06 April 2007

What's so happy about Easter?

Those who know me personally will know I was raised a Greek Orthodox Christian, and this time of year was always a time of tradition and family and holiness. In Greek, we say Christos Anesti, meaning "Christ has risen", customary in acknowledging Christ's resurrection. Over the years, I strayed from the religious dogma, which, ironically, has brought me closer to Jesus Christ than ever before. After stepping outside the dogmatic sphere, I see how perfunctory Christos Anesti has become; it is the message of Christ that was to live forever in our hearts and minds, a message wholly ignored by most, if not all of us, for we are distracted by the image of some supernatural being rising from the dead and ascending to some mythical place in the sky.

I wish to share with you some of the traditions associated with Easter, so that I may highlight the absurdity of our practicing them. First, it is customary for us to fast during the Holy Week - I learned later in life that we are supposed to be doing so for forty days, similar to Lent - thus we were always taught to abstain from eating meat and dairy during this time. I was never actually told why we were to do this, except, perhaps, that God would punish me for my disobedience. I don't know how many people are aware of fasting as a means to learn restraint, that when we fast, we learn to do without, and thus learn to appreciate the common plight of most of our brothers and sisters who are forced to do without, as they live with very little. If we can swear off meat for a week, or forty days, why not gasoline, or television, or promiscuity, or shopping? How absurd to practice a benign custom for a given period of time, then resume consuming ourselves silly; such is life within the confines of the Empire.

Next, we reenact the events of the crucifixion, probably because we're a group of sadistic fucks. It's not enough that the ravaged body of Jesus Christ was nailed to a wooden cross for everyone to see as an example of what happens to those who dare challenge the established social order; we have to relive this gruesome chain of events year after year in effigy. What's worse, we worship the image of his agonizing death! We kneel before the instrument used in his murder! Who are we to renounce violence when we deify it through the crucifixion? Is this why weapons drive our global economy?

Finally, we rejoice on Easter Sunday because Christ has ascended directly to Heaven where he will live for all eternity, because he is the son of God, placed on this Earth to meet a horrible end so that we may live in sin. It is customary for us Greeks to celebrate the occasion by roasting a whole lamb over an open flame. Once upon a time, we sacrificed the lamb ourselves; nowadays, they can be found hanging in butcher shop windows en masse, further detaching us from the lives we destroy to satisfy our insatiable consumptive needs. Every year, we have more than enough food to make ourselves fat and happy, feeling blessed to have been born on the side of the conqueror. One year, I suggested we feed the leftovers to those who might appreciate a little food in their bellies, those who struggle to find a single meal in a week, let alone three in a day - you can imagine the reaction I received after posing this idea. Did Jesus not tell those of us in luxury to help those in need? Is it not absurd to celebrate the message of Jesus Christ by shoveling heaps of food in our mouths, then laying to waste whatever is left?

Lost in all the fanfare is the message of love and compassion Jesus Christ tried to convey before his untimely demise at the hands of the authorities, a fate similar to that suffered by the likes of John Lennon, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X and Mahatma Gandhi. The Holy Week of Easter has become nothing more than a perfunctory exercise shrouded in images of chocolate and eggs and fluffy bunnies and a dead man on a cross, another holiday on the calendar highlighting more and more to consume. If it is true that Jesus Christ is to return, I wonder if people ponder what he - or she, for all we know - would have to say about our war economy, or our domestic violence, or our ill will towards one another, or how the rest of the world suffers so that we may live in luxury, or how we voluntarily enslave ourselves to afford said luxury.

This time, when we decree "Christ has risen", can we think about what we're saying? If Jesus Christ has, in fact, risen, why are we constantly throwing him back into his grave?

10 Comments:

At 6/4/07 20:25, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello Holden;

Well, you are wirting! Why are we in this mess? Why do we continue in this mess? Is the return of Christ true? You have posted several good questions but I will say first that God in His Grace has given each and every one of us a "Free Will." That "Will" is what makes us do right or wrong. War is wrong, but we do it. Hatred, bitterness, poverty, racism, etc. is all wrong, but we do it because that is the choice of our freewill.
God will not force His good will on anyone. We are all free agents!

The resurrection is a fact only to believers. The return of Christ is a fact (future) only for those who are believers. The rest of the world accepts or rejects this doctrine because they do not have the ability to accept it by faith. The "faith" only comes from God when we accept the Lord Jesus Christ as our personal Saviour. It is my understanding that you are a little confused regarding this matter. You are not alone, but most people just ignore this and go on with their freewill. But not you! You question these things because you have a desire to know the Truth of the matter. You can find this and many more answers at:

http://www.geocities.com/celestialtime@sbcglobal.net/WOT.html?1152498753765

Feel free to visit (just copy and paste into yur browser) anytime you like. Other questions can be answered when asked.

God bless, and may He grant you the desires of your heart.

In Christ,
Floyd

 
At 13/4/07 14:34, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let's get serious: John Lennon did not die at the hands of the authorities. He died at the hands of a madman, Mark Chapman, who never held any position of authority over him.

Emilia Liz (emilia_e_murphy@yahoo.ca)

 
At 13/4/07 17:58, Blogger G. said...

Who put the gun in Mark Chapman's hands?

 
At 13/4/07 18:00, Blogger G. said...

How about those who make and sell the guns? Are they not mad for profiting from devices designed to kill?

 
At 13/4/07 18:58, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, come on. The "authorities" never told Mark Chapman to shoot Lennon. This is different from the death of Jesus. I think if the authorities really were plotting Lennon's death, they would never have jailed Chapman in the first place.

Apparently Chapman attributed his decision to shoot John Lennon on the book Catcher in the Rye. So should we blame the author of the book (or sue his estate) for what happened?

I'm not saying comparing the death of Lennon to that of Jesus is blasphemous; I'm saying it makes as much sense as comparing the death of Lennon to that of John Candy (oh, maybe the fast food restaurant business is ultimately responsible for Candy's demise).

Emilia

 
At 13/4/07 22:12, Blogger G. said...

So that's how it is: when in doubt, blame the one who pulled the trigger. I can sleep easier knowing I need not consider what potentially drove Mr. Chapman into "madness". What a relief to be able to negate the violent undercurrent running through our society and the establishment's perpetuation of said undercurrent by pitting everyone against one another. There's nothing wrong with the fact that weapons are the foundation of the global economy, nor is there anything wrong with my valuing my automobile over your life, oh no! It's all Mark Chapman's fault.

 
At 13/4/07 22:29, Anonymous Anonymous said...

From what I read about Mr. Chapman, he most likely had a chemical imbalance that caused him to kill John Lennon.

Unfortunately, zealots from both the left and right sometimes use tragic events like murders to push their own ideological agendas. For instance, some conservatives have blamed feminism for the supposed rise in female crime. On the other hand, one website said Karla Homolka was the "perfect right-wing woman" because she supposedly did everything her husband told her to.

To me it's a bit disgusting that ideologues use other people's misery to advance their own cause.

Emilia Liz

 
At 15/4/07 21:32, Blogger G. said...

By claiming the chemical balance to be the root cause of murder, I'm afraid you paint a dangerously broad stroke, one that tends to provide ammunition for the artillery of said ideologues.

 
At 16/4/07 11:02, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, if not a chemical imbalance, what was the "root cause" of Chapman's action?

Emilia Liz

 
At 16/4/07 18:34, Blogger G. said...

You are negating the important fact that Mark David Chapman lived his life on planet Earth, where he was prone to a variety of influences over a number of years. Assigning sole responsibility to the chemical imbalance in his brain excuses the rotten world in which he and you and I have to dwell. Any one of us is quite capable of committing murder; our elected governments do so by the hour without batting an eyelash, but are they perceived as "mad"?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home