In Silence, it is noted that the hidden Christians, when found, must trample an image of Christ Himself to signify their submission to the country. Some do carry out the rejection of the image, while others take their punishment.
I have a problem with both of these actions. They are both centered around an idol. Even if they trample the idols, this is not truly trampling Christ or even His ideas.
Another thought: 1 Peter 2:20 suggests that one is to endure unjust suffering. As Christians, we are not to flee from the punishment (government/established law) nor succumb to the immorality. If we choose God over an unjust law, the law is still broken and we must hold ourselves accountable to the punishment. Even if our cause is just, we are not permitted to riot or undermine for change.
Ad augusta per angusta,
Will Drake
[I commented on Joshua Spell's "Life is Beautiful."]
is a picture of Christ really always an Idol? I mean, if someone told you to walk on a picture of your mom- would you do it? There is something sacred in the name of Christ, and how much more so in his picture? Even if it is just a picture of some other persons projection of what he might have looked like. I know it's not the same thing as trampling ON Christ, but I think there is something to it. After all, we're like sheep and God gives us tangible, physical things that remind us of who He is. A physical reminder of the God we serve would be wrong to desecrate, but I don't think that automatically elevates it to the status of Idol.
ReplyDeleteBut I agree that Christians should not run from the law- and that's very Socratic of you:)
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI disagree Will Drake, I mean- yes, the picture is not Christ himself... but it was know, as you said, that to participate in this act was to show where ones loyalty was in the presence of these persecutors and in the presence of his or her peers. I get what you mean, but if we get to into this then one might say "Why even get baptized anymore? It's just getting wet? Why have a wedding? I promised her and told God I would be with her forever." I could even go as far to say that someone should not wear a cross on their neck because it focuses to much on the death and not the resurrection. The list goes on. The cruz is that they are doing this to SIGNIFY something. Venerating a picture of a biblical truth does not mean one is worshiping an idol. It means one is reflecting on that mystery or that event and praising God for it. I could go on and on but where I am going is that thoughts like this are what lead people away from sacraments and tradition (which are GOOD THINGS, they are earthy acts that lead to/represent spiritual truths and preserve Christianity) to an empty happy clappy, postmodern Church.
ReplyDeleteps: I know spiting on an image is not a "sacrament" I am only following the thought process into a further conclusion.
>>I could go on and on but where I am going is that thoughts like this are what lead people away from sacraments and tradition... to an empty happy clappy, postmodern Church.
DeleteThat's a slippery slope you got there.
>>I have a problem with both of these actions. They are both centered around an idol.
ReplyDeleteOf course you have a problem with it. You're Protestant. From my Protestant perspective, I can justify those actions, but for the Catholic, to trample the icons is to trample Christ himself.
A quote from the Catholic "Catechism on Christian Doctrine": "We should give to relics, crucifixes and holy pictures a relative honour, as they relate to Christ and his saints and are memorials of them" (newadvent.org).
I'm sure you knew that already. I'm just saying that for everyone else. Knowing the images' importance in the Catholic religion intensifies the moral dilemma faced by Kichijiro and the others.