We hear a great deal these days on the news and in the media about self professed Christian groups openly and publicly calling attention and condemnation to the sexual transgressions of others. Homosexuals are the primary target of these groups, and they not only actively condemn these individuals and their lifestyles and orientation, but actively work towards restricting their freedoms and rights in the United States. Hot topic items include the rights of these people to marry as they see fit, or to serve openly in the US Military. We will not attempt to condone or condemn any sexual practices of other individuals and it is up to the invidividual to make choices as they see fit with regards to personal lifestyle or orientation. But we will point out the hypocrisy in so called "Christians" who actively work to condemn and limit these individuals and their freedoms to choose as well as spending their energy's condemning other sexual transgressions in others.. Throughout Christ's 3 year ministry he never mentioned the sin of Homosexuality one way or the other. And with regards to adultery and forincation, Christ while not condoning such actions, almost invariably condemned the accusers rather than the accused. In them he said lied the "greater sin". The sin of self righteous judgement to Christ was far more grevious than any individual personal transgressions, and he went to great lengths to drive this point home.

 

Unfortunately this message is lost today on so many Christian groups and churches who demonize and condemn the personal transgressions of others, while never contemplating the "beam" in their own eyes. Following is a brief overview of some of those lessons Christ delivered that seem today to have fallen on deaf ears.

 

The Woman Caught in Adultery

 

Perhaps the most famous account in the Gospels of Christ rebuking the judgmental "self righteous" was the account of the woman caught in the act of adultery. Known as the "Pericope de Adultera" this passage was included in the Latin Vulgate and while some biblical scholars contest its authenticity it is generally believed to have been included in many early manuscripts (including being referenced in Gnostic and Apocryphal manuscripts) and was sanctioned by the Council of Trent. The story certainly parallels other teachings by Christ and drives home the messages he provided in other passages. It is found only in the Gospel of St John, in verses 7:53 thorugh 8:11.

The account occurs one morning when Jesus returns to the Mount of Olives, and enters into the Temple where he is again thronged by the people and proceeds to teach them. No doubt seething at the lack of attention to their ecclesiastical authority the scribes and Pharisees leverage the opportunity in an attempt to confound Jesus in front of the crowd and corner him as either a violater of the Mosiac law or a hypocrite with regards to his own Gospel which focused on forgiveness and tolerance for personal transgression.

 

It was early in the morning, and the Scribes and Pharisees brought with them a woman who had apparently been caught in the act of committing adultery, a serious transgression in the Law of Moses and one mentioned in the commandments handed down to Moses on Mt Sinai. Presenting the woman vocally in front of the crowd to Jesus, the scribes and Pharisees announce the womans transgression, reference the Law of Moses and its prescribed punishment of death by stoning, and challenge Jesus to produce his judgment over her. The conundrum placed before Jesus was immediately clear. On the one hand were he to pardon the act and not call for her death by stoning they would accuse him blasphemy against the Law of Moses, a charge surely to bring division among his followers and prospective proselytes, as many were devout Jews and held the Law of Moses in high regard. On the other hand were he to agree with the Law of Moses, and call for her immediate death by stoning, his own Gospel of forgiveness and tolerance would be rebuked by his own mouth. Thus the trap was laid.

 

It is important at this point to mention that the question was merely a hypothetical one. While some movies and paintings depict the Elders preparing to stone the woman, the fact was the Jews were forbade by Roman law to perform any executions. Only Rome was permitted to decide who would live and who would die, so capital punishment was a right denied the Jewish Sanhedrin and leaders. So the womans life was never actually in jeopardy, and no one in the temple that morning would have been weilding a stone to cast in her direction. The question was merely a hypothetical one.

Upon hearing the charge and the challenge for judgement, Jesus obviously aware of the keen trap laid for him pretended at first to not hear the accusations, and instead stooped down to write in the sand. What he wrote, we do not know, but clearly it was designed to unnerve the Pharisees and scribes and demonstrate his lack of respect for their pious hypocrisy. The scribes and Pharisees becoming no doubt agitated at this intentional apathy to their challenge repeated their challenges until finally Christ stood up and delcared that timeless, famous statement " let he who is without sin, cast the first stone". Then Jesus proceeded to return to a crouching position and continued his writing whatever it was he was writing, in the sand. The response was genius. Not only did Christ fail to fall into their trap, but he actually turned the encounter back on them placing them in the same position they sought to place him in. Were they to declare themselves sin free, a characteristic reserved for God himself and only God, then they would be speaking blasphemy. If on the other hand they failed to call for her stoning (even though technically unenforceable) then they would be guilty in the peoples eyes of blasphemying the Law of Moses. Additionally the scriptures point out that their own consciences caused them to shrink and withdraw, one by one until none were left in the area and Jesus found himself alone with the woman. He asked her where her accusers were, and she responded she had none. He then replied that neither would he condemn her, and admonished her to "go and sin no more".

 

Clearly Christ did not pardon the sin. Sin was sin, and adultery is a grevious sin in that it is not merely a personal sexual transgression, such as fornication for example between two consenting adults which only hurts themselves, but this sin was against her spouse. Yet he did not see any reason to condemn the woman, nor did he proceed to lecture her on the sin itself. He merely admonished her to go and do better. Contrasted to todays preachers and religious communities who condemn such transgressions and seek to publicly demonize the transgressor, Jesus's Gospel was much more forgiving and compassionate. Personal sexual transgression while recognized, did not merit much condemnation from Christ. His condemnation instead always seemed to target the accuser, and not the accused.

The Prodigal Son

Easily the most well known of Christ's Parables was the Parable of the Prodigal Son. It is the culmination of three parables dealing with repentence and forgiveness and it is found in the Gospel of St Luke. Few people, Christian or not are unfamiliar with this parable and its message is stark and clear. The story follows that of the "Prodigal Son" of a rich land owner. Prodigal meaning "wastefully extravagant" the younger son of the land owner demands from his father his inheritence early, and embarks on a life of wanton lesiure and indulgence in personal appetites. Time eventually catches up with the young man and his fortune is squandered. Finding himself alone now that he has no money to spend on others, the young man feels the natural remorse of such a situation and decides to return home to his father and beg for a position not as his son but merely as a hired hand on his fathers land. He figures and rightfully so, that even the servants of his father were better off than he was presently and his father would at least permit his son the right to work again for his living.

Upon returning home the father is overjoyed to see his son whom he feared dead, either spirtually or perhaps even physically. His father welcomes back the son and dismisses any talk of working as a servant and instead restores the son to his former stead, clothing him in the robes of his household and placing a ring on his finger (the ring being a common token of authority in a given household or estate). The father calls for a feast to celebrate his sons return, and the elder brother upon seeing this enthusiasm by his father over his wayward brothers returns is angered and declines to participate in the feast. When confronted by the father as to his cold reception to his younger brother the elder son points out how he has not sinned, and heralds his loyalty to his father. The father responds that he indeed honors his sons loyalty (all that I have is thine) but will nonetheless not shrink from his joy or welcome of a son he thought once lost who has now returned.

 

"A certain man had two sons: And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me. And he divided unto them his living. And not many days after the younger son gathered all together, and took his journey into a far country, and there wasted his substance with riotous living. And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want. And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine.

 

And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat: and no man gave unto him.And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger! I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants. And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him. And the son said unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy son.

 

But the father said to his servants, Bring forth the best robe, and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet: And bring hither the fatted calf, and kill it; and let us eat, and be merry: For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry. Now his elder son was in the field: and as he came and drew nigh to the house, he heard musick and dancing. And he called one of the servants, and asked what these things meant. And he said unto him, Thy brother is come; and thy father hath killed the fatted calf, because he hath received him safe and sound. And he was angry, and would not go in: therefore came his father out, and intreated him. And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends: But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf. And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine.

 

It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found."

Luke 15:11-32