It is the year 2026, and the musical “Jesus Christ Superstar” is scheduled to be shown in Singapore. According to the synopsis on Wikipedia, this musical portrays the last days of Jesus up till the crucifixion. In its dramatic retelling of the Passion, the musical portrays Jesus as someone full of doubt over his mission of dying on the Cross. The Lord’s Supper evidently was not instituted by Christ but was instead a misunderstanding of the drunk disciples. Through the musical, what is portrayed is a human Jesus who does not trust the Father, and therefore cannot be God.
It is in this light that the National Council of Churches of Singapore (NCCS) puts out a statement claiming to speak for the Christians of Singapore. In this statement, while acknowledging that the “Jesus” portrayed is one full of doubt, it nevertheless claimed that the musical showed “Jesus’ humanity.” It then states that “Christians have diverse views” about the musical and acknowledges these differences, and then summarizes these as follows:
For those who find the musical deeply offensive to their conscience or harmful to their faith, the Council respects their decision to abstain from viewing or supporting it. For those who choose to attend or reflect on the musical, the Council encourages a critical and prayerful engagement.
It might be seen that the Council acknowledges Christians who disagree with the musical and see it as blasphemy (which it is). It is also good that the Council states that the “Jesus” of the musical “does not fall within the bounds of Christian orthodoxy.” But what it also does is that it asserts that it is perfectly acceptable for Christians to take this as a creative reimagination of Jesus, and to these people, it “encourages a critical and prayerful engagement.” That is precisely the problem with the NCCS statement. The NCCS statement tolerates evil. It is one thing to acknowledge the views of others. It is another to encourage “critical” engagement. What is the kind of “critical” engagement should you have towards heresy? And yes, the musical is heretical.
It Jesus has doubts about his mission, that doubt does not show his humanity. Humans do not have to doubt in order to be human. Doubt is unbelief. In Jesus’ case, since Jesus is the second person of the Trinity, to doubt is to separate the persons of the Trinity and move towards tritheism. Alternatively, this doubt makes Apollinarianism (that Jesus is a man adopted to be the son of God) correct. In no version of Trinitarian orthodoxy can doubt be considered a sign of Jesus’ humanity.
Therefore, there is no case for any creative or “critical engagement” with the musical. The secular authorities have the right to show it, but Christians should treat it as blasphemy, something even more blasphemous than the Mohammad cartoons done some time back. The NCCS’s statement err because it allows for Christians to see it, instead of warning Christians not to see it at all. What next? Christians are allowed to critically engage with even more blasphemous stuff like The Last Temptation of Christ? Is there no bottom to the barrel of sludge Christians can critically engage in?
As the NCCS’s statement says, Christians are “to be true to the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints’ (Jude 1:3).” That however is not what the NCCS’s full statement does, which is one tailored to give a nod to orthodoxy while giving a green light to what worldly professing Christians would like to do.
