Mike's musings

Friday, June 15, 2007

Untouchables

I came up with this topic after a sermon last Sunday. One of the points the preacher made about the service on the Friday was that some people had made flippant remarks about it, and I was one of those people. I hope I made it clear to the people to whom I made remarks that I was joking, but I was disparaging about the tradition, and after the sermon, I felt chastened. It got me thinking, though, which I believe was the point.

I think most Christians would agree that Jesus went out of his way to spend time with, preach to and scandalise others about, the marginalised. And some of these would, quite literally, have been "untouchables" at the time: if you did touch one of these people, you were ritually unclean, and had to go through a variety of rituals before you could interact with other people. Examples? Dead bodies (widow of Nain's son, Lazarus, centurion's child), menstruating women (woman with the issue of blood for 7 years), probably the Samarian woman, gentiles (the centurion), and probably tax-collectors and publicans, too. Certainly prostitutes.

Things are different now: we don't have (in Christianity, at least) the idea of "ritual uncleanness", but what about how others in your congregation would feel about you if they found out you were talking to certain people? Drunks? The homeless? Drug abusers? Beggars? Sun readers? Guardian readers? Abusive atheists? Publicans? (Well, my congregation wouldn't mind my talking to landlords, I think.) Jews? Hindus? Fundamental Evangelicals? Anglo-catholics? Roman Catholics? Gays? Fox-hunters? Pornographers? Pagans? Satanists? People from Kettering? (Just checking, Gary, just checking.) Divorcees? Adulterers? Fornicators? Sabbath-breakers? Abortionists? Animal testers? Animal liberationists? Unmarried families? Murderers? Child abusers?

Some of these groups are pretty safe for most - some for few. But I suspect that for most of us, there are groups there that we would be unhappy talking to. That's fine: that's how we work, as part of safe, happy communities. And we have the excuse of our place in society, or our families, or time, or money, or, well, whatever. But look at the list above. Do you think that there would have been _one_single_ group up there to whom Jesus would not have talked? Who Jesus would not have loved? Who Jesus would not have forgiven? No.

I'm not a fan of the "what would Jesus do?" movement, because who are we to make ourselves Christ? But there are times when we realise that Jesus set us an example. And that to be Christ-like (which I believe is what we need to aspire to, though it is, of course, impossible, being as we're all sinners), we have to try to emulate his example.

This will be hard. But that's the paradox about "his yoke is easy, his burthen is light": there's hard work to do.

Synchroblog

Today is a "synchroblog" on the subject of "Untouchables". If you've liked what you read here, or, more particularly, if you didn't, and you'd like to read some other opinions, please visit one of the other participating blogs: