|
|
|
Anne Rice
|
A decade ago,
Anne Rice, who gained prominence for her bestselling novels, The Vampire
Chronicles, walked away from atheism to rejoin the
faith of her youth, Roman Catholicism. Though, not necessarily due
to her decision, her writing also turned from vampires to a planned
series of novels about the life of Christ.
Last month Rice took another walk; walking away from Christianity.
On July 28, she announced this decision on her Facebook page stating,
"Today, I quit being a Christian". With more than 100,000
people following her on Facebook, it quickly
became a topic of discussion even drawing the attention of the
national media. Naturally, it also became the subject of numerous
opinion pieces and blogs.
Why did she leave? She
said she did it in the name of Christ, writing, "I refuse to
be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be
anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I
refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I
refuse to be anti-life."
Rice was not leaving, however, because of Christ. She made a
carefully worded distinction between being a Christian and being
part of Christianity; or, perhaps better stated, the visible
representative of Christianity - the Church. On this point she
wrote, "I remain committed to Christ as always, but not to
being Christian or to being part of Christianity"; which she
went on to identify as a "...quarrelsome, hostile,
disputatious, and deservedly infamous group".
Not a very flattering assessment of the Church. Sides were drawn.
The debate began. The devout and not so devout took their
perspective of her announcement to the airwaves, blogs, and op-ed
pages.
For some it was viewed as a monumental move towards dragging the
Church out of the "moral dark ages". For others, it was
proof-positive of the collapse of our culture, and/or that Rice was
not now, nor could she have ever been, a Christian. Even some
atheists jumped into the fray arguing she didn't go far enough in
her renunciation of Christianity.
Rice will no longer give interviews on the matter; yet, weeks later
it continued to be a topic regularly referred to on her Facebook
page. What is it about this story that has resonated with so many
people and moved so many of them to become involved in the
discussion? While it may simply be the result of her celebrity
status, it is more likely due to the fact she has expressed some
quite commonly held views about the Church today.
Consider four areas of concern expressed by Rice, and the data
regarding each as presented in the Pew Forum's extensive 2008 Report on
Americans' Religious Beliefs and
practice (Her objections are primarily related to her experience as
part of the Catholic Church, but the data indicates many
Protestants share her same concerns):
Homosexuality
One reason Rice stated she was leaving Christianity is because she
refuses to be anti-gay, inferring that the Church opposes
homosexuality. Obviously, rejecting homosexuality would be a
difficult position for Rice since she has a son who is openly gay.
But, even beyond that, her views on this issue are actually
becoming increasingly mainstreamed among those who identify
themselves with Christianity.
The majority of those who consider themselves part of Christianity
still reject homosexuality; however, the Pew Report found, 38% of
Protestants and 26% of evangelicals believe that homosexuality
should be accepted by society. This compares with 50% of the total
population and 58% of Rice's former Church, Catholicism.
Abortion
In her statement Rice did not explain what she meant by refusing to
be anti-feminist. However, in interviews subsequent to issuing her
statement she expressed her view that radical feminism has
accomplished much in advancing women's rights and it should not be
reduced to simply a battle over reproductive rights, the right to
abortion.
Concerning that battle, the Pew report found 45% of Protestants,
33% of Evangelicals, and 48% of Catholics now
believe abortion should be legal in most, or all cases.
While Rice personally opposes abortion, (thus her statement she
refuses to be anti-life) she is very much in line with those who
believe it should be legal.
Political
Parties
Rice's declaration that she refuses to be anti-Democrat, obviously
reflects a belief that Christianity expects adherents to be
Republicans, or against Democrats. It is safe to say that many
would agree with Rice's assessment as Christians aligned with the
Republican party seem to have been much more vocal about their
faith; particularly as it relates to their political activism.
Interestingly, however, among those aligned with Christianity, when
it comes to identifying with a political party, the numbers are
fairly even. Among Protestants, 42% identify themselves as leaning
toward Republican and 45% toward Democrat. Among evangelicals the
numbers are 50% Republican and 34%Democrat. Among Rice's own
Catholic Church, 33% lean Republican and 48% Democrat.
Science
While Rice does not explain her statement refusing to be
anti-science, she most likely refers to support for evolution since
this is probably the biggest debate involving the scientific
community and the Church, today. And, while the majority of those
identified with Christianity support creationism, it is a shrinking
number. Pew found that 35% of Protestants believe evolution is the
best explanation for the origin of human life. 23% of evangelicals
hold this view, and 58% of Catholics, which is even greater than
the 48% of the total population that embrace evolution.
Whether Rice's assessments regarding the Church are correct, or
not, as the data indicates, hers is not a view simply held by some
small fringe group who identify with the Christian Church. Rather,
they are reflective of a growing cultural voice. And like Rice,
many of these are choosing to simply walk away from
"Christianity".
Recent polling by Barna
found that she is one of about 60 million adults (about 24% of the
population) who have, at some point in life, changed faith
traditions (this does not include Protestants changing denominations).
The largest shift was self-identifying Christians to atheism or
agnosticism (12%).
The list of reasons respondents gave for changing sound very much
like those of Rice. They include, "...feeling disillusioned
with church and religion; feeling the church is hypocritical;
having negative experiences in churches; being in disagreement with
Christianity about specific issues such as
homosexuality, abortion or birth
control; [and] feeling the church is too authoritarian. (Read Report)
Though certainly not identified with mainstream Christianity, Miami Herald
columnist, Leonard Pitts, Jr. clearly understands this is a much
bigger issue than just Anne Rice. Shortly after her announcement he
argued that there is a segment of society, "...who seek a
magnificent faith that commits and compels, and [yet] finds
churches offering only a shriveled faith that marginalizes and
demeans". He then offers his opinion that, "...organized
religion's response to those people, those 'seekers', will determine
its future."
Perhaps, Pitts is right. Rather than focusing the discussion on
Anne Rice, maybe the Church would be better served if Christians
took time to consider the objections she has raised and, instead of
arguing over whether or not they are valid, begin to address them
in a Christ-like manner. After all, she is not the only one raising
these issues.
To do this will certainly present a dilemma for the Church. Can the
Church reach out to those "seekers" while avoiding the
temptation to do so by compromising its historical and, more
importantly, biblically held beliefs and practices? Without
question, the road of compromise is much more easily traveled and
the path which culture cries out for us to take; but, is it the way
of Christ?
While the polling reflects great diversity of belief and practice
among those who call themselves Christian, we must remember that
truth is not determined by polling. There must be a standard to
which we all are held accountable. For those who call themselves
Christians, the Bible is undeniably that standard.
Even Rice, in withdrawing from the community of Christians,
acknowledged in interviews that she will continue her habit of
reading the Scripture each day to find direction and answers.
However, she said she is tired of the fighting among Christians
about how it must be interpreted and what is right and wrong.
Frankly, I can understand this. I also get tired of the fighting
among Christians; oftentimes about theological positions that have
little bearing, if any, in the grand scheme of the gospel. And,
yes, I agree with her that at times we Christians - the Church -
are a "quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly
infamous group". However, at such times I must remember it is
a group that Christ passionately loves and gave his life for.
However, that doesn't give us a free pass to act any
way we want towards those with whom we disagree. In fact, it
should give us a greater sense of responsibility to be more like
Christ and to conduct ourselves with Christian charity. Our
conversations should be seasoned with grace and expressed in love
and concern and our actions filled with compassion,
without compromising the truth.
Pitts ended his opinion piece by saying, "It might behoove keepers of the faith to keep in mind the distinction Anne Rice drew in her farewell: Christ didn't fail her...Christianity did."
Perhaps it did. And if so, hopefully, what Mrs. Rice is expressing
is the realization that her hope cannot be placed in institutional
religion but only in the person of Christ. If that is what she
means then she has found what the Church truly is - the Bride of
Christ, blemished and tarnished though it may be.
|
