Religion in the Age of Secularism

Religion in the United States is gradually losing an ongoing battle with secularism. A recent study by Pew Research not only shows that people identified as non-religious are growing, but they are in fact becoming even more secular. The same organization made a study to find out why people were leaving their faith tradition. While everyone’s experience is unique in the decision, the study was able to find some common ground in the responses. The number one reason being a lack of belief, led many to abandon their faith. The study drew this response from many that referred to this experience or decision as, growing out of the faith, the use of common sense or logic, and science as the ultimate factor that led them away from belief. Other reasons included a dislike of organized religion, no need for religion, or religion being too much like a business.

It is clear that we live in a secular age and studies like this one only suggest it is growing in the United States. Much of the response from religious groups however has been counter-productive. Often, I read headlines in articles that proclaim religion is being persecuted or that people of faith are being harassed. (Must of them from Catholic sources) This sort of response does not help religion as a whole, nor does it help people of faith. It further antagonizes religion and secularism by placing them at a contradiction. Pope Francis constantly reminds us of the welcoming response Christians should offer atheists. After all, he even claimed that atheists that followed their conscience are welcome in heaven too!

Religion and secularism are in contention with one another because secularism has leveled the playing field. In the past, religion had always the upper hand simply by being married to divine rule. Now, in democratic states, religion is no longer able to exercise this type of influence. Naturally, religion is losing some of its power and influence and this has shown in how it communicates beliefs to people, leading many to leave their faith traditions. More so, in a postmodern age, any single narrative is not only questioned but abandoned for being too rigid and simplistic.

Instead of focusing too much on the problem of why so many are fleeing Church pews and exchanging them for just about anything, a better approach is to propose an alternative for a response. Notice I did not mention solution because firstly, that would be too overconfident but mainly because it is a suggestion. First, religion does not have to be at opposition with secularism. This might sound like a contradiction itself—but I believe firmly is not. For religions to exist they must co-exist with other religions and this includes secularism. Religion must dialogue with secularism and find common-ground. Secularism for instance, does not abandon ethics and morality. Christians can speak of ethics and morality from a Christian point of view. An absence of religion does not mean an absence of good—sometimes the biggest obstacle for dialogue and understanding is semantics!

Most importantly, people of faith must really ask the question: Why do I want to pass down my faith? I believe firmly that religion is most authentic, and therefore attractive, when it is radical. This word gets a bad rep but it is used intentionally here. There is an aspect of religion that is crazy—but crazy for love and good. To love those who hate me? To pray for those who want to hurt me? What else would you call this type of behavior—stupid and crazy! But faith demands this from us. People are drawn to this type of religion. They recognize its authenticity, they see the fruits that it brings, they admire it, and they yearn to be moved by it.  

And so in this era of secularism people of faith can dialogue with it and find common ground and in the process find out that alienation is not an option. Instead, people of faith can find that in dialogue partners are made and that Jesus did not close the doors on those of little faith, but was harsher with those who called themselves self-righteous. But people of faith can also attract by example. By living lives so radically that it leads other people not only to see the good in religion but to partake in the journey of faith as well. 

The Cost of Discipleship in Luke: A Radical and Daily Commitment, and a Hatred of Possessions

Luke’s Gospel originates approximately around 80 CE and 90 CE, the same time in which Matthew’s gospel was written. After The Jewish War of 66-70 CE, Christians spread throughout the Roman Empire. Luke finds himself writing to these highly diversified communities that had survived the war and had gone into exile. Among these groups, Luke addresses a particular group called ‘God-Fearers’ who followed Jewish beliefs and practices. (Ludwig, 164) Luke, like Matthew, addresses the Hellenistic Jewish Christian mission to the Gentile world, but is particularly concerned with Gentile Christians. (Ludwig, 184) Throughout his gospel, Luke offers numerous passages on discipleship. As with all gospel writers, the context in which the writer finds himself in shapes his writing and therefore the meaning he tries to convey. For instance, Mark finds himself writing after the destruction of the Temple in 60 CE to a community in distress. Because of this, he stresses the helplessness of disciples to remind his readers of the hidden glory of God. Mark’s eschatological revelation is concealed from the disciples. Instead, Luke writes for Hellenistic Christians spread throughout the Roman Empire who are no longer concerned with the parousia, or second coming. Luke’s community is not primarily concerned with eschatological purposes. Because of this, there is a theological shift for Luke’s community. Instead, Luke’s community is concerned with the semeron (this day or daily affairs). (Plessis, 62) Due to the context in which Luke finds himself and the present condition his community faces, discipleship is more of a daily commitment, an existential decision for Luke. (Plessis, 58)

The structure of Luke’s gospel is also particular. Luke uses three sources to write his gospel. The first, also found in Matthew’s gospel, is material borrowed from Mark’s gospel. (Ludwig, 183) The second source can be seen when Luke, like Matthew, uses an independent source of Jesus’ sayings called ‘Q’. In the text Luke also provides his own independent, and third, source, ‘L’ not found in Mark or Matthew. (Ludwig, 183) It is essential to point out here that the Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles are to be considered two volumes of a single literary project. (Johnson, 187) The author wrote both volumes with the intention of it to be part of one single message: Salvation History. The outline of Luke’s gospel can be divided into the following: Prologue (Lk.1: 1-4); Infancy Narratives (1:5—2:52); Preparation of Jesus’ ministry (3:1—4:13); Jesus’ ministry in Galilee (4:14—9:50); Journey to Jerusalem (9:51—19:27); Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem (19:28—21:38); Passion of Jesus (22:1—23:56); and the Resurrection of Jesus (23:56b—24:53). (Perkins, 215) 

            As with any literary analysis of a text, a term must be seen through the lens of a major theme or motif. For instance, Luke’s gospel has Jerusalem as one theme. This theme serves as a geographical structure for the entire gospel. The center of the story is the city of Jerusalem, the infancy narratives lead to the presentation of Jesus at the temple (2:22); the climax of the temptation narrative is reached at Jerusalem (4:9); the transfiguration and end of the Galilean ministry prepare Jesus to go to Jerusalem, and even the resurrection appearances take place in the environs of Jerusalem. (Johnson, 194) Naturally, this theme affects how Luke perceives discipleship. As an example, Jesus’ sayings on discipleship in Luke 9:23-27; 9:57-62; 14:25-35 (under consideration later) are substantially shaped by this theme.  We now turn to these passages.

The Meaning of Discipleship in the Text

Luke 9:23-27; 9:57-62; 14:25-35

            Luke touches on the theme of discipleship explicitly in Luke: 9:23-27; 9:57-62; 14:25-35. From these three passages it is clear Luke intends to communicate the hardship of discipleship. In all three passages Luke highlights nuances in the conditions and demands for discipleship not found in the other synoptic gospels, indicating the emphasis he places in the difficulty of the demands of this world. In the following section these passages will be carefully studied to further develop the notion of discipleship in Luke’s gospel—and how it can be considered radical.

Luke 9:23-27 is the first passage in his gospel to address the conditions of discipleship. The pericope is borrowed from Mark and it also appears in Matthew. In Luke’s version however, there is an addition in v23 not found in Mark or Matthew: ‘daily.’ This first pericope that outlines the radical dedication to follow Jesus to the point of ‘denying oneself’ is shaped by Luke’s meaning of discipleship, a daily and existential commitment. (Plessis, 58) The stipulation clarifies that Jesus is not referring to how one is ‘born-again’ or justified before God (as it is with some Pauline-theology) but instead, discipleship requires one to ‘deny oneself’ and to ‘take up his cross’ in a commitment one undergoes daily. (Tanker, 48) This understanding of discipleship as a daily-commitment is echoed in Acts, "Through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God." (Acts 14:22)

The word ‘deny’ in v23 asserts Luke’s radical notion of discipleship. The Hebrew (άπαρνέομαι) can be interpreted in two ways: first as ‘to refuse to recognize or to acknowledge someone’ and second, as ‘to act in a wholly selfless manner.’ (Tanker, 48) The word first used in Mark, and then copied in Matthew and Luke, is used to express the latter. In the passage, deny oneself becomes a way-of-being, it is a demand to place God’s will first, and one’s own second. For Luke, a disciple is someone who constantly (daily) is seeking to place God’s will as his or her priority, above one’s own.

The verse continues to provide the most radical condition of discipleship in the words that follow, ‘take up your cross and follow me,’(v23) which imply a commitment not only to deny one’s will daily, but to do so willing to face even death. This verse found in Mark and Matthew is deliberately placed in all synoptic gospels for the same purpose. The writers are speaking to a group of early Christians and, or, Jews, that had a clear notion and understanding of a death by cross. By placing these words in Jesus’ mouth and equating it to a condition of discipleship, the authors are conveying the message of suffering, and even death, as a result of being a disciple. Luke intentionally places this pericope in the journey narrative. (Luke 9:51—19:44) Jesus gives these requirements for discipleship on his journey to Jerusalem with his own death in mind.  While the disciples are clueless on the literal meaning of this command, (although Jesus reminds them several times in Lk. 9:51; 13:22; 17:11; 19:11, 28) the community Luke addresses is very mindful of the meaning of Jesus’ words. Luke Johnson sums up the intentionality of Luke, ‘this travel motif gives the entire section a dynamic quality and renders more dramatic the calls to discipleship.’ (Johnson, 204) In other words, Jesus invites his disciples to be willing to model what he is about to do, to die on a cross as a means to be a disciple.

The second pericope under consideration is found in Luke 9:57-62. This pericope outlines three conditions to become a ‘follower’ or disciple of Jesus. In Luke 9:23-27 Jesus address his disciples in monologue but in 9:57-62 we find a dialogue between Jesus and three followers-to-be. In the dialogue Jesus harshly rejects the three followers-to-be for different reasons. The afore-mentioned passage serves to reinforce Luke’s radical notion of discipleship yet again.

 Also found in Matthew 8:20, as in Luke 9:57-62, the first follower-to-be precipitately announces his wish to follow Jesus, to which Jesus replies with an extreme call to renouncement of security and well-being as a fundamental requirement of discipleship. In other words, the first condition is the willingness to let go of security as the price of discipleship. (v58) (Plessis, 63) This verse speaks of detachment; to follow Jesus means to not only to embrace the hardship of discipleship, but to renounce our own false sense of security. Then, Jesus invites the next follower-to-be who accepts but places a provision: He needs to bury his father first. Jesus rejects this provision severely by saying ‘let the dead bury their dead, but you go proclaim the Kingdom of God.’ (v60) It was part of Jewish custom to bury the dead, a sign of piety and responsibility. To neglect the dead was an exceptional disgrace at the time. Therefore Jesus’ response was a strong threat to Jewish sentiments. (Hays, 50) This second condition demands both the sacrifice of cultural demands to be a disciple of Jesus, and the willingness to face opposition for it. (Plessis, 63) But the third and last demand is perhaps the most challenging of all three. The third condition found in v63 speaks of a man who declares his wish to become a disciple but then quickly finds a priority over the call—a simple goodbye to his loved ones. Jesus again rejects any excuse, for loved ones come second when one is committed to being a disciple. (Plessis, 63) For Luke’s understanding of discipleship, this is not an excuse. This last verse (v62) also highlights the supremacy of Jesus over Elijah. The verse is reference to a passage found in Elijah 19:20—where Elijah allows his disciple Elisha to kiss his parents goodbye, whereas Jesus sets harder conditions and a more radical degree of commitment for his disciples. (Hays, 53)

Luke continues to develop his radical understanding of discipleship in Luke 14: 25-35. The opening of the passages tells us that Jesus addresses a large crowd and delivers a devastating one-liner. In v26 Jesus claims that a measure of discipleship is to hate family members and even one’s own life. The verse is also found in Matthew 10:47 with nuances in Luke. Perhaps the major difference being that Luke uses hate whereas Matthew expresses it as ‘if you love (them) more than me’ you are not worthy to be a disciple. Another difference is that in Matthew’s version, the condition is given only to the twelve (Matthew 10:1-42), whereas Luke addresses a ‘large crowd’ (v25) that was following him. The passage in Luke is placed strategically after Jesus announces several times his passion and death (Luke 9: 22, 44) serving again as a demand on discipleship. Luke’s notion of discipleship is radical not because it uses hate to delineate the intricacies of an unbearable demand, but because it maximizes the choice on the commitment and allegiance that being a disciple requires. Matthew’s version ‘love more than me’ softens the radical commitment to follow Jesus. While Luke’s word choice of hate dramatically indicates that the decision to follow Jesus places everything at opposition. It is necessary here to explain that Jesus does not intend for his disciples to hate loved-ones, but uses the word to emphasize two things: the choice, and its priority.  Brisson states, ‘Hate may be understood, then, as the call "to choose between" or "to have one's life prioritized accordingly to" that which must be privileged above all other things.’(Brisson, 312) He explains further, “Much of the term is used in the Wisdom tradition, when choosing the "fear" of God necessarily requires its antithesis, the "hatred" of evil, not as a destructive response to evil but as a refusal to offer to evil one's allegiance. (312)  

Luke’s Concern for the Poor

There is a clear theme on the concern for the poor in Luke’s gospel. (Luke 4:18; 6:20-23; 7:36-50; 14:12-14; 15:1-32; 16:19-31; 18:9-14; 19:1-10; 21:1-4) And by the same token condemning those who place their material wealth above God. (Luke 6:24-26; 12:13-21; 16:13-15; 19-31; 18:9-14; 15-25) The calling of disciples includes a verse that Luke uses repeatedly: ‘leave everything.’ Luke’s account to call Peter, John and James as a disciple ends with, ‘so they pulled up their boats to the shore, left everything and followed him.’ (Luke 5, 11) Levi ‘left everything’ (5:28) and rose and followed him. These passages highlight this requirement of discipleship. In Luke 9:23-27, Jesus once again assigns possessions as a detriment to discipleship. In v24 He uses the word profit to associate it with wealth and money. Then, He compares the gaining of wealth to a man who would ‘lose or forfeit himself’ in the world. In the followers-to-be pericope, the first condition is associated with the renouncement of security, and therefore possessions. (Luke 9: 58) Similarly Luke 13:25-35 ends with ‘every one of you 

who does not renounce all his possessions cannot be my disciple.’(v33) Luke places parables after the sayings on discipleship, implying that these are for all disciples to hear. Among them he places Luke 16:9-13, tying wealth with dishonesty and the final premonition in (v13); ‘You cannot serve God and money. But perhaps, the most straightforward tie of the condition to denounce possession to discipleship is found in Luke 18:23, where Jesus meets a wealthy man and invites him to follow him. The condition is simple, ‘sell all that you have and distribute it to the poor.’ (v22). 

Not only is leaving everything, leaving all, or renouncing all possessions condition of discipleship but it is also the nature of the mission. In Luke 9:1-6, Jesus sends the Twelve in mission, and in v3 he sets a condition for the work, ‘take nothing for the journey, neither walking stick, nor sack, nor food, or money.’ Again, emphasizing the renouncement of possessions, even daily needs! This pericope is mirrored in the sending of the seventy-two in chapter 10. In Luke 10:1-12 Jesus commissions seventy two disciples to go proclaim the Kingdom of God. Yet again, the condition is to ‘carry no money bag, no sack, no sandals.’ (v4)

The disciple and the disciple’s work require a renouncement of possessions. And for Luke the Kingdom of God itself is for those who are poor.  (Luke 6:20) In this verse, Luke departs from Matthew’s ‘poor in spirit,’ (Matthew 5:1) to simple ‘blessed be the poor.’(v20)  It is essential here to clarify that Luke’s Greek has two words for poor: πενής and πτωχός. The former Greek term included the masses who were involved in subsistence living as small peasants, tenant farmers, craftsmen, small traders, and day laborers. The latter Greek term is used to describe the destitute and beggars. Luke always uses the latter as a condition of discipleship, the nature of the mission, and for those who will inherit the Kingdom. (Kraybill, 232)

For Luke, being a disciple is not an easy thing to do, far from it. It is a radical lifestyle. Luke’s attention to discipleship is centered on the commitment that requires you to renounce everything and the existential decision it takes to be able to make this choice daily. The choice is such that it antagonizes loved ones, comfort and security, cultural norms, and even one’s own life. The commitment is such that it embraces persecution and death. Luke’s understanding of discipleship also includes a total dependency on God. An attachment to any other sort of security measure is a threat to this relationship. Hence, Luke places wealth and possessions at an opposition not only to being a disciple, but also as an opposition to the Kingdom itself.