Many believe that the ascetics were holy. They are seen as righteous and venerable. Some believe that the correct path of enlightenment is through the denial of what is natural. I want to share with you a statement that comes from one of the predominant influences in the Christian movement, the ascetic belief structure. This quote was borrowed from a publication by the adherents to that influence:
“Asceticism is a necessary part of the spiritual life. Saints John of the Cross and Teresa of Avila espoused an absolute asceticism of complete detachment and relentless mortification.”
They believed that complete detachment from reality and relentless self-abuse was NECESSARY for a spiritual life. Relentless torture. I am stunned that masses of people were drawn to that pathology.
Starting in the second century, asceticism, the belief that suffering, denial, detachment and isolation, and “relentless” mortification, became a driving influence of Christianity. For those not familiar with the word mortification, it means the death of one part of the body while the rest lives. This is very important. John of the Cross literally taught that “life is achieved through death.” He died in a cell, “expressing in his prison-cross the ecstasy of mystical union with God in the Spiritual Canticle.”
Life through death, taking a spiritual principle that Christ sacrificed himself for human sins and twisting it into some morbid message that salvation by grace wasn’t enough, each person had to earn holiness by suffering.
His life became one of the pillars of the Franciscan Movement. How can anyone look at these examples and see anything healthy? How did we take a few simple messages that were specific to situations Jesus was addressing, and apply them broadly to all of humanity?
Again, I am amazed that human society, the one that believed in the God that created heaven and earth, transitioned from building a healthy culture that embraced families and blessings of prosperity, to one of perversion, death, and isolation.
The movement began with an over-focus on a few passages of scripture. Two of them are found in Mark 8:34, “Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me,” and Mark:10, the story of the interaction between Jesus and the “Rich Young Ruler.” In that story, verse 21, we are told that Jesus looked at him with love and saw that the love of wealth was deep in his heart. As a test of that pride, Christ said, “One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”
In verse 22 we are told, “But he was deeply dismayed by these words, and he went away grieving; for he was one who owned much property.”
As I studied the belief in ascetism, I found reference time and again to the same few passages. As with all cults, and asceticism clearly meets the test of that word, there is a focus on one or two messages to the exclusion of many others that contradict their out of context interpretations.
The practice began with the belief that it was proper to take part of our lives and dedicate that time to prayer during a period fasting. Within one hundred years it became twisted into the ascetic monastic movement. These strict practitioners of asceticism believed that isolation, celibacy, poverty, begging as a means of shaming themselves, and self-inflicted pain were the REQUIRED means of spiritual purification.
From that point, the logical step was to require others to observe all or part of that belief. They moved away from Jesus teaching of the value of life, loving your neighbor as yourself was one of the two greatest commandments, and a society that was structured to productively manage human nature, and legislated a culture that demanded what I have called “Poverty Theology.” They embraced the torture of people they perceived as lacking righteousness, torture for the good of the tortured, of course.
It is one step further to allow the practice of abortion, which is directly related to poverty theology and eugenics.
Muslims should take no position of superiority in this conversation. They practice the disgusting abuse of little girls called Female Genital Mutilation, FGM, wherein they brutally remove the genitals of girls and sow them together in order to assure they can’t have sex and will never enjoy it. Both societies have atrocities enough to make them ashamed.
I want to leave this discussion of Hebrew society with a final example where the ascetics went off track. They focused on Mark 10, especially verse 25, but they didn’t seem to read the rest of the story. In this famous passage, Jesus said: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.”
That passage is often misquoted. In the next few verses, Jesus qualified what he meant: And they were even more astonished, and said to Him, “Then who can be saved?”
Looking at them, Jesus said, “With people it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God.”
Peter began to say to Him, “Behold, we have left everything and have followed you.”
Jesus said, “Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or farms, for My sake and for the gospel’s sake, but that he will receive a hundred times as much now in the present age, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and farms, along with persecutions; and in the age to come, eternal life.
That seems very straightforward. In principle, Christians who followed him were promised that righteous living would not keep them from the difficulties of life but would also not keep them from prosperity, and in a future time, to eternal life.
Remember, most of the early Christians didn’t read. Even in the modern age I have heard priests discourage believers from reading scriptures. The ascetic movement misdirected the church and we are left to question if that errant teaching destroyed our social structure.
I want to draw your attention to the word “house,” (singular) in Mark:10, verse 29, Strong’s Number G3614. That word in Greek is οἰκία. According to Strong’s Concordance it means the family that lives in the house, the household, persons dwelling there. In verse 30, the promise is applied to the word, “he.” “He” references the word “one” in the preceding verse 29. That word “one,” is Strong’s G3762, a singular pronoun. Singular. So, we are told that the promise includes many family members per man, and specifically mentions “houses, brothers, sisters, children, farms, and mothers.”
In Chapter 29, he specifically used the word MOTHER, in the Greek that word is an accusative singular feminine noun, and FATHER, again, singular, but it Chapter 30 he is promised “Houses”, an accusative plural feminine noun, and “Mothers,” an accusative plural feminine noun. In the Greek it is intentionally plural.
Fathers are not mentioned, only “mothers.” We have seen in Hebrew society what that meant, to have many mothers in your household.
Notice also that there is no mention of leaving a wife, a man could not have left a wife. He left his father and mother, but not a wife, and he will have a great household with many mothers.