Cultural relativism

My political orientation is complex. If you have to place a label on it, I’m a fiscal conservative with libertarian/liberal social leanings. I’m deeply suspicious of government interference in the economic and social lives of individuals and buy into the conservative concept of low-taxation and small government coupled with low barriers to capital formation. Yet, I take nuanced liberal positions on such issues as gay marriage, immigration, legalization of drugs and capital punishment.

So, with this in mind, I read today’s epistle, Colossians 3:18-4:18, with some alarm. Paul appears to be at his most socially conservative here, lending his considerable authority to a host of traditional social/gender roles that fundamentalists have latched onto for centuries. Wives are told to be “subject” to their husbands and slaves are told to “obey in everything” their masters. Subjugation of women and slavery? What was Paul thinking?

This is where literal, uncritical readings of scripture become a trap for the unwary. Yes, the men who wrote (and edited) scripture were inspired by the Holy Spirit to do so; this is what elevates scripture beyond mere philosophy. But—and this is a huge but—they did not receive scripture as dictation from God. What we have are ideas and concepts which were inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit but transmitted through the imperfect media of human beings who, like we ourselves today, saw everything through the lens of their own cultural biases and prejudices.

The role of women in Paul’s world was indeed one of abject subjugation. Roman law gave the Pater Familias, the family patriarch, literally life and death authority over everyone in his household, especially women. Slavery was a fact of life in the first Century—no one even remotely questioned its legitimacy. Radical as this new Christian faith was, Paul was incapable of overcoming these very basic, fundamental cultural biases.

Or was he?

I’ve been careful so far not to mention the other half of Paul’s admonitions. Wives are to be subject to their husbands, but husbands are admonished to love their wives and not be harsh to them. Slaves are to obey their masters with “singleness of heart,” but masters are admonished to treat their slaves justly and fairly, “knowing that you also have a Master in heaven.” In the context of Paul’s cultural biases, these are radical statements. Love was not considered a relevant ingredient in marriages; justice and fairness were concepts entirely divorced from master-slave relationships, and that masters should consider themselves slaves to a greater Master was an idea completely out of anyone’s comfort zone.

And so here is what Paul is really saying about all these traditional societal roles: be who you are in and of the world, but be in and of Christ also. Let Christian love inform your relationships with each other, and remember that we answer to God for what we do to and for each other.

This is radical stuff, for the 1st Century, and calls on us to be radical today. Yes, I believe that capitalism is the social model best able to promote the advance of humankind, but I also believe that capitalism must be tempered with Christian charity, with a keen awareness of Jesus’ insistence on washing his disciples feet before going to his death on the cross.

This entry was posted in Spirituality. Bookmark the permalink.