Changing Trends in the Christian World

Changing Trends in the Christian World

Bilal Atkinson
The Review of Religions, October 1992

The changing trends in Christianity as we see them today are not a new
phenomenon.  If we turn to the source of Christianity and examine the
instructions which Jesus gave to his disciples, we will also find the
first movements away from those very instructions:

    Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans,
    go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.  (Matthew 10:5)

The instruction is quite clear.  Jesus, being a Jew, was appointed by
Almighty God for the Jews as a teacher and upholder of the Mosaic laws.
As with all prophets before him he believed and taught the Oneness of
God.  His disciples were given strict instructions to preach only to
the Jews who had dispersed to other countries, and were the upholders
of the laws of Moses.

St. Paul looked upon the Law as a yoke of bondage, if not as an actual
curse.  He stated in Galations 3:10 that all who relied on observing
the law are under a curse and that Christ redeemed people from the
curse of the Law by becoming a curse himself.  When the Jews opposed
him, he said to them:

    Your blood be on your own heads, I am clear of my responsibility,
    from now on I will go to the Gentiles.  (Acts 18:6)

Not only did he disobey Jesus by going to the Gentiles, it would seem
that by his correspondence with different persons, he created new laws
to suit his separatism from the Mosaic Laws and to direct and
systemise the activities of early Christian communities.

By the year 325 A.D. the emperor Constantine 1, who had accepted
Christianity, called together both Church and State in what is now
known to be the Council of Nicea.  This council formulated the
Christine, became the accepted instrument for defining Christian
dogma.  They disposed of many other gospel writings as unnecessary and
forced the acceptance of the Trinity, by way of the Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit as the true Godhead.

Naturally there were many who could not accept this.  A notable person
being a man called Arius, who was a priest in the Church district of
Baucalis in Alexandria.  He affirmed the Oneness of God and denounced
the Trinity.  He defined the Oneness of God to Bishop Alexander in 
which he stated:

    We acknowledge one God, who is self existent, eternal, without
    beginning, true, possessing immortality, wise, good, sovereign and
    judge of all.  Since it is unique, transcendent and indivisible,
    the being of essence of the Godhead cannot be shared or 
    communicated.  For God to impart his substance to some other being,
    however, exalted, would imply that he is divisible and subject to
    change, which is inconceivable.  Moreover, if any other being were
    to participate in the divine nature in any valid sense, there would
    result a duality of divine beings, whereas Godhead is by 
    definition, unique.  (Early Christian Doctrines, p. 227/Jnd Kelly)

Naturally Arius and his form of Arianism were officially condemned
and he was labeled a heretic.  Arius and his followers were ignored
and the Nicene Creed was formulated, which has been the basis of all
Christian affirmations in the Trinity of God.  The Trinity of the
Father, Son and Holy Spirit remained established until recent times.

Since the demise of Queen Victoria in 1901, the Christian world, 
especially in England, has seen dramatic changes, not only in the
practice of the Christian faith, but also in its preaching.

By the beginning of the twentieth century, most people, even in
European countries were poorly educated, if at all.  Education belonged
to those who could afford it and to the clergy of the Christian Church.

In most European countries, each village had its own church, along with
its incumbent priest.  It was from the priest that the common man
sought advice on many subjects.  He would baptise them into the 
Christian way of life.  He would marry them and also bury them.  There
were no distractions of television or radio and it was to the church
that the common folk turned for either knowledge or solace from the
rigours of life.

Although the priest was there to counsel them at all times, Sunday
was the Day of Rest, according to Christian tradition, and that
meant attendance at church on at least one occasion.  On Sundays, even
the servants were granted time off to attend church to hear the 
readings from the Bible and the sermon and admonitions of the priest.
Every person, whether man, woman or child who attended church, did so
wearing clean clothes, or as was the common parlance, their Sunday
Best.  The ladies and girls would have their heads covered, whilst
men and boys were bareheaded.

The people of these times were exhorted to abide by the teachings of
the Gospels in their everyday lives.

Apart from the landed gentry, the parish priest had a very powerful 
influence on the minds of his parishioners.  Though naturally there
were those who would not accept the teachings of the Church, many did
indeed accept and believed in what they were taught as the truth,
The Gospel Truth.

During the Victorian era, morality and acceptance of the teachings
of the Gospels were an important part of everyday life.  The simple
country folk used to practice to a certain degree what was preached
with great diligence, but in the towns and cities, although an
outward display of morals was shown, the cancerous growth of
immorality was festering.

With great Empires came great wealth and prosperity and in close
attendance, the cancers of greed and lust.  The rich became richer
and the poor were exploited to the full, the consequences of which
would prove harmful to the Church.

Within the Church itself, questions were being asked, however
tentatively, about the virgin birth, the miracles and the resurrection
of Jesus and about the whole historical basis of Christianity.  A few
preachers aired their doubts openly and the bishops deplored such
indiscretions.

Early in the twentieth century a theological journal published a much
discussed special number called Jesus or Christ?  Contrasting Jesus of
Nazareth with the Christ of the Church orthodoxy.  A volume by Oxford
scholars called Foundations, showed that the doctrinal foundations 
were being shaken in the Church of England, although as yet, very
gently.

During the period 1914 - 1918 the effects of the Great War were to
change the whole lifestyle of the Western world.  There were few
families that did not feel the effects of that great man-made
catastrophe.  The great yoke of servitude was cast aside by the lower
classes.  The domination of the ruling classes was broken and the
emergence of the politics of socialism and communism began to grow.

Not only did the ruling classes lose their power but the power of the
Church also began to lose the tight grip it once enjoyed on the hearts
and souls of the common people.

The effects and consequences of the Great War brought into question the
Christian Faith and indeed belief in God.

The delivery of the Church's message seemed to be out of touch with the
thoughts and ideas of the time.  The Church began to be regarded as the
hereditary enemy of the working classes, as they looked for what they
thought was true brotherhood and fellowship in the Labour movement.  
The war had a great effect on the social conscience of the Christians.
The shackles of what appeared to be slavery in the industrial system
were to go.  Wages, employment, housing and schooling were demanded by
the working classes.  The Church soon realised that the recruitment of
working class people into the clergy should being more earnestly.

As education of the masses improved, the level of questioning
authority began to grow.  The Trade Union Movement developed more
muscle and began dealing with the unscrupulous practices of all
authoritative bodies, at first with limited success, but grew more
powerful with every contest.

Instead of seeking out the local priest for advice, the ordinary man
would seek advice from his union representative whom he saw as a
fellow brother and as one with better understanding of his daily
needs.

The 1920's and 30's saw industrial unrest and the call of the man in
the street for a better standard of living only came to fruition
after the Second World War.  By this time the British Empire had
almost reached its nadir and a new Britain had to be built on its
ruins.  A home for heroes had to be built as the result of the most
devastating and traumatic war the world had ever witnessed.

As the social life moved up a gear, the spiritual life of the ordinary
man seemed to be left behind.  Missionaries continued their activities
in Africa and Asiatic countries, but not in their own Western 
countries, at a time when they were needed the most.  So much so that
by the time the 1960's arrived, a social, economic and moral trend
began the erosion of the Christian teachings.

Let me now refer to some of the changing trends which seem to have
affected the Church the most.

MORALITY

Christian values are challenged because Europeans, like the North
Americans, have undergone a revolution in sexual ethics during the
latter part of this twentieth century.

Up to the 1950's, divorce was looked upon as distasteful, a stigma,
and not in keeping with the Christian tradition.   During the
marriage ceremony the couple pledge before God that they will honour
each other and that only death would part them.  The rate of divorce
now in this country is frightening and has almost reached the tragic
North American level.

Although the Roman Catholic Church is against divorce, abortion and
contraception, the Protestant Church seems to be indifferent about 
the situation and fails to see the alarming situation that is rapidly
growing out of control.

This so-called revolution has produced uncountable unwanted children,
devastated families and broken homes.  It has led to destitution and
degradation and the Christian Church seems unable and unwilling to
cope or control the situation.

Since the emancipation of women in the West, the commercialised cult
of sex has been very prominent in European life, partly because it is
used as a substitute of religion.  Far from being emancipated, their
souls languish in the depths of self doubt and insecurity.

One of the most controversial aspects of Catholic life is that priests
cannot marry.  According to the New Testament and in the early church,
many bishops and priests were married.  Prior to the middle of the
tenth century, all priests were allowed to marry.

The Church initiated a movement to reform.  In particular the clergy
had to lead chaste lives, not because sex was evil and incompatible
with the priesthood, but because a celibate clergy was a powerful tool
in uniting the Church and centralising it under the Pope.  Without a
family, a priest would owe all his loyalties to his religious 
superiors.  He would be less likely to be worried about his property
if he had no children to leave it to.  The clergy resisted most
strongly this attempt to regulate their sex lives and it took the 
Church a long time to make the clergy celibate.  In the Catholic
Church, ever increasing numbers of priests have left the priesthood
to marry.

Reports in the American Catholic press have estimated that up to 
fifty percent of all priests in the United States are homosexual.
In his book, Clergy under stress, Dr. Ben Fletcher remarks that
figures support the view, that a sizable minority of the clergy of the
Church of England are likely to be homosexual.  The Christian Church,
whilst not condoning homosexual or illicit sexual behaviour, seems to
turn a blind eye to such incidents.

Instead of looking to the teachings of their own Gospels, they looked
for a way out be re-interpreting these teachings to appease those who
do not regard their activities in anyway as being unlawful in the sight
of God.

We read in the New Testament:

    Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of
    God?  Do not be deceived, neither the sexually immoral nor 
    idolators nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual
    offenders, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor
    slanders, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.  
    (1 Corinthians, 6:9-11)

    Flee from sexual immortality.  (1 Corinthians, 6:18)

These admonitions do not point towards any particular person.  It warns
of the actions of man, not of man himself.  It is his actions he must
control, for if he does not, then logically, they become uncontrollable
and what at first seemed to be unacceptable, through time and practice,
these actions become acceptable, not only acceptable but appealing.

    But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immortality,
    or of any kind of unpurity, or of greed, because these are 
    improper for God's holy people.  (Ephesians 5:3)

The message to any person reading these words is quite clear.  Man has
many weaknesses and the only true way is to follow with certainty and
conviction the teachings of those who have achieved such righteousness
and piety in order to attain the pleasure of God.

No matter how Christians might re-interpret the teachings in the Bible,
especially the Gospels, they cannot change what God has already 
decreed.  The people of Sodom and Gomorrah as recorded in the book of
Genesis, were prone to open acts of immortality.  They had no fear of
the God of Abraham and Lot.  So much so that it is recorded that God
said:

    The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sins so
    grievous that I will go down and see if what they have done is as
    bad as the outcry that has reached me.  If not, I will know.

In the eyes of God, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah had reached such
an uncivilized and immoral condition that He destroyed them all, apart,
that is, the prophet Lot and a few other righteous people.  People,
therefore, who accept immoral practices as normal will gradually 
destroy themselves.

Christians and Christianity must accept the true status of a prophet
before they accept the truth.  For a prophet is born without sin and
remains sinless for he is there for all men to follow.

It is a sad fact that the law of the land in England allows you to buy
a semi-pornographic magazine on a Sunday and that same law prohibits
you from purchasing a Bible.

Again the changing trends, even from as short a time as the 1950's and
early 60's have shown such tolerance towards open lewdness both 
visually and audibly.  Many magazines and other publications as well
as television, portray nudity and sexually explicit settings.  So 
called soft pornography is generally thought to be a harmless form of
pleasure.  The number of sexual offences and child abuse cases in this
country alone is on the increase.  The revolution in attitudes has had
many different causes and has aroused many moral responses.  In his
book, The Future of Christianity, Mr. David Edwards states:

    It is a fact that the sexual revolution has coincided with
    secularisation of Europe and would have been impossible without the
    decline in the powers of the clergy.  Many secularised people as
    well as many Christians are deeply worried about some development.

    There is massive concern about the increase in the number of
    abortions involving sacrifice of the embryos which are at least,
    potentially human, to the convenience of adults, about the divorce
    epidemic inflicting cruel emotional damage on children as well as
    on wronged wives or husbands.  About the pressures on women to
    coarsen their sexuality in order to keep men as friends.  About the
    militantly 'gay' propaganda for homosexuality as a satisfactory
    alternative to marriage.  It is widely recognised that the often
    commercialised cult of sex - something very different from the
    life-giving role of sex in courtship and marriage, has been so
    prominent in modern European life.

Quite surprisingly he goes on to say:

    In such a society the churches are in danger of alienating vast
    numbers of Europeans unnecessarily by insisting on moral and social
    customs which are not essential to the Christian understanding of
    sexuality.

Surely, whether the Church alienates the people or not, the onus is on
that very Church, Christian or otherwise, to admonish and to lead the
people by example, so that others may have the courage to stand and
be counted.

ORDINATION OF WOMEN PRIESTS

The Catholic Church, along with Eastern Orthodox Christians, allow only
men to be ordained into the priesthood.  They have resisted the recent
tendency within other Christian dominations to begin to ordain women
also.  The tradition of only ordaining men to the ministerial priesthood
goes back to the time of Jesus himself, who chose only men as his
apostles.  According to the Catholic teaching, the priest represents
Jesus, who is God become man, and not God become woman.

Although the Catholic Church remains impervious to the constant demands
of the supporters of women priests, the Protestant and Anglican 
churches have allowed women to be more active, to the cautionary and
unbending views of some clerical hierarchy and also the ordinary 
faithful, including Christian women themselves.

Mr. John Gummer, a cabinet minister in the present British Government
and also a member of the Church of England's governing body, the 
General Synod, has recently made comment on some of the practices of
the Church of England in a recent edition of the Spectator Magazine.
On the ordination of women priests he said:

    The ordination of women undermines the whole basis of the Church.
    Once Anglicans decide they can unilaterally change the Apostolic
    order of the Catholic Creeds and depart therefore from the
    teachings of the Universal Church, the whole basis of their
    comprehensiveness is destroyed.

Christians believe that woman, in the form of Eve, was the first 
sinner, and not man in the form of Adam.  Their erroneous belief that
all are born with sin and that woman was the first to be led astray,
still seems to bind some of them to hold fast to these beliefs.

If Christians take the teachings of the Bible to be a guide in their
everyday lives, then one may ask how they take account of the teachings
of Saint Paul:

    I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, 
    not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but
    with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.

    A woman should learn quietness and full submission.  I do not
    permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must
    be silent.

    For Adam was formed first, then Eve.  And Adam was not the one 
    deceived, it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
    But women will be kept safe through childbirth, if they continue
    in faith, love and holiness with propriety.  (1 Timothy 2:9-12)

And if that was not a sufficient and clear advice he goes on to say:

    For God is not a God of disorder of but peace.  As in all
    congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the
    churches.  They are not allowed to speak, but must be in
    submission, as the law says.  If they want to inquire about
    something, they should ask their own husbands at home, for it is
    disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.  
    (1 Corinthians 14:33-35)

This teaching is very clear that women should not speak in churches,
but remain silent.  This is not an Islamic teaching or Buddhist 
teaching but it is the teaching of the Christian Church itself.  
Outwardly it seems very restrictive on women to even speak in a
church let alone conduct the affairs of the church and be chief 
participants in the services held within the church.

STATUS OF THE BIBLE

By alluding to the New Testament and, indeed, the Bible as Word of
God or the inspired Word of God, Christians in this day and age have
made prisoners of themselves.  Do they think that by re-interpreting
these books of the New Testament, they are also inspired by God to do
so?

Time and time again, people of all religions, past and present, reject
the pure teachings of their faith and mould them to suit the 
individual needs of the time.

Christian scholars are agreed that the Gospel of Mark was the first to
be written.

The two oldest surviving texts of the Bible in existence, which
include the whole of the New Testament and most of the old and known
as Codex Sinaiticus were discovered in the St. Catherine's monastery
situated at the foot of Mount Sinai during the last century.

Upon examination of these manuscripts it was found that the Gospel
according to Mark ended at 16:8 with the words, 'because they were
afraid'.  In today's versions of the Gospel of Mark, however, you will
find an extra twelve verses that have been added to Chapter 16, which
relate to the resurrection of Jesus and also the fact that Jesus told
his disciples to preach to the whole of creation.  The last instruction
contradicts his earlier instruction to the disciples to go only to the
lost sheep of Israel.

The discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus which Christian scholars tried
to reject its evidence and failed, gravely affects the main aspect of
the Christian faith, namely the resurrection.

The Codex Sinaiticus is owned and can be found in the British Museum.

The Right Reverend Dr. David Jenkins, Bishop of Durham in his book,
Free to Believe, states:

    If we are going to be free to believe, we have got to understand
    that the major pre-occupations of the Gospel writers was not to
    give accurate and historical accounts as we would understand them.

This admission, which I believe to be a sincere and true admission by a
high ranking bishop within the Church of England, brings into doubt
what exactly is required of a Christian.  If he, as a great scholar,
has found inconsistencies within the Bible, then how does he and all
other Christian hierarchy expect the ordinary man, woman and child in
the street to understand?

Different versions of the Bible have been produced to suit different
tastes and trends.  Changes to the Books of Common Prayer, changes to
the traditional hymns and changes in the actual Christian services 
which are now conducted using modern music and instruments to attract
the modern youth, are but a few alterations to Christian practices.
For instance, in an article in the Sunday Times (12.7.92) it was 
reported that the first complete feminist interpretation of the Bible
called The Women Bible Commentary is soon to be released.

The book, which tackles the Bible from cover to cover, suggests that
some of the Gospels have been written by women and, according to the
Sunday Times correspondent, Eve emerges as the heroine, Adam as the
wimp, Mary Magdalene as misunderstood and God forbid, Jesus as 
something of a male chauvenist.

This interpretation of the Bible has already been denounced by the
Cenerable George Austin, Archdeacon of York.  He comments:

    This is totally wrong and a distortion of the Scriptures.  It shows
    there is a liberal agenda and it is creeping in on us.

He went on to say:

    Exalting Eve is exalting sin.  These people are turning evil into
    good and good into evil.

Commenting on the book, Canon Roy Porter, emeritus professor of 
theology at Exeter University also said:

    If you go behind a text with certain ideas, you find what you want
    to find.

Throughout the centuries, the ordinary Christian has almost been
brain-washed by Christian scholars into believing the Gospels to be a
totally accurate account of the ministry of Jesus.  Today, Christian
scholars have indeed found elements of doubt in the Scriptures and they
are now saying to the faithful that the emphasis should be on the
spirit of the teachings and not on the actual words.

Commenting on other trends, Mr. Gummer is reported to have said:

    The Church of England itself sowed the seeds of its own 
    destruction.  It threw away the Book of Common Prayer as the norm
    of worship and doctrine and replaced it by mix and match liturgies.
    Today the majesty of the Authorised Version of the Bible is rarely
    heard and the Tesco-speak translations cheat the next generation of
    its heritage.

It would seem that the people about whom Mr. Gummer is talking think
that God's teachings are old fashioned and not in tune with the times.

RESURRECTION

According to the an article in the Times (Saturday March 28, 1992), 
Dr. Jenkins, in an interview with the evangelican magazine, Alpha, said
he thought it unlikely that Jesus said that he was the way the truth
and life (John 14:6) and agreed that John had said it.

In an interview with Clive Calver, director of the Evangelical
Alliance, Dr. Jenkins stated that the body of Christ could still be
discovered in a Middle Eastern tomb, but he was no absolutely certain.
He went on to say:

    The more I am involved in this, the less likely I think that
    anything that might be called physical reconstruction or
    resurrection took place.

Dr. Jenkins has stirred up a hornets nest by questioning the virgin
birth of Jesus and also his bodily resurrection.  He has been attacked
by some people for speaking what he believes to be the truth, though
other authorities are also coming out in his support.

Is it any wonder that the churches are emptying.  How can the
ordinary man distinguish the truth, if the truth is being withheld from
him?

There are some bishops who pour scorn on the Bishop of Durham for
speaking out.  They do not want the apple cart upset as they know full
well that if the truth came out, as it most certainly will, the end of
the Christian faith as we know it today, would surely come.

Today, according to a TV documentary called Heart of the Matter, there
are substantial numbers of clergymen who do not believe in the bodily
resurrection of Jesus.  This growing movement is known as The Sea of
Faith.  The dilemma that most of these clerics face is whether to tell
the truth or to preach what they believe to be incorrect.  They have
come to realise that the body of Jesus was not in the tomb after the
third day and also know that he appeared to his disciples after
crucifixion.  The missing link, the missing piece of jigsaw that they 
are unable to see or grasp, is the fact that he did no die upon the
cross.  This fact alone explains the disappearance of the body of
Jesus from the tomb in the Garden of Gesthemane and this fact alone
removes the central pillar of Christianity, that Jesus was not bodily
resurrected to sit at the right hand of God Almighty.

The Christians as well as other religious bodies are all waiting for
the Messiah to descend from heaven for all people can see.  They are
waiting for the second coming of Jesus to save them and they have been
so blind and deaf that they did not see his sign in the heavens in the
1890's nor did they hear his calling, which I refer to Ahmadiyyat.  The
Promised Messiah and Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Community in Islam
proclaimed:

    Hear ye people that God Almighty, the Creator of the heavens and
    the earth has foretold me that He will spread the Ahmadiyya
    Movement for the propagation of Islam in all parts of the world
    and make Islam triumphant over all other religions through reason
    and argument.  Remember, no one will descend from heaven.  And the
    third century from today will not have been completed, when all
    those waiting for Jesus, son of Mary, both Muslims and Christians,
    will despair of his coming, and shall give up that belief, the days
    are approaching, rather at hand, that Islam will be the only
    religion held in esteem by all.  Then there shall be only one 
    Guide, the Holy Prophet of Islam.  I was raised only to sow  the
    seed of renovation of Islam and I have done it.  It shall now grow
    and flourish and no one will be able to check the growth of Islam.

Copyright © 1996 Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam (RAM Service)