Sunday, May 20, 2012

So Long and Thanks for all the Fish (rant about why I've left Christianity, for good)

 I left Church about one and a half years ago, and rejected any idea of God shortly after. However, I have left it until now to say something that I have been holding back for some time: I think christianity is a sham, I hate it, and am sorry I ever had anything to do with it.

 While I have tried to remain civil, eventually something was going to snap. Here's what did it - one of the places in Bristol that I most loved was evicted and destroyed, for the sake of "the advancement of the Roman Catholic and Christian faith". (see: https://freefactory.wordpress.com/2011/10/06/against-eviction-and-gentrification-in-st-pauls-for-the-defence-of-liberated-spaces/). This happened six months ago, but it is only now it's been gone so long that I realise exactly what this place meant to me. It sounds stupid and sentimental, but it's taken this long to realise that I'm pissed off that an awesome project was destroyed by Christians doing God's work. Every time something like this happens I start to hate it a little more, and now it's got to the point where I have to vent or explode. What follows is a self congratulatory rant about how I found out that the Church was crap. Read it if you want to, I guess :-).

 Six years ago, I discovered something beautiful - something that made sense. I called it the Kingdom of God. I could write chapters about my 'journey', but I'll spare you the poetics and get to the point. I realised that if you took the moral teachings of Jesus literally, three things happened - first, the rest of the Bible started to make sense, second, they had profound political consequences, third, life took on a new sense of purpose. Jesus commanded the rich to give up all their possessions, and share with the poor. He commanded that we love our enemies. He commanded that we love God and our neighbour before anything else - including the law. Jesus' non-violence and care for the poor at all costs has obvious political consequences - Christians have an obvious obligation to work against oppression and poverty, at all costs. Allowing Jesus to be political makes some of his more obscure statements make a lot more sense. "The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favour." is a weird thing to say if it just means something spiritual. Finally, Jesus' command to love our neighbour at all costs has profound personal consequences - you can't live in an expensive house, drive a Mercedes, and run a bank, if you want to follow Jesus. If you've got all that stuff, you have to give it up. If you've got fuck-all, then rejoice! - God's on your side: "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.".

 The honeymoon period only lasted so long, however. For one thing, living up to this new ideal proved to be a lot more difficult than I'd expected, as did working out what it really meant. Though, I couldn't help feeling that if it wasn't just me, things would be a lot easier. Why shouldn't my congregation and family, who had been worshipping Jesus and reading about him for so long, be able to help me out? Well, it turned out I couldn't find ANYONE I knew who had sold everything they had and given it to the poor. Nor anyone who was a conscientious objector. I could, however, find plenty who lived in the richest part of my city, and drove expensive cars. On closer inspection, I found something. Some people gave 10% of their income to charities. Some people tried to forgive other people a little. However, I was uncomfortable that this was the best the Church had to offer. The fact was that even though we all paid lip-service to the martyr who died on the cross, no-one really went out of their way or did anything daring. Unless it was in order to convert sinners, of course.

 At first, I assumed that people just hadn't imagined that their lives could be anything other than what they were - that they just needed someone to give them an example of what it could mean to follow Jesus. As time went on, I realised that people liked things how they were, that they didn't want any more from God, especially if it meant taking risks! So, I studied hard and began to try and argue people into following Jesus. I thought if I could just show them that the simple things Jesus said (never mind the complicated ones, they could come later!) - for instance,  "love your enemies" (i.e. don't kill them), really were intended to be lived, then they would start to try it out. When I did this, everyone had their excuses (or, as it's commonly known, theology). However, though I always started with the simple, literal stuff, I had been studying hard, so I had a pretty convincing theology too. (to be fair, this is no reason to be arrogant - it is always going to be easier to argue that the son of the living God meant what he said). Finally, just when I thought I was getting somewhere, people might commend me for having an 'interesting perspective', or for 'making them think'. Worst of all though, was when they nodded and agreed with me! This was almost always an intellectual agreement, often they would carry on doing the exact opposite in real life.

 Though I did not manage to convince anyone this way, I did manage to eventually meet a few kindred spirits, and start trying to live out the 'Kingdom of God'. Sharing more of what I had, doing non-violent political activism, and protesting war. Despite having spent literally years searching, out of the millions of Christians in this country, I have only ever met a few people who really believe in the simplest of Jesus' teachings - in non-violence, in loving at all costs, in working to liberate the oppressed. Of this few, only a handful are actually making any real attempt at living it (i.e. an attempt involving real sacrifices or changes). When this handful are not being ignored, pitied, or despised by the mainstream 'Church', they are held up as Saints. Sometimes this is due to honest guilt - people point to them to show that not everything is wrong with the Church, that even though they are not good enough, there are a few holy examples who are perfect enough to do something. (by the way, I have met these 'saints' and they are very far from perfect and are simply normal human beings) Sometimes it is more sinister - Christians revere their saints because they help the image of their religion, and allow them to convert more of the heathen. I have met more than one bastard evangelist who pretends to love 'radical' christians, simply in-order to ensnare more unsuspecting atheists.

 Anyway, eventually I left the church completely. Once I had managed to make some small steps towards integrity, two things happened. First, I got to know some really good people who were trying to change the world. They all had something to teach me, and none of them were Christians. Second, I started to feel used by the Church I was in. Although I had felt dissatisfied with the churches I had been in for a long time, and believed that their very existence was one of the reasons behind the apathy of the people in them, I had stayed in order that I might try and convince people of something different, and perhaps change it from within. This all fell apart one day when a preacher said to me "I often worry that my church isn't radical enough, but because you're here, I know we must be doing something right". Before this, I could not have imagined that my very presence in a community could be enough to make them feel justified! It was as though the fact that I was there made it ok that most of the congregation lived off the backs of the poor, and supported war and killing. So I had to leave. Thankfully, by this point I had already begun to feel more comradeship with those on the 'outside' anyway.

 Once I had left that dreaded institution, I got to thinking about God, and Jesus. If Jesus' message was really compelling, why did not more people try and follow it? If God really transformed people's lives, why after travelling for miles (in a so-called christian country!) and searching for years, could I only find a handful of people making any sincere attempt to live lives based on justice? And why is it that people who are not Christians often seem to be doing just as good a job of living good lives as those who believe? I understood that Jesus would not transform the world right now, and that until the second coming of Jesus we would only see the 'first-fruits' of his Kingdom - a few healings here and there, a few hungry people getting fed, a few prisoners getting freed. However, I did not see the slightest evidence of God using any of his miraculous to liberate anyone. Nor did the argument 'God uses people to change things' hold water any longer - I had met too many good atheists. As such, I was left with a choice - I could deny that God exists. Else, I could believe that God changes people regardless of what they read, pray, or believe, and that he does miracles in a way that no-one could notice. Either of these choices spell the death of religion. If praying, reading the bible, or believing in Jesus do nothing to transform you as a person, you might as well be an atheist. If God never does anything visible, there is nothing there for you to worship or thank him for. Realising this, what is left of Christianity? At best, it is an opiate that gives a few struggling people hope, despite being a fiction (and I see nothing wrong in opiates). At worst, it is an incredible waste of human time and energy, that helps the worst people in the world to feel justified in what they are doing, yet saps the strength of the very best. Despite possessing a holy book that commands care for the poor, that book is used as the cornerstone of vast and expensive buildings while people without home or shelter beg for places to sleep. For myself, I want nothing more to do with it.

So long, and thanks for all the fish.
Tim




3 comments:

Ben said...

Tim,

I’m not sure I understand your perception of the Kingdom of Heaven - but that would be a discussion for another day. Broadly, I agree with your understanding of and reaction to it. I am always at pains to remember though that it is underwritten by the grace of G-d - we can never achieve perfection, yet G-d allows us to take part in the Kingdom anyway. If it was about what you did or didn’t own, that would be a pretty horrid and annoyingly religious system.

Yes it’s a hard ask, the Kingdom of Heaven. Yes it requires sacrifice. No, we don’t all do very well at following that. Some don’t realise, and out of those that do, only a few are fearless enough of the consequences to go through with it. In my experience, that is down more to their insecurities than their lack of desire, when you dig deep enough. Surely then, our response should be to encourage, instead of condemn (if indeed we can see them in spite of the planks in our eyes...)

Oh, and for the record, I’m a conscientious objector.

I’ve been there with the arguing, and I’ve seen it not work, and I’ve grown tired. But what I have learned is that when you live something out, people begin to respect it. So I’ve committed to less arguing and more trying to be like Jesus. Besides, Jesus himself said that the road is narrow and untravelled, and that the workers are few...

I think you’re right about truth. Christians don’t have the monopoly. But I think that God probably does (something the less liberal among us would argue against, I’m sure).

I’m not sure who the preacher you speak of is (though I may have my suspicions!) but I think you perhaps give them a hard time. I am sure they didn’t use you deliberately. Insecurity is something that comes naturally to all of us... and I’m not sure that pragmatism is always a bad thing. God was quite pragmatic after all ... the law wasn’t exactly Plan A!

Your dichotic response to your situation doesn’t work. You could have chosen to see Jesus as the one who comes to rupture religion itself (read some stuff by Pete Rollins... he’s very good...) and yet be human/divine, fulfillment of the law etc. Most of us are atheists in practice, yes. So let’s encourage one another to walk a better path than that...

I would say that God does much visible stuff - look at the good things that happen in people’s lives. Just because those things are not always radical does not mean that they are not somehow good. God has done much good (the cross being the ultimate example) - he will always deserve worship (even though I’m sure he cringes at our attempt to constantly sing it) and if we do not, he still deserves it (scripture says ‘the rocks will cry out’).

I honour the spirit of God in you, Tim. You seek radicalism. Seek it with a loving heart rather than one jaded by the indifference of others. Then you will see lives transformed. What matters more, truth or transformation?

It is ironic that the teachings of a man who claimed to be divine inspire you to refer to the story of that divine as fiction!

Of course, we want nothing more to do with hypocrisy. Nothing more to do with those who distort the word of God, nothing more to do with those who see moral teachings, hear moral teachings, and know moral teachings and yet live immoral lives.

But I guess that’s why we’re not God. We’d have never sent Jesus to try and start the long process of sorting the mess out...

Ben

Tim said...

Part 1:

> we can never achieve perfection
The problem with most Christian spirituality is that people are seen as either perfect or sinners, with all sin being equal. Hence, evicting your tenants when they can't keep up the rent is no worse than taking too many biscuits at the church coffee morning. Since no-one is perfect, everyone is a sinner and there's nothing they can do about it. So no-one does anything. Ever.

The typical church atmosphere of guilt, grace and worship breeds apathy. If people let go of the idea that the only worthwhile thing is being perfect (or, failing that, accepting the 'grace' of an impotent God, then doing nothing more), and actually just made a start at changing their lives, they would achieve SO much more.

I don't expect people to be perfect. I just expect them to try to do something. Then fail. Then start again. I see christians spending much more time trying to absolve themselves of the guilt that their religion gives them than just accepting themselves as they are, and getting on with it! As an institution, not only does Christianity not really empower people to act (I accept that doing things is hard), but it is so pathetic that someone can become a priest without learning that Christians should not make people homeless .

I am not sure how to say this as loud and clear as I can, but here goes: it does not take any effort whatsoever to not kick people out of their home and on to the street. Not doing things does not take effort, much less perfection. Doing something wrong is only possible when you believe it is right, and you have a church congregation to come home to that will tell you that you are accepted by God.

I am not criticising christians for being imperfect. I am not criticising them for not trying quite as hard as they could. Rather my criticism is due to the fact that almost every conversation I have with Christians about how to live, does not feel like it is based on the premise of actually wanting to live like him at personal sacrifice. I have no real problem with people who are not up to this. I do have a problem with people who try to call themselves followers of him, when it is quite clear they have never wanted to be. If the way of the cross isn't for you, fine. It's not for me, either.

Since 'Christianity' is not really about the cross, then, what is it? Why do they use Jesus as their figurehead? In my opinion, what we know as 'Christianity' is a psychologically harmful cult, that makes people feel ok about their nationalism, prejudice and riches by co-opting the story of a good man. The real Jesus would have up-turned the Mercedes in the church parking lot. The Christian Jesus not only welcomes the rich, but makes no attempt to challenge them. Unless they have sex outside of marriage, of course.

Tim said...

Part 2:

> Oh, and for the record, I’m a conscientious objector.
Didn't know that! When were you in the army/police? What made you leave?

> I’ve been there with the arguing, and I’ve seen it not work,
> and I’ve grown tired. But what I have learned is that when you
> live something out, people begin to respect it.
I do not want anyone's respect. I am more frightened of respect than I am of rejection.

> I’m not sure who the preacher you speak of is (though I may
> have my suspicions!) but I think you perhaps give them a hard
> time. I am sure they didn’t use you deliberately.
Why shouldn't I give people a hard time when they say 'Lord, Lord!' about Jesus, but have no interest in doing what he said?

> read some stuff by Pete Rollins... he’s very good...
I have read a lot of Pete Rollins. He inspired the first post on this blog ('am I a Christian?'). http://timusblog.blogspot.co.uk/2008/11/am-i-christian.html

> You could have chosen to see Jesus as the one who comes
> to rupture religion itself
This post was about Christianity, as in the institution, and as I have experienced it. I have different criticisms of Jesus (but criticisms nonetheless).

> I would say that God does much visible stuff - look
> at the good things that happen in people’s lives
Not that I have seen

> God has done much good (the cross being the ultimate
> example) - he will always deserve worship
I do not see why God is so special. Other people have sacrificed themselves in the name of what is good. Friends have put themselves at risk of arrest and pain for my personal sake (and I love them for it!). I also do not see that God (if s/he exists) deserves my worship.

I suggest you read Emma Goldman's essay 'The Failure of Christianity' (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/goldman/failureofchristianity.html), as she says this stuff better than I ever could.

> Seek it with a loving heart rather than one jaded by
> the indifference of others. Then you will see lives
> transformed. What matters more, truth or transformation?
I left 'Christianity' for that reason - because although I was comfortable, my presence in it seemed to be making things worse, not better. Once outside of it, I rejected God and Jesus too. God, because s/he was irrelevant. Jesus, because although he was very very good in many ways, he was human, flawed, and his example is no more important to me than the lives of other people I respect (living and dead).

Timus