Defining Christianity.

I want to quote a snippet from Jane Eyre to illustrate a point.

Having fled Mr Rochester’s house in a destitute condition, and having nearly died on the moor from exposure and hunger, Jane has been taken in by the charitable St John Rivers. His housekeeper had at first refused her shelter and is now excusing herself. Towards the end of the conversation, Jane says:

‘But I do think hardly of you,’ I said; ‘and I’ll tell you why – not so much because you refused to give me shelter, or regarded me as an impostor, as because you just now made it a species of reproach that I had no “brass” and no house. Some of the best people who ever lived have been as destitute as I am; and if you are a Christian, you ought not to consider poverty a crime.’

It was for statements such as this that a leading reviewer of the day – a woman of high social standing who subsequently married into a title – accused Charlotte Bronte of being anti-Christian and anti-Establishment, even going so far as to suggest that she was the stuff of which evil revolutionaries are made. And she further expressed doubt that Charlotte could have any place among others of her sex.

Doesn’t that speak volumes about the way in which Christianity came to be defined by and for the benefit of a wealthy, privileged elite who sought to vindicate their elevated position in the class system? It had very little to do with what Jesus supposedly taught.

I have the impression that the same holds true today – not so much in Europe where Christianity is becoming ever more marginalised, but certainly in America where it remains highly revered as a controlling influence on the population.