Thursday, May 17, 2007


This morning I read an interesting article on a Christian news service about the World Congress of Families, which met this weekend in Poland. The leader of this organization expressed concern over the declining birth rate in developed countries and said,
“A great struggle is going on over competing world views regarding the family and Europe is really one of the battlegrounds for that right now. Militant secular individualism tied to a vision of socialism which sees the state replacing the family that’s one view. I think it’s probably could be said to be the dominant view here. The other view is one which understands and recognizes the natural family grounded in religious faith is in fact the best hope for human kind [sic]."
Are these people reading their New Testaments? What would they make of Jesus "Who is my mother? Who are my brothers?" of Nazareth?
And then you've got the book of Acts, where the followers of the Way are "all tied to a vision of socialism" in which they share what they have with each other irrespective of marital and biological ties.

Don't forget Paul "It is good for a man not to marry" of Tarsus, who basically founded the church. He made concessions for marriage only because he feared that Christians would devolve into promiscuity without it. People were going to have sex, whether Paul liked it or not. Knowing the human capacity for jealousy, even among the saints, and the economic hardship that would be faced by children whose fathers refused to claim them (or perhaps did not even know that they were fathers), he favored monogamous marriage over sleeping around. Paul certainly did not believe marriage to be an exalted state, much less God's plan for human happiness. And he would have viewed as blasphemy the suggestion that the family is "
the best hope for humankind."

I'm sorry. I thought the best hope for humankind was God's love. Silly me.

I better go out and build me an altar to marriage and family so I can be a real Christian.

No comments: