Continuing an examination of verses pertaining to
worldliness, antithesis and the Dominionist confusion regarding these topics,
we come to Matthew 19 and the reference to eunuchs for the Kingdom.
This is connected to the discussion regarding divorce and
that if one is separated it is better to remain alone, in other words to live
in a state of self-denial – a concept alien and even repugnant to modern world-affirming
Evangelicalism.
A difficult saying, Christ speaks of eunuchs for the Kingdom.
Now these eunuchs may not be actual physical eunuchs but the idea being
communicated is that they live celibate lives. Eunuchs from the womb suggests
physiological or congenital problems while eunuchs made by men refers to the
traditional understanding and usage of the term. Indeed in all likelihood
Nehemiah and perhaps Daniel were of this type and yet were mighty servants of
the Kingdom of God.
The eunuchs who have made themselves such may refer to self-mutilation
as some historically have understood it or it may refer to a choice regarding
celibacy. The context and connection to the previous verses concerning marriage
and post-marriage suggest the latter, although some have (by analogy) paired
this passage with the Sermon on the Mount and the seemingly hyperbolic command
to maim one's self in order to hinder the progress of sin. One of course thinks
of Origen of Alexandria.
Most exegetes would argue that Christ is not literally calling
us to be put under the knife in these circumstances (losing arm, eye or other
members) but this does not absolve or endorse the world affirming
materialistic-minded ethos of Dominionism because what we have here (no matter
the understanding) is a form of asceticism.
Now is this not in conflict with Paul's later condemnation of
those that 'forbid to marry' in 1 Timothy 4? There is no conflict but rather a
nuance. There is a celibacy that is right and Paul also references it in 1
Corinthians 7, his teaching being in perfect accord with the words of Christ.
Dominionism which is hostile to all asceticism struggles to account for this
framing of the question as the mindset of that school (which in various forms
dominates the Evangelical spectrum) is far more concerned with worldly
indulgence, affirmation and social transformation so that the ideals of denial,
rejection and avoidance are something they immediately view as gnostic and
rooted in an improper view of creation and physical matter.
There are gnostic-Manichaean varieties of asceticism and
celibacy and they are to be condemned. If asceticism is tied to salvation,
framed in a legalistic manner or rooted in a false cosmology then it becomes
dangerous. If there's an absolute dualism at work then the asceticism is rooted
in a rejection of not just the creation but the Creator who made it.
That said, the New Testament emphasis is not on the world as
created 'good', an oft-heard refrain in Dominionist thought. On the contrary
the world is fallen and this present age is described as evil and as something
temporary, doomed and ready to pass away. It is citizenship in heaven, which
will indeed involve a resurrected material body that is the motivation for
self-denial, mortification and yes, in some cases a variety of ascetic practice
in this age, this aeon under the authority of Satan.
It is not wrong to marry but celibacy is reckoned a gift and
is in keeping with Paul's elaborated teaching in 1 Corinthians 7 in which he
roots marriage and our posture toward this world as tenuous, temporary and thus
something less than eternal. Again, this (or Paul's reference to keeping his
body under in chapter 9) is not because of a problem with matter but rather the
sin-cursed age and the decaying death-bound matter that inhabits it. It's not
matter per se but this matter as it
were, this matter that is subject to futility, death and disintegration.
The single life affords a better use of time and a fuller
opportunity for service. There's no indication this asceticism involves locking
one's self away but rather is an invitation to work in the context of the Church
and labour having no other ties or cares... which are not wrong in themselves...
but for those who wish to fully devote themselves to Christ, the single life is
a blessing and gift, indeed a higher calling.
Again, modern Evangelical and Protestant Dominionism cannot
grasp this reality nor accommodate it within its theological framework.
Ironically, Rome for all its flaws and evils has a larger framework that allows
for king and soldier... the worldly 'ministries' of Dominionism but also allows
for (and even exalts) the ascetic calling or vocation as they would have it.
Rome's paradigm is deeply flawed and rooted in its many false teachings regarding
Church and Kingdom but it harks back to an earlier time in the primitive Church
when the older understanding was retained even as the Constantinian Church
imposed a new paradigm over top of the old, a paradigm which largely crushed
and eradicated the ethos of the primitive Church, but not entirely and not all
at once. The martyr-ethos lived on in monasticism but the idea of celibacy was
obviously much older, rooted in the Age of Martyrs and in the New Testament
itself.
Magisterial Protestantism rejected this nuance and
streamlined the teaching into a world affirming, world sacralising system that (under
its expanded definition of Vocation) had little room for asceticism and
developments in 20th century theology have only accentuated this.
And yet despite centuries of theological redaction, it's
still in the text of Scripture and while these handfuls of verses are on one
level a minor doctrinal point, they touch on and hint at a larger conception of
the Kingdom, one that is alien and at odds with the popular conceptions that
wholly dominate our day.
See also:
No comments:
Post a Comment