In analyzing Jesus’ crucifixion with regard to Karl Marx and Mircea Eliade, I found a startling similarity:
deep desire to escape world. The cross symbolizes and encompasses this desire, although two theorists define its manifestation differently. As always, Karl Marx interpreted most issues of his time using concept of social struggle. There was always an ongoing battle between workers and their capitalist oppressors. Society was fundamentally corrupt so long as a minority (the middle-class capitalists) had an economic advantage, a sense of superiority, over masses (the workers). Marx dreamed of a classless society where everyone was treated equally, fairly, and would be completely satisfied both in their work and in their relationships with each other.1 But economic reality of society in his day caused alienation between workers and their true selves.
Alienation occurred because capitalist economics took production of labor, very product supposedly reflecting worker’s true self-expression, and transformed it into a material object that is bought, sold, and owned by others. This economy gave worker’s product to rich middle-class who was able to buy it and thus ruled and oppressed working masses. 2 Physical, social, economic, and spiritual oppression was result of this alienation, and religion was way out, an escape:
Religion is sigh of oppressed creature, heart of a heartless world, and soul of soulless conditions. It is opium of people.3
The drug opium lessened pain and created fantasies. Marx compared religion to opium because he saw religion playing same role in life of poor. Through religion, pain workers suffered in a cruel and exploitative world was eased by fantasy of a supernatural world void of all sorrow and oppression. It is pure escapism.4 This escapism shifted gaze upward to an all-knowing, all-powerful, all-enduring God who occupies a perfect Heaven.
For Marx, essence of religion, and for purposes of this paper, Christianity, is its voice of suffering, its crying out against realities of capitalist exploitation and degradation.5 The cross is ultimate symbol of pain and suffering. Marx’s working class would identify with this symbol and cling to it with hope of a better life, a better world, to come. Jesus’ suffering and death on cross, and his eventual resurrection, would be proof to workers that if they just endure this worldly suffering and oppression with patience and long-suffering, they will too be rewarded eternal life in Heaven when they die. The poor would also identify to humiliation Jesus suffered at hands of Romans even before he died. They would say, “Hey, humiliation that happened to Christ is happening to us. He did nothing to stop it. He endured all pain and suffering with strength, courage, and patience. If we do same in our situation, if we imitate our Lord, we will be rewarded in Heaven. Everything here on earth passes away; it doesn’t matter.” And, they are even forced to recognize and acknowledge fact that they are dominated, ruled, and possessed as a privilege from Heaven.6
Marx would say this hope in cross and in Heavenly salvation are all negative concepts that paralyze and imprison. For him, desire for Heaven made poor content with their situation on earth. It promoted oppression by presenting a belief system (Christianity) that made poverty and misery acceptable and allowed ordinary people resignation to their lot in life. By keeping their eyes on symbolic suffering of cross and staying content with thought of next life, what energies will poor ever put into changing their circumstances?7
Not only does belief in cross have negative connotations, it has evil consequences as well:
The social principles of Christianity declare all vile acts of oppressors against oppressed to be either just punishment for original sin and other sins, or suffering that Lord in His infinite wisdom has destined for those redeemed.8
It is most extreme version of ideology, of a belief system whose motive is simply to provide reasons, excuses even, for keeping things in society just way oppressors like them. For non-oppressed, for those lucky enough to control means of production, this belief system was used to remind poor that all social arrangements should stay just way they are.9 In this sense, religion was ultimate form of control. Again, poor would look to cross for answers: they would look to forgiveness: Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing. [Luke 23:34]
Blessed are poor in spirit, for theirs in kingdom of Heaven. [Matthew 5:3]
Blessed are meek, for they will inherit earth. [Matthew 5:5]
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is kingdom of heaven. [Matthew 5:10]
You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy’. But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in Heaven. [Matthew 5:43-44]10
By adopting this mentality, oppressed would constantly forgive their oppressors, thus giving their oppressors even more reason to persecute them. The middle class would be surrounded by lower class, factory-oriented doormats who, in theory, would permit middle class to walk all over them.
Mircea Eliade’s ideology does not reduce religion (or in this case, cross) to economic misery; he doesn’t reduce it to anything. For him, in order to interpret importance and significance of religious experience, we must step out of modern civilization and enter world of what he calls “archaic man”. When we do this, he says, we find these primitive people living on two markedly different planes: sacred and profane. The profane realm consists of everyday, normal business people attend to each day and is relatively unimportant. The sacred is just opposite. It is realm of supernatural, of things extraordinary, memorable, and momentous. While profane is arena of changeable and chaotic human affairs, sacred is sphere of order and perfection, home of ancestors, heroes, and gods, of beings not of this world.11 The role of religion in archaic life is to promote encounters with sacred, to put people in touch with something otherworldly in character; this character makes them feel like they have brushed against a reality unlike any other. It’s felt as a dimension of existence alarmingly powerful, enduring, and strangely different. When archaic people set up their villages, they do not choose just any place, a place with simple “profane” surroundings. A village must be founded at a place where there has been some sacred appearance, or hierophany. Thus, authority of sacred controls all decisions. The community can then be built around this center to show its divinely ordered structure – it’s a sacred system.12 The language of sacred can be found in symbols and in myth. Here, certain things are seen to resemble or suggest sacred; they give a hint to supernatural. In a village, this symbol may be a pole, tree, or stone situated at center of village. The Dome of Rock is another example. Myths are symbolic as well, but in a more complicated way. Where poles and trees are more material and concrete symbols, myths are symbols put into shape of a story. But stepping outside of all this and entering realm of profane for a moment, Eliade notes that most of things making up ordinary life are in fact profane; they are just themselves taking up space, nothing more. But at right moment anything profane can be transformed into something more than itself – something sacred. Once recognized as a sacred symbol, an object acquires a double character.13 This seems to be case with cross.
