than from outside as most do it.
Unfortunately, the mere mention of Harpur and your willingness to examine and critique the church will likely result in your views being dismissed by those who are not willing to do this, as you have seen already in this blog. These hawks, unfortunately, could possibly benefit a great deal from this dialogue and examination but are the least likely to participate.
For some, there is a specific checklist of beliefs you must share with them before they will dialogue with you. Or they wish to influence your beliefs to come in line with theirs as their reason for having dialogue with you. For them, real diversity is not something they are comfortable with when the rubber meets the road. I don’t think there is a whole lot you can do to share your ideas and have them heard by those with this approach to the world.
One more thing - Coldplay is far superior to Radiohead and the energetic, hopeful anthems of Coldplay have little in common with the suicidally depressing dronings of Radiohead. Now I’ll see which of my comments gathers more controversy…
Pagan rituals were copied. Period. They did not “influence”. That is euphemistic double speak. The only reason we have a christmas tree, christmas, easter, a saviour, 3 days of disappearance, resurrection, son of god etc. is because these were pagan religious traditions adapted by christian churches to make the transition to christianity palatable for the masses.
And as to Radiohead and Coldplay. They are both excellent bands. They cannot be compared on a ‘better than’ scale. They are different. Like apples and oranges. Like biking and running.
Nuf said.
Well Jake your first paragraph made me chuckle but your second paragraph made me think you’re mad - apples are in fact better than oranges and biking is far superior to running. I don’t understand your post at all.
On the other hand, how about some late night live blog coffee talk or something at Mahone Bay Dave for those fans of your site who’ll be there?
Well, Jake, that is arguable about rituals I think, which is why you’re arguing your point, of course. But in the above quote, Harpur is talking about “views”, not “rituals”. I agree, many rituals have pagan origins. But not all views have pagan origins. As to Mahone Bay, I’m in like Flynn, the pagan!
Arguable about rituals?? It is a fact, not arguable! I submit that many christian views, i.e. son of god, purpose of crucifixion, resurrection, etc. are based on pagan views of divinity. Most of the others were thought up by Church leaders in the first millenium to suit their purposes.
Once you finish reading Harpur’s book, you will see what I mean.
Where is Mahone Bay?
Brain M. (or should I call you chuckle?)
Why did the first paragraph make you laugh? I did not intend it to be funny. Any serious religious historian will agree wholeheartedly with what I said.
The Church will always be one that is criticized. So, “giddy up” and get in line.
Truth is usually twisted into a palitable lie.Truth has to be pure, otherwise, how can it be truth? So..from “Christmas Tree” to “Son of God”.. which in the list are truths and which in the list are lies? Or am I out of step here? Was son of god in small case for a reason?
Jake…
The comments in the first paragraph….hmmm….
“pagan religious traditions adapted by christian churches to make the transition to christianity palatable for the masses”
…. makes it sounds a little arrogant - i mean - were people in that culture and day unable to make a rational decision? Were they a bunch of “simpleminded” people? Or, did someone start a religion and throw some pagan strawberries and a little pagan whip cream to make it palatable?
Even Coldplay would tell you that they’re not as good as Radiohead.
Go listen to Kid A.
“Plagiarism is basic to all culture.”
Woody Guthrie
I think Jake’s comment, #10, regarding strawberries and whipped cream is accurate.
Saturnalia became Christmas. Imagine how Western “Christian” culture would howl if Christmas was taken away (and replaced with nothing). Loss of a paid vacation to most, desecration of a religious holy-day to some..
Dave’s point might be getting lost though- borrowing rituals to placate/engage the masses doesn’t equate with my present church’s beliefs. My church admits it doesn’t really know the date of Christ’s birth, and sings Christmas Carols in July. The arrogance comes from churches (many churches) expressing that they (each) have the definitive answers on life, the universe and everything! Present day pagans look at many churches expressing their undeniable truth and wonder “Why can’t they get it together?”
Not many churches express that “what is gospel truth for our church may not even be applicable to your church, but we’ll respect your views.”
Is God infinite enough to encompass my truth and your truth, and bless them both as truth, even though you and I see ourselves as divergent?
“Jingle bells, Jingle bells…”
(Mahone Bay is in Nova Scotia)
Hey, I prefer Brian to “Brain” or “Chuckles”.
I find it amazing that we can say that one group of historians is right and another group is wrong as if the only ‘right’ can possibly be the one that goes against the popular belief.
Certainly it’s no secret, despite what Dan Brown might say, that the RC Church absorbed people by slapping a new name and new understanding of their former faiths holy days and practices. However that’s a huge jump to say that everything from the incarnation to the resurrection was just appropriated from other religions.
I had a teacher in school, and this is not a lie or made up ‘parable’, who did a whole week of teaching during our ‘Shakespeare’ section of Lit class on how Shakespeare actually wrote the Bible. She took sections of some of his works and put them side by side with sections from the Psalms and other passages of the OT. They were far too similar, she said, to not be the work of the same man. She was deadly serious. I wasn’t even a believer then but her argument made me wonder about my reasons for not believing.
I’ve been around academics too long to not be very impressed by their new insights into ancient history.
I understand there’s a nice pub in Lunenberg. Which I understand, by faith, is 10 minutes from Mahone Bay.
Well, then, we shall have to be like Luther and talk shop over a mug! Shall we?
The church still borrows from the culture around it every day. I remember years ago listening to a Christian rap CD and being shocked by the artist using the word “nigga.” He justified it in the liner notes by making up some positive-sounding acronym for N.I.G.G.A., but even as a kid I was smart enough to recognize that was just his ridiculous excuse for trying to sound as hardcore as a “secular” rapper.
I don’t listen to much Christian rap anymore, because 90 per cent of it is a cheesy knockoff of what’s on the radio and really doesn’t sound more spiritual than artists like Common or De La Soul anyway.
Now, I don’t think borrowing is bad. When I write worship songs, of course I’m influenced by the music I listen to. When I write fiction, I’m sure I’m influenced, sometimes consciously and sometimes not, by the people I read. I’m sure Dave would admit that his art is influenced by his favourite artists as well.
But I think the problem is the church often suffers from a lack of imagination. We try to take what the world offers and carbon-copy it with a Churchified slant, all in the name of buzzwords like “being relevant” and “reaching our culture.” And it usually ends up falling somewhere between laughable and sad. I think it’s one of those things (and there are many) that Christians sometimes waste a lot of time arguing about instead of doing what’s actually important.
But hey, I love the church too!
p.s. Coldplay has less in common with Radiohead than U2, right down to their big-headed but humanitarian frontmen. But Radiohead is obviously better than them both.
Chad, that’s just heresy. U2 and Coldplay are vastly superior in every way.
I think you make a good point about the church and imitation though. Worst of all is when we imitate each other and become copies of copies.
I think it was easier 2000 years ago when no one was around to say, “we’ve never done it that way.” How did having done it already a certain way ever become a reasonable test for whether it’s from God, good or worth doing?
At the same time, as I reconsider our whole approach here at home to leadership structure I look around at what others are doing, not so much to copy but to feel a little less crazy if someone else has gone this way before.
Jake, Mahone Bay is right next door to Chester which was, as any histoian will tell you *grin*, the intended capital of Canada when confederation was negotiated until the Upper Canadians insisted it be more “central” in location to the federation and wanted it in Ottawa. Go figure.
I have to say that I am enjoying this discussion thread and look forward to the beer on the bay. In support of Jake’s point about the reality of the origins of christianity, historians do appear to be fairly unanimous in support of what Jake has said. Theologians not so much. But which of the two is more likely to approach the subject matter with an obvious bias? Who is more credible on what is fact and what is creative analysis of the evidence?
Where I might disagree with Jake is on the value of the insights of theologians and teachings and wisdom of religion. At the end of the day, the pagans had mythologies that allowed them to understand and share their wisdom on the spiritual dimension to life and it had great value to societies like Egypt in this way. Where we lost our way, as Harpur says, is when these mythologies turned into historical fact under christianity and the spiritual wisdom was lost and replaced by laws, standards, righteousness, and the wars and hate that results from this.
I agree with Harpur and others that humanity can’t take any more religion. Weapons of mass destruction in the hands of the “righteous” will destroy us all and this may now be inevitable.
Nicely said Jeff.
A slightly tangential video which dovetails with your point can be found at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1002626006461047517
well worth a watch.
Jake, I watched that on CBC last week. Fantastic program! A perspective many will find difficult to accept if they are even willing to watch.
Hey Chad!! Good to hear from you! I agree: influence and imagination are forever intertwined. And I too believe Radiohead is astounding!
It is my continuing hope that the church will always struggle to stay in touch with its surrounding culture. This may look like imitation or plagiarism but it is totally necessary if we don’t want to erect obstacles, both visible and invisible, to newcomers. Wouldn’t it be great if church felt comfortable and familiar to new people and was able to deliver truth in ways that were easily digested? I thought Martin Luther or some other famous theologian took bar songs and put Christian theology to those tunes….
Faith is being sure of what you hope for and certain of what you do not see. WHAT YOU DO NOT SEE. WHAT YOU DO NOT SEE. What YOU do not see. My thoughts are completely different from yours, “says the Lord. ” ” And my ways are far beyond ANYTHING you could imagine.