On a T-shirt, a rainbow, and a play on a sacred word, there is offence enough to summon a mob.
Yet before we take up arms for our gods, we might ask whether Western Christianity would truly accept an Arabic Christ, and whether we have the sense of the old cow, who eats the hay and leaves the baling wire.
This is a reflection on symbolism, belief, and the fine but firm line between the deed and the doer.
An AI-generated infographic on the blog content. (Click to enlarge.)
Where Offence Begins
Religious symbolism, individual
perceptions, and beliefs provide many opportunities to take offence. This
became the core of a conversation in which I was invited to comment on someone
wearing a T-shirt depicting a religious personality, with a play on one of the
final words of supplication or veneration, all set in the context of human
sexuality.
At first glance, there are so many
things capable of causing offence, ranging across a spectrum from the merely
unfunny, through the disrespectful and the sacrilegious, to outright blasphemy.
Each could attract anything from a
simple flinch to an outrage that seeks out a mob for retribution, all in
response to this perceived denigration of symbols and language. Such reactions
often arise in the quest for an expansionist embrace of all things represented
in our humanity; a sometimes-worthy goal, though one that needs wisdom in its
deployment.
I will not dwell on the particulars of
the item itself, for my concern is not the object but the impulse it stirs in
us; the principle interests me far more than the personality behind it.
Confrontation and Its Limits
I would suggest that the
confrontational approach sets people up against one another. It might well be a
way of challenging norms, yet it is rarely the means by which one wins
converts.
In terms of religious figures who
walked the earth more than a millennium ago, it is quite unlikely that anyone
truly knows what they looked like. The pictures we see of them today are
figments of human imagination and artistry, quite awesome and commendable, but
not real. For those who claim to have had visions or apparitions, my view is
that revelation is only presented to the limit of one's capacity to perceive.
Depictions and Idolatry
Depictions might offer a sensual connection to the unseen, but they do not replace it; to think otherwise opens one's appreciation to a form of idolatry. Then again, depictions can be instructive or misleading.
For instance, the European masters have in many
cases depicted Jesus Christ as Caucasian, with northern Scandinavian features,
when, by reason of history and region, He would most likely have looked Arabic.
Such features would not have made Him seem alien, nor His parents, when they
sojourned in Egypt at the time Herod massacred every boy-child in Judea under
the age of two.
The question then becomes this: would
Western Christianity have been amenable to an Arabic, Black, or Asian Jesus
Christ? Now, that is to court controversy, meddling with images and depictions
preconceived to accentuate belief, yet upended by reasonable supposition.
The Lesson of Gideon
I am reminded of the story of Gideon
in the Bible, who one night destroyed the idols of his community, so that they
rose up to put him to death. His father was able to convince them to let the
offended gods avenge themselves.
We should be careful of emasculating
our deities by offering to fight for them as though they were utterly
powerless, because the deeper issue is this: if a god cannot fight for himself
when slighted, what is the power we believe he possesses? Gideon came to be
known as Jerubbaal.
Belief and Fellowship
We all believe differently, to the
extent of our own persuasion, and we do let the beliefs of others influence us,
hopefully to buttress what we know rather than to pull apart and pull down our
creeds. At worst, those who choose to meddle with the elements of our
foundational beliefs put themselves at risk of forsaking our fellowship,
communion, and friendship.
They might be misguided, but it is
impossible to read motivation or intent from afar; we are left with our
conscience to decide. One may hold an act to be unwise, even unnecessary,
without presuming to indict the one who acts; the deed and the doer are not the
same thing.
Perhaps I feel quite unperturbed
because, in the admonition of one preacher, I have as much sense as an old cow:
I eat the hay and leave the baling wire. The beliefs we hold are like seeds
sown, which will grow in the ways we allow, for the ground of our hearts tends
the seed to be fruitful, affected by heat, thorns, or weeds, for it is in these
very things that offence reveals itself.
Keeping Offence in Perspective
Yes, we do get offended, but we must
limit the impact to two things. First, the offender acts in a foolishness that
does not engender the best of our humanity. Secondly, for all the offender
does, I do not attach myself so closely to any man that I cannot cut loose when
he is falling into the ditch.
The offender might be worthy of
rebuke, and in extreme situations they might find themselves in receipt of mob
violence. Even where the latter could be justified, I would not subscribe to
it. We are allowed to deviate in how we believe, and to break away if no
compromise can be found.
At the intersection of symbolism,
language, depictions, and beliefs, the apparent offence of any one thing is
kept in perspective. Another's journey, leading to redemption or perdition, is
theirs alone; I refuse to follow in folly.
