It’s the fiftieth anniversary of the Tim Rice/Andrew Lloyd
Webber rock opera Jesus Christ Superstar
in 2020. Bet you didn’t know that. I had to look it up.
For readers who weren’t around in 1970, this pithy summary from GotQuestions is pretty much
on-the-nose: “It is an attempt to rewrite history. It makes the traitor Judas
Iscariot a victim and reduces the Lord Jesus Christ to a burnt-out celebrity
who is in over his head.”
I never saw Superstar
back in the day, but a few of the older guys in my mid-’70s youth group loved
the soundtrack and played it to death at our basement get-togethers. The
experience was musically painful and theologically teeth-grinding.
She Didn’t Know How to Love Him
The most odious tune of the bunch was the big hit, the
Yvonne Elliman version of I Don’t Know How to Love Him. It’s supposed to be Mary Magdalene singing about her
crush on the Lord, and it went something like this:
“I don’t know how to love him
What to do, how to move him
...
He’s a man, he’s just a man
And I’ve had so many men before
In very many ways he’s just one more.”
Bleh, I thought, and still do. There’s sacred,
there’s profane, then there’s cheesily saccharine AND profane, which has got to
be at least one notch further down on the sizzle spectrum.
But it was the first time I’d ever thought about the Lord as
someone who might potentially have provoked the romantic attentions of women,
or have responded to them (appropriately, of course). It seemed a weird and inappropriate notion.
But Hey, Why Not?
Okay, but why is that? Why couldn’t Jesus have married? Hebrews tells us he “had to be made like his brothers
in every respect,” and that “we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who
in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.” Surely if there is
anyone in human history who could have done marriage perfectly, it is our Lord.
So why didn’t he? Wouldn’t a married Jesus have given
Christian husbands a whole lot of useful tips about relating to their wives?
Wouldn’t a married Jesus have clarified for Christian feminists once and for all what the “servant leadership” dynamic really looks like in marriage?
Wouldn’t a married Jesus better help us understand the wonderful spiritual
reality marriage pictures for us, which is the relationship between Christ and
his church? Why deprive us of all that?
Here we are asking a question our Bible doesn’t answer, and putting
words in the mouth of the Lord or speculating about the plans and purposes of
God the Father is a couple steps more than I’m comfortable taking without
scriptural warrant. So let’s reframe the question a bit so that we don’t go
trampling holy ground with our shoes on: Supposing the Lord Jesus HAD married,
how might humanity have reacted? That much we can certainly chew on without
being irreverent.
Implications and Consequences
Well, let’s see. Making a marriage requires making a choice,
and the Lord would have had to select an appropriate partner. Can you imagine
what church history would have done with any woman personally selected for her
exceptional qualities by the Son of God? Picture the “Blessed Virgin” business
squared or cubed, except of course presumably without the attributed eternal virginity.
You would have had the usual devoted-but-severely-confused people wandering
around praying to her, asking her to intercede with her husband for us, making
little statues of her and generally turning her into a billion dollar industry.
You would have had believing women modeling themselves on her conjectured
attributes, self-flagellating when they couldn’t live up to their mental
pictures of her, or, alternatively, rationalizing away deficiencies in their own
behavior by telling each other unflattering fictions about what she was really like. Ugh.
Then there is the fact that marriage usually produces
children. Had the Lord married in his late teens or early twenties, which was
probably normal timing in the first century, he could easily have fathered
several sons and daughters by the time he began his ministry. Once again,
imagine what the community of faith might have done with those children and
their heirs. They would have been considered a super-race, possessed of all
sorts of qualities we haven’t got and can only aspire to. Or perhaps they would
have been as viciously persecuted as their father. We can only speculate. What
we can be sure of is that they would have been singled out and have become a
huge practical and theological distraction, a new category of being we’d all
have to get our heads around. Hmm. No thanks.
Changing Dynamics and Complicated Decisions
It should be obvious that having a family would not have
kept the Powers That Be from murdering the Lord of Glory. He would have had to
leave his earthly family behind far too young, all the while knowing the pain this
would cause them. Doubtless he could have made suitable arrangements for
their care just as he provided for the care of his mother, but what actually happened is certainly simpler and kinder. Knowing from the beginning exactly what he was destined for, the Lord Jesus declined to inflict his lot on any more loved ones than absolutely necessary.
Again, we may be able to imagine what the Lord’s married
life might have been like from his early twenties to age 30 or
thereabouts, but what would our Lord have done with his family for the
three-plus years he was ministering in public, and how would people have
assessed that? “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests, but the Son
of Man has nowhere to lay his head.” They sure weren’t coming with him, and if they had, the relationship dynamics
with his disciples would have been significantly altered.
Numbers and Distractions
Another thought. There are currently 62 million married couples in the U.S., 124 million people out of a population of 326 million, or 38% of the population. That means that at any given time, almost 2/3 of the
population is single. Never mind how unmarried believers might feel about
whether a married Savior really understands their issues, which is yet another
matter for speculation. It is sufficient to note that in remaining single, the
Lord chose to make his personal experiences relatable to a much larger segment
of the population than he might have done by marrying.
Then there is the matter of distraction. Marriage is a big
one. “The married man is anxious about worldly things, how to please his wife, and
his interests are divided.” Our Lord could surely have managed the conflicts, interruptions and
distractions that would undoubtedly have come his way from married life. But
how would his unmitigated devotion to his Father play with any normal woman? I suspect there are few who could handle the
Lord’s unequaled commitment to his Father’s will.
The Testimony of the Scriptures
I notice that when we consider this subject, Christians will
point out that there’s not the faintest hint of sexual interest toward his
female followers coming from the Lord in any of the four gospels. Not one sniff.
They are correct on that count. Even the Lord’s enemies never
once attempted to accuse him of sexual hijinks or loose living. The scribes and
Pharisees certainly didn’t hold their tongues with respect to Jesus’ other
“sins”, such as “breaking the Sabbath” and eating and drinking with publicans
and sinners, and we know that the gospel writers faithfully recorded their
objections to these activities. They would surely have just as faithfully
recorded their objections to the way the Lord related to the women who
ministered to him and his disciples. Yet there isn’t one accusation any time that he misbehaved in this regard. Given the reputation of
men generally, his track record of impeccability is mind-boggling, especially
for such an admired figure — not to mention the walking embodiment
of love.
Even in the house of Simon, when his feet are being anointed by a “fallen woman”,
you don’t get any sense the Lord was reciprocating her attention, or that the
contemptuous Simon even thought he was. Instead, Simon criticizes Jesus’
apparent paucity of prophetic insight. If there was any evidence of heightened
emotion in the room, it was surely on her side alone.
This is a remarkable fact, since it’s the very FIRST thing the Lord’s enemies would
have raised if they’d thought for a second anyone would have believed them. It’s
the most plausible of slanders one can raise against a man. But ... not in
his case.
We can therefore be quite confident there’s no “there” there
in the questions raised by Webber and Rice, and which turned up again in Dan
Brown’s noxious The Da Vinci Code. Brown went even further than Superstar,
positing a twenty-century clerical conspiracy to hide the fact that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had a daughter together.
Double bleh. Never happened. Just the usual round of pagans
taking cheap shots.
Essential Differences in Nature
Finally, there are monumental theological and practical
issues involved with the Lord taking a wife. Consider that it took eleven
different normally-flawed men to collectively absorb three years of the
Lord’s teaching and pass it on to the world. During that time, despite his love
for them, they were an ongoing source of frustration to the Lord. “O faithless generation, how long am I to be with you? How long am I to bear with you?” “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!” He was gracious and good to them at all times, and he came among them as a
servant and served perfectly. But in no way was he really like them. They were
always struggling not just to keep up, but to even stay within shouting
distance.
Fallen men can pair up with fallen women with some measure
of occasional success because we are operating more or less on the same level.
But how would a marriage work when one partner was literally ALWAYS right,
and the other partner knew it? When the differences between partners were not
just matters of role, responsibilities and authority, but went right down to
the essential nature of one partner? Whatever such a relationship might be, it
would be vastly different from anything you or I might ever experience,
and for both parties. It would be orders of magnitude more bizarre and
inappropriate than marrying your cat.
One day we will indeed be “like him” in some sense. Fit for God’s presence. Made compatible with the divine nature.
That’s a marvelous thought. But we will not become gods, though God lives out
his life through us. We will always be his creatures. And that’s not a bad
thing to recognize.
The notion that any one woman, however (relatively)
virtuous, might ever have constituted a fit partner for God in the flesh is
more than a little presumptuous. There is very good reason the Church has never
seriously entertained it.
___________________________
Photo courtesy BroadwaySpain [CC BY-SA 4.0]
No comments :
Post a Comment