About h00die_R (Rod)

priestly abolitionist time travelling supervillian

infant lowly, infant holy

originally posted at Toy Adams’ Imagining Jesus blog

These days, there are a lot of Christians that like to talk about being “Incarnation,” and even to some extent “The Incarnation” itself. There are even some Christians who prefer to talk about multiple incarnations. When it comes to discussions of the Incarnation, we love the neat,cleaner, more respectable adult version, where we talk about Jesus as a Grown-Up, as he is able to walk  with us, talk with us personally. This perspective is a highly individualistic, it is self-centered, and exclusive of children’s subjectivity in the life of The Church.  As a Liberationist and an Open Theist, I am all for defending many (not all) relational approaches to understanding God. During Advent, this is the time where we must affirm God’s openness and freedom in choosing to reveal Godself in Christ Jesus, and at the same time we must affirm God’s particularity, the specific choice that God makes, God’s chosen location and positionality.

Let us not fool ourselves. Almost everyone remembers that famous scene from Talledega Nights, where Ricky Bobby proclaims that he loves to pray to Baby Jesus,. “Dear Lord Baby Jesus, we’d also like to thank you for my wife’s father Chip. We hope that you can use your baby Jesus powers to heal him and his horrible leg. It smells terrible and the dogs are always bothering with it” or “Dear Lord Baby Jesus, lying there in your…your little ghost manger, lookin’ at your Baby Einstein developmental…videos, learnin’ ’bout shapes and colors.” The hypermasculine shaming by our general culture was not the beginning of neglecting Baby Jesus as LORD. That all began when Christians throughout history appropriating philosophies that were inconsistent with the idea that YHWH himself became a child. In his book, In the End—The Beginning: the life of hope, Juergen Moltmann notes that the greek words for slave and child have the same root, that even the inspired New Testament authors use the term “childlike/childish” disparagingly (Luke 7:32/1st Corinthians 14:20, for ex.).

Unfortunately, Moltmann does not extend this logic to the Advent image of the Trinity, Mary our Theoktos, her husband Joseph, and Baby Jesus in the manger. In this lowly infant, God has once and for all united divinity with the class of human beings on the lowest rung of the social hierarchy. Children cannot speak. Babies cannot change themselves, feed themselves, OR WALK! Christians desire to solely talk about Jesus as an autonomous, able-bodied male-privileged Jewish subject. The idea that God was dependent upon a woman to nourish Him (in the womb) for His well-being is offensive to us. There are some Christians caught up in debating how the Son of God really could not become a human zygote because that means he was unconscious, and therefore could not reciprocate the love of the Father. This abstract and meaningless debate is one in which God’s sovereign choice at choosing risk and vulnerability is ill-recognized.  If the Church Fathers and Mothers agreed in line with the Gospel narratives that the Second Person of the Trinity did indeed become FULLY human, then the Son experienced fully and completely all things involved in human development and growth. As the Gospel according to Luke informs us, Jesus grew in both WISDOM and STATURE (Luke 2:52).

In agreement with James Cone, we as The Church must recognize continuity between the historical Jesus and the Christ of the creeds. God in the hypostatic union has reconciled marginalized humanity and emancipatory divinity. “For [the early church], Jesus is certainly a unique person, but the uniqueness of his appearance reveals the Holy One’s concern for the lonely and the downtrodden,” argues James Cone in A Black Theology of Liberation. By starting from the bottom-up, God’s salvation works for the benefit of all: God’s Triune love travels from least of these all the way to the top in order to raise up all of humanity at the New Creation (some people will choose judgement, others, reconciliation).This is the logic of the Resurrection, a theo-logic that finds itself as the result of the Incarnation of YHWH as Holy, Lowly Infant.

Following the arguments of the late Clark Pinnock, I can co-sign on the idea that Scripture presents us with a paradox of strength and vulnerability. “Though ontologically strong, God can be vulnerable because of the decision to make a world like this. The Lord of the universe has chosen to limit his power by delegating some to the creature. God gives room to creatures and invites them to be covenant partners, opening up the possibility of loving fellowship but also some of the initiative being taken away from God and creatures coming into conflict with his plans”- The Openness Of God: A Biblical Challenge to the Traditional Understanding of God. Clark Pinnock gets the general description of God’s nature basically right but what his analysis ignores is the particular circumstances that YHWH reveals Godself. God invited the Hebrew children that YHWH delivered from Pharaoh to be covenant partners first. God chose to covenant with King David, Israel’s greatest king, to be God’s specific vehicle for the Logos’ embodiment. The loving fellowship that YHWH invites humanity to partake in is the story of the Law, the Prophets, and the Wisdom writings: the very narratives that reveal YHWH’s justice & preferential option for the widow, the stranger, and the poor. 

This Advent season I have also been working my way through Richard Wright’s Black Boy. Black Boy is Richard Wright’s autobiography about his childhood, or his lack thereof. It is a miserable tale in many instances, with stories about the brutality of an impoverished life, White supremacy, and religious fundamentalism. Wright shares a story of one Christmas day where he received nothing but an orange, and he describes the pain he felt while all the other kids in his neighborhood were playing outside, having fun. It was experiences such as these that taught Wright how to live in solidarity with those who are afflicted. “The spirit I caught had gave me insight into the sufferings of others, made me gravitate toward those whose feelings were like my own, made me sit for hours while others told me of their lives, made me strangely feel tender and cruel, violent and peaceful” (chapter 3).

The title Black Boy itself is filled with irony IMO.  When Black men are referred to as “boys,” it is an insult going back to African enslavement. Black people were/are considered to be at the bottom of White Supremacist hierarchy. On one hand, “boy” is pointing towards Wright’s experience of oppression under Jim/Jane Crow imperial domination.  On the other hand, “boy” is also being reclaimed with Wright taking back his ownership of his own childhood and his own story in spite of being robbed of it by organized religion and structural injustice. I am now contending that we Christians do a reclamation projection of our own, that of revisiting this notion of the Divine Baby more than once a year, to allow God’s choice for risk and vulnerability to define God, and not our own speculations. Once the Church returns to the childhood of the Triune God, we will be better able to join in the bottom-up Resurrection movement of the Logos. 

h00die_R (Rod)

priestly abolitionist time travelling supervillian

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
Twitter

Royal. Bodies. #StayWokeAdvent #Ferguson

staywokeadvent (1)

Over a week ago, NBA basketball star LeBron “King” James found himself in hot water after breaking a rule. While hanging out with Prince William and Duchess Kate, LeBron violated British royal protocol by wrapping his arm around Kate’s back. The bodies of the members of the British Royal family are national treasures, and palace officials work to make sure that particular customs are adhered to.

Today I would like to reflect on the Advent Lectionary selection, 2nd Samuel 7:1-11, 16 (NRSV). Because the personal is political, and vice versa, I purposefully chose what I believed to be the most difficult text to deal with during this season of repentance. The chapter itself brings a lot of baggage, and so if you do not understand the context (historical & theological), it becomes more about King David and his reign rather than the actual kin(g)dom of God. The prophet Nathan is approached by David and is asked whether or not David is the one to build YHWH’s temple.  Nathan at first approves of the project, but then that night, God speaks to Nathan, and tells him, hold up homey, I have other plans. Verse 6 says, “I [YHWH] have not lived in a house since the day I brought the people of Israel from,  Egypt, to this day but I have been moving in a tent and a tabernacle.”

Right away, YHWH is reminding Nathan the prophet and King David that the central story for Israel is THE Exodus. The story of God liberating the Hebrew people from the wrath of Pharaoh is the foundational narrative by which we understand God’s sovereignty. God’s freedom is a freedom for others, a releasing of the captives whose bodies are suffering affliction. The human body is of utmost importance to YHWH because in it is located the imago Dei, as well as the primary means by which God receives worship (READ: LOVE). Therefore, White Supremacist systems that value the value of one group of people over People of Color, especially Black men, are in direct opposition to the Kin(g)dom of God.

Because God has blessed humanity with embodied spiritual existence, ALL of our actions do matter. The books of 1st and 2nd Samuel are good reminders. When the Israelites reject the prophet Samuel as kyriarch Samuel first reminds them that YHWH was the divinity who reigned over them since delivering their ancestors from Egyptian oppression (1st Samuel 8:), and that with this new political structure Israel desired, there would be consequences: “He will take your male and female slaves” “He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers” “he will take your sons to be his horsemen” (1st Samuel 8:10-18). In each example that the prophet Samuel gives, he refers to the future king’s lordship over Israel’s children’s bodies. Israel’s monarch will become Pharaoh: “And in that day, you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves; but the LORD will not answer you in that day.”

David is not allowed to build YHWH’s temple because he had too much bloodshed on his hands (1st Kings 8). What God does promise him however is that God “will raise up your offspring after [David], who shall come from [David’s] body” and YHWH then promises to establish that progeny’s kingdom. David’s throne will be made to rule forever (2nd Samuel 7:16). Now, it would be quite easy to spiritualize this promise, but we must not ignore the theological significance of the human body here. God’s shares God’s divine power with us human beings so that we may reign with God. The kin(g)dom of God is not some otherworldly reality in the great by and by; the kingdom of God takes place whenever the Holy Spirit is active and working within and between human bodies. The question is, what does the kin(g)dom of God look like in the here and now?

The Israelites failed to believe the words of the judge/prophet Samuel, and by the time King David rose to power in Hebron, it was too late. King David’s sexual assault set in motion events where the reign of God became absent. The murder of Uriah, the death of Bathsheba’s newborn child, and number of political conspiracies and military battles that were waged against David’s household. One must ask herself, “Where exactly is God’s kin-dom found during the days of King David?” Okay, really where was God’s reign found during Israel’s monarchies?

Might I suggest that God reigns and continues to rule through the prophets? Nathan, Samuel, Huldah, and Deborah and a number of YHWH’s prophets stood as God’s voice, re-telling the Exodus story and God’s liberating activity when it comes to human affairs. Israel could exist with a king. Israel could be perfectly fine without the military dictators in some instances that we read about in Judges. Israel could be Israel even while in exile. Why? Because God chose to execute God’s rule through the prophets.

Notice what Nathan says about YHWH, that Ya has been moving through tent and tabernacle. God prefers to be on the move, marching with suffering humanity in their struggles for justice. In the Gospel of John, chapter 1:14, the original greek means that YHWH set up God’s tabernacle in Jesus’ royal flesh. And where did the Logos take up residence? Christ was not to be found among the powerful, but the outcast, the sick, and his fellow first century Judeans who were being colonized and terrorized by the Roman Empire. In the wake of the #Ferguson movement, where are the prophets? The kingmakers of the world (the racist media) are vying to make Al Sharpton king once more so that they can control the narrative. Yet it is clear that there is no need for an earthly ruler when all of humanity has the potential to have the reign of God in their hearts. The Spirit of Jesus is working in the midst the women and men organizing and updating their fellow human beings on Twitter, marching the streets to #ShutItDown, to end the current anti-Christ system of police brutality and mass incarceration.

There is no need to look for messiahs to save the poor. Human beings can and must do it themselves.”- James Cone, Malcolm & Martin & America: A Dream or a Nightmare?, page 315

This has been my contribution to the Theology of Ferguson #StayWokeAdvent lectionary reflections.

h00die_R (Rod)

priestly abolitionist time travelling supervillian

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
Twitter

Language For God in Patristic Tradition by Mark Sheridan

Woooooo hoooo! Christmas came early for me today in the mail. Intervarsity Press has sent me a review copy of Language For God in Patristic Tradition: Wrestling With Biblical Anthropomorphism by Mark Sheridan. Words cannot fathom how excited I am, but maybe this video can! LOLS!

h00die_R (Rod)

priestly abolitionist time travelling supervillian

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
Twitter

Upcoming #AnaBlacktivism chats: #JamesConeWasRight & Bonhoeffer

Yes, that’s right, CHATS. PLURAL. Mark your calendars for two conversations on Theology and Race. Back in June, we had our first #AnaBlacktivist chat on Anti-Blackness, Liberation, and Shalom.

On Thursday night December 18th, 2014 at 8:00pm EST, over on Twitter, @AnaBlacktivism will host a conversation on #JamesConeWasRight (using this hashtag inspired by the labor of our friends Daniel and Terrence). Given the recent discussions nation- and worldwide about #Ferguson, #TamirRice, #EricGarner, racism, and police brutality, we at AnaBlacktivist Seminary wanted to highlight the prophetic words of Dr. James Hal Cone, and how his insights remain relevant to this day. Cone’s intellectual project in advancing an Anti-racist, anti-oppressive Christianity are now needed now than ever before. From his analysis of Blacks’ experiences, to his critique of pacifist theologians from the dominant culture, we hope you will join us in this important conversation about Cone’s theology. We will conclude the discussion with challenges and pushback, and a few critiques of Cone’s project.

[TO BE DETERMINED, A DATE AFTER CHRISTMAS DAY, STAY TUNED]: @AnaBlacktivism will host a discussion on Black Theology and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. For many, Dietrich Bonhoeffer is more than simply a martyr. For others, Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s legacy in his writings could be seen as a possible turning point in theology in the post-Christopher Columbus ERROR Era. While many scholars acknowledge the influence of Bonhoeffer’s encounter with Black church life in Harlem, it is usually downplayed. In this discussion, we will be talking about Bonhoeffer’s views on race, Western civilization, and Protestant theology. We will also discuss whether are certain texts in Bonhoeffer’s work that are problematic, and whether or not there is a way forward in re-reading Bonhoeffer for today.

If anyone wants to get a head start in preparing for either of these conversation, we would recommend watching this video of J. Kameron Carter at Lancaster Seminary: Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Failed Blackness.

Linked here

20140616-225219-82339663.jpg

h00die_R (Rod)

priestly abolitionist time travelling supervillian

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
Twitter

the master’s tools #AnaBlacktivism

“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as you obey Christ; not only while being watched, and in order to please them, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. Render service with enthusiasm, as to the Lord and not to men and women, knowing that whatever good we do, we will receive the same again from the Lord, whether we are slaves or free. And, masters, do the same to them. Stop threatening them, for you know that both of you have the same Master in heaven, and with him there is no partiality.-the Apostle Paul Ephesians 5:5-9(NRSV)”

“Those of us who stand outside the circle of this society’s definition of acceptable women;
those of us who have been forged in the crucibles of difference — those of us who are
poor, who are lesbians, who are Black, who are older — know that survival is not an
academic skill. It is learning how to take our differences and make them strengths. For
the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house. They may allow us
temporarily to beat him at his own game, but they will never enable us to bring about
genuine change. And this fact is only threatening to those women who still define the
master’s house as their only source of support.”- Audre Lorde, “The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle The Master’s House

Whenever discussions of social injustice take place, I normally see a shorter version of Audre Lorde’s quote appear, with the phrase itself taken completely out of context. The bumper sticker version “The master’s tool will never dismantle the master’s house” is invoked whenever some revolutionary purist wants to score points for quoting a woman of color and sexual minority (bonus points! LEVEL UP!)

Level up scott pilgrim

In context, Audre Lorde is describing her situation, and critiquing white feminism that centers the Academy and the middle class, and straight. The event she critiqued which took place almost thirty years ago was one in which “difference was merely tolerated.” For Lorde, “Difference is that raw and powerful connection from which our
personal power is forged.” It is the exclusion of this difference by white feminism that is exactly the way that it (white feminism) reinscribes White Supremacist Kyriarchy. One of the interesting questions that Lorde asks in this essay/speech,

“Why weren’t other women of Color found to participate in this conference? Why were
two phone calls to me considered a consultation? Am I the only possible source of names
of Black feminists? And although the Black panelist’s paper ends on an important and
powerful connection of love between women, what about interracial cooperation between
feminists who don’t love each other?”

Or for in a different context, why isn’t there any discussion for People of Color who desire for racial justice at Christian conferences? One of my friends a few months ago received a few phone calls as “a consultation,” and his voice was further devalued. The problem with the bumper sticker version of “the master’s tools” is that these discussion still center “the masters,” the dominant culture with its male supremacy. Even when members of the dominant culture find themselves wanting to discuss issues of white supremacy, privilege, classism and sexism, the starting point unfortunately seems to focus on the perspective from those at the top.

Then, there is this “demand” for marginalized people to “supply” privileged persons with education to be better allies. The choice by those from the margins to take the lead and inform the dominant culture of its wrongs should be a free, noncompulsory choice, on the terms determined by the marginated. Dialogues such as the Southern Baptist Convention partaking in the LORD’S Supper with members of the LGBTQIA community is a start, but again, it was on the SBC’s homefield. The calls by the majority, those in power, for the minorities to educate them, are, as Lorde argues, diversion tactics that lead to a repetition of white supremacist kyriarchy.

The way to decenter these discussions is to #1, stay focused on the margins, #2, not stray away from the topic of structural oppressions which can get derailed by persons who wish to make it “all about the individual,” and #3, recognize that whatever our visions of liberation are, whether they are religious or political, that these transcend as “the master’s tools.”

h00die_R (Rod)

priestly abolitionist time travelling supervillian

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
Twitter

In The Mail: Kenneth Bailey’s The Good Shepherd

My friends at Intervarsity Press sent along Bailey’s The Good Shepherd: A Thousand-Year Journey from Psalm 23 to the New Testament. Psalm 23 was one of the first Bible passages I memorized as a child. As an adult, I discovered just how prominently political the language of “shepherd” was. I hope to put this book to good use.

h00die_R (Rod)

priestly abolitionist time travelling supervillian

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
Twitter

The Liberating LORD of Peace, Part 3: the Revealer #TheNewPacifism

Reading the New Testament as a Continuation of the Hebrew Bible

Previous posts in this series-

The Liberating LORD of Peace, Part 1: Groundrules

And

The Liberating LORD of Peace, Part 2: Revelation

In order for me to argue that the New Testament is not that new in the sense of Jewish moral theology, allow me to review my counter-arguments to uninformed claims that advocates of Christian non-violence avoid the Old Testament.

On the contrary, it is several Old Testament theological claims that remain at the root of Christian pacifism and Christian peace-making efforts. 1. The Decalogue, specifically The Second and Fifth Commandments read together are calls to reject violence.  By knowing the name of God, we avoid linguistic violence towards God and are able to have inner peace that manifests itself outwardly in a peaceful relationship with our neighbors.  The negative command to avoid killing is a logical conclusion from the directive to love God. 2. The Image of God: If one understands the doctrine of being made in the image of God as where humanity’s worth is seen as immeasurable in the eyes of the Triune God, then it follows forth that all of human life is sacred because of the Creator, and second, only God has the right to take away life. 3. Blood as Sacred: Various legislation in the Torah informs readers that the blood of every creature is sacred, for the blood of the creature is its life. 4. The Wars of the Holy One: Rejecting the Holy wars in favor of the far more accurate term, Wars of the Holy One, one can see that theologically the God of Israel, the YHWH Armies is the lone sources of military victory.  Any prideful attempt on the part of the Israelites to take away God’s glory is to be rejected, as was with prophets such as Elisha’s rebuke of the king of Israel (1st Kings 6). 5. Diaspora Judaism: The Maccabee’s violent revolution was rejected, even excluded from the canon at one point.  Nehemiah and Ezra’s noble yet ethnically exclusive experiment should be viewed as a failure, and falling short of God’s command to “seek the peace of the city,” according to Jeremiah 29:5-7.

How Jesus and the Apostles Passed Down the Non-violent Jewish Ethic

Jesus embodies the entirety of the nonviolent morality as it relates to Judaism. It is in his life, death, and resurrect that he creates a new covenant, a better testament (Hebrews 8:6) through his obedience.  The New Covenant is a better one, not because of any principles are laws but simply because the Covenant has been made available to all nations for it was first to the Jew, but now to Jew and Gentile (John 4:22; Romans 1:16). The healing of the nations (Revelation 22:2) is part of the mission of God as well as the healing of the soul.  The incarnation and mission of the Logos points toward reconciliation God with humanity, as well as making possible a greater human fellowship.

1. Jesus as the Logos, or Word of God in many of the early Christians thinking was the Ten Words made Flesh or the Law Incarnate. Their understanding of John 1:1-18 was that God’s teaching had to take on a human body in order for God to teach human being holiness.  What the Patristics understood is that Jesus as revelation cannot be separated from understanding God disclosing God’s Will in the Decalogue.  When New Testament passages allude to the reality that all persons will confess Christ as Lord while every knee will bow, it does so because there is no other name by which human beings receive the gift of salvation (Philippians 2:10).  If one knows Jesus, one will know the God of peace, thus continuing the promise of the 2nd Commandment.  Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount in Matthew as well as his Sermon on the Hill in Luke are the re-iteration of the Ten Commandments as well as their Jubilee interpretations in Leviticus. These laws are not for a chosen few (ala Reinhold Niebuhr) but for everyone who wishes to follow the Lord Jesus. In Liberation Theology, as I have contested a number of times this year, the Exodus narrative is absolutely essential to understanding the whole metanarrative of Scripture. Without the story of YHWH redeeming enslaved Hebrew bodies from the wrath of Egypt, one cannot grasp a proper understanding of God’s Word. Jesus as the Incarnate Son of God partakes in the prophetic tradition of which Moses was the first human participant.

2. Jesus as the Image of God is the norming norm for human behavior (Colossians 1:15). As fully God and fully human, Christ is what it means to be a person. As Yoder articulates quite well,

“When Paul spoke of Jesus as image, or when the author of Hebrews , or the signers of the hymn cited in Phillipians 2 used similar expressions, they were practicing the opposite of freewheeling image making.  They were affirming the abiding normativeness  of the work and words of the man Jesus as revelatory of God’s being and will.”

(1) That the exclusive imagery of Jesus as some Nordic looking hippie is something that ought to be destroyed. Honoring Christ as THE Image of God means the destruction of ALL idols. In A Black Theology of Liberation (chapter 2, “The Norms and Sources of Black Theology”), James Cone criticizes those who would use the image of God as love as a ground for nonviolence. Theologies that are born out of whiteness (the powerful, the dominant culture) serve the interests of the majority including disingenuous calls for Blacks protesting injustice to be “peaceful” like Governor Jay Nixon last night. An AnaBlacktivist theological ethics would call for recognizing the Just Divinity from the Hebrew Bible as the impetus for religious peacemaking with Christ Jesus being that very Deity’s enfleshed self.

3. The Sacred Blood of Jesus: The author of 2nd Peter makes the death of Christ Jesus the reason for our righteousness, and because Jesus’s blood is sacred, we are called to a new life (much like Abel’s blood cried out for justice). Note that 2nd Peter 2:24 says that the two-fold reason for the death of the God-man is for human beings to turn from sin and live in cruciform holiness– both substitutionary atonement and moral exemplar. It is not an either/or when it comes to divine reconciliation. Jesus was victorious in his obedience, representing humanity and taking the punishment what we deserve; our act of worship should be the life of sacrifice, of self-giving, of living in humility, residing in solidarity with the crucified peoples of this world. In Black Christianities, Jesus’ bloodshed connects God in se to the history of blood that has been shed on U.S. American soil: African enslavement, the genocide of First Nation peoples, lynching, the death penalty, police brutality, the poor being sent to unjust wars ordained by the wealthy. While this idea may be offensive to many persons’ sensibilities, traditional hymns spirituals such as ‘Oh, The Blood of Jesus’ and ‘Nothing But the Blood of Jesus’ or ‘Were You There When They Crucified My LORD?’were/ are still sung in Black churches do NOT point to a retributive God. Rather, Christ’s atonement is at once salvific, sanctifying, and a symbol of solidarity with the oppressed.

4. Wars of the Holy One in the New Testament, i.e., Exorcisms: When one recognizes that it is not broken human beings who we are not struggling with, but what the Pauline/pseudo-pauline letter of Ephesians calls ‘the powers of this dark world” and evil from the heavenly realm, one must understand the testimony of the Gospels as they tell us of Jesus healing persons such as Legion [Mark 5; Luke 8] as well as other daemon-possessed persons as going to war. In fact, at the cross, Christ himself alludes to YHWH his Father as the YHWH Armies (Matthew 26:53). How God reigns is on the cross, and through suffering throughout creation. Christ fights our battles for us, and he has already conquered at his death and resurrection; God does not have a social strategy outside of these two events. Yoder puts it this way, “The church does not attack the powers; this Christ has done. […] By existing, the church demonstrates that their rebellion has been vanquished.” (2) The Johannine literature, such as the Apocalypse (the revealing), purposefully depicts Jesus as a warrior king. Specifically, it is the crucified Christ whose very words function as the sword that conquers the rebellious powers (Rev 19:21. Waiting upon the Lord, trusting in Christ’s teaching (Rev 13:10) is the key to victory, and not any human tradition. A possible reframing of this notion of Christus Victor is what Joerg Reiger, in Christ & Empire: From Paul to Postcolonial Times, calls a Christus Victor from the Margins. Rather than a CV that is from above, which can give into triumphalism and nationalism, this view of Christus Victor “stands a chance to be more real and push toward resistance” against empire (page 259).

5. Diasporic Jewish Christianity: The New Testament authors understand Christian existence as one being in exile, foreign to the surrounding nations in which followers of the Way resided in. Paul places Christian citizenship in the realm of God (Phillipians 3:20). In the midst of living in the violent and oppressive “Pax” Romana, the NT writers wanted to emphasize that we are in the world, but not of it, and our actions should show likewise. As I mentioned in part 2, Black communities have faced histories of alienation and systems of death. Part of learning how to navigate being Christian and Black as a descendent of enslaved Africans as well as a U.S. citizen meant being an actual “resident alien.” Living in exile is not just some metaphor that Christians from the dominant culture can appropriate just because they have a few less votes in the U.S. Senate. The experience of exile is first and foremost a material reality, wrought with feelings of human betrayal and Godforsakeness. If God has deemed it appropriate to show God’s universal love for all through God’s own preferential option for the marginalized, then what should a Christian ethic of nonviolence look like. For part 4 of this series, that is where I will turn, looking at ideas of community, revolution, and responding to Just War theorists.

(1) John Howard Yoder. The War Of The Lamb: The Ethics of Nonviolence And Peacemaking. Editted by Glenn Stassen, Mark Thiessen Nation, and Matt Hamsher. Brazos Press, Grand Rapids Michigan, 2009, 168

(2) John Howard Yoder. The Politics of Jesus : Vicit Agnus Noster. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.Carlisle, U.K.: Eerdmans ; Paternoster Press, 1994, 150.

Recommendations:

James Cone. God Of The Oppressed. 1975.

John Howard Yoder. The Politics of Jesus: Vicit Agnus Noster. 1972.

h00die_R (Rod)

priestly abolitionist time travelling supervillian

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
Twitter

The Rise Of The Pinkie Pie State

Towards a Rescued Responsible Masculine Libertarian Utopia

pinkypie balloons

Today dear audience I wish to present before you the awful truth about our society. Through a lengthy nuanced, incoherent political screed, I plan to provide more pop culture references than actual facts to prove that America has gone downhill. America has exchanged pearls for pig slop, cultural and political freedom for limited personal freedom in the name of being squeaky clean and, ew, having fun! The current disaster I bring to you I have named the Pinkie Pie State. The Pinkie Pie State is completely unlike the campaign versus HillaryCare and the concept of the Nanny State of the in the 1990’s. The Pinkie Pie State must be resisted at all costs. We can’t have too many girls hosting parties. in addition to referring to movies you may or may not have seen, I am also going to name drop a few great philosophers from the Western Canon in order to prove that I have transcended today’s shameful habit of playing Identity Politics.

The new world order that we see today has more affinity to the democratic socialist dystopian reality of the world of the Hunger Games. Rather than Katniss Everdeen having the target on her back, it is Peeta and Gale who’s lives are at risk. Given the fact that Johanna Mason is one of the leaders of the “revolution,” she is the actual ideal player for the Pinkie Pie State. Johanna is oppressed by the Motherly bureacrats, and given the fact that President Snow symbolically represents the emasculated man currently running our multinational corporations and universities, the elevator scene highlights just how immoral Johanna is. One should not mistake the rise in the popularity of the Hunger Games trilogy based off of Greek mythology as a mere coincidence. Johanna Mason IS The Pinkie Pie State.

According to the ancient Stoics, the World had a soul on the inside of it. If there was a group of women who had too much fun, then the World’s soul would experience an imbalance. The World’s Soul needs to be saved, and what it suffers from is what I diagnose as The Pinkie Pie State. The Great Western Tradition was built on the backs of, YES, CALL ME POLITICALLY INCORRECT, White Men who believed in the virtue of getting others to do hard work for them, responsibility, and persuading others to take risks for them. As Poulos said yet so eloquently,

“But unlike Adolph Hitler, Andrew W.K. is an American, and one of the great blessings visited upon America is the naiveté about power found in its origins as a new country in a new world. To be sure, native Americans and African Americans have suffered grievously under that naiveté. But it has also spared America from the cataclysmic oscillations between reactionary re-enchantment and revolutionary disenchantment that ruined European civilization and plague it still. From the standpoint of Plato’s fable, America’s residual innocence about power has arrested democracy’s decay into tyranny.”

America’s innocence has prevented Her from becoming an oppressive nation-state. If indeed ignorance is bliss, then America has truly been blessed with a bountiful helping of happiness. Reverse Racism poses as the greatest threat to our national joy, wouldn’t you agree? Reverse Racism and racial violence became popular right around the time that Edward Norton’s American History X debuted in theaters. Whites receiving racial discrimination because of the Black thugs in power became the prevailing unjust philosophy of the day. Thus, American History X made way for the Pinkie Pie State to publish a record number of texts on Critical Race Theory. Bigotry and anger now reigns in the current Era of Twittervists Gone Wild. What we need is a return to Augustine, Plato, Tocqueville, and Hayek and banning the work of Thomas Paine and Frederick Douglass in public and private schools.

There’s absolutely no question that the nuanced difference between the Feminist socialism of Hillary Clinton and the Lean In feminism of the Pinkie Pie State is where women and effeminate men is whereby the women are making more money and therefore having too much hedonistic fun. We must look for a Third Way, a Third Way that will challenge the Pinkie Pie State, and rescue men from Misandrist policies. Protest if you will, but We ARE ALL GILMORE GIRLS NOW, AND ALL MEN ARE LUKE. Like at the end of the episode “Too Many Pinkie Pies,” only a nuanced Western, Responsible, risky rescued Christian Masculinity can prevent Lorelai Gilmores from cloning herself into more Rory Gilmores.

h00die_R (Rod)

priestly abolitionist time travelling supervillian

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
Twitter

Mainstreaming Radicalism

“Radicals are hopeless, they are all ugly, and are so ungrateful for everything given to them. — they are ultimately rooted in a sense that everything sucks”

I don’t get it. I really don’t get it.

I really just don’t understand how there’s an entire generation of Christians out there who feel like Mainline Christianity has let them down, that there’s this BIG CONSPIRACY OUT THERE: that the Bible shows us just how terrible everything is. EVERYTHING IS AWFUL! EVERYTHING IS NOT COOL WHEN YOU’RE NOT PART OF OUR TEAM!

It can be a startling revelation to learn that there are a relatively small group of people sitting on their couches, criticizing the civil religion that this great nation was founded on. Social Justice Warriors have absolutely no respect for their elders, which is completely ageist by the way!

We might still be reeling, okay, okay, just a tad bit embarassed that there are no Mainline Protestant members on the Supreme Court, and we have all of these elitist outsiders “claiming” that we live in a Post-Christian world, and that may be true. This is especially true when many Mainline Christian voices are exiting the public realm. How can there be a realm with no King? If the nation’s civil religion is removed, who will be there rule over the masses? Certainly not lazy hyper-critical Twittervists!

So who in their right minds would try to mainstream radicalism? Well, I’d like to give it a try.

If you can’t imagine anything good coming out of Mainline Christendom, this essay may not be for you.

Mainstream Churches are not about seeking other options, it is not a project for outsiders; this is for insiders.The point isn’t to challenge conservatives in power, but to emulatethem.

The temperament of radicals is defined by a nihilistic disposition. Radicals are filled with ingratitude, they are mean. Surveys have shown of the top 300 of Social Justice Warriors who use Digital media, 79% of them possess no sense of humor OR patriotism, and they certainly don’t care about being respectable! Radicals are hopeless, they are all ugly, and are so ungrateful for everything given to them. — they are ultimately rooted in a sense that everything sucks.

This isn’t a rescue project. This is not a call to turn back time to the good ole days where all of our civic leaders attended Episcopalien, Methodist and Baptist churches. If you are a radical, and you have no respect for yourself, then there’s isn’t a hedge of protection around you. The Mainline Church has always been a for-ism project; we are in favor of assimilating the world’s most hideous rejects into being civilized participants of our society. It’s not like ugliness will save the world, okay?

As my favorite director Tyler Perry once testified, the family that prays together at the dinner table, stays together. It’s only at the potluck dinners filled with casseroles and lemon meringue pies that The Church can teach others about unity and politeness. He who fills himself with two helpings of mashed potatoes learns what it is like to NOT bite at the hand who fed him. When brotherhood and niceness are scoffed at in favor of barbarism, we merely get assimilated into being worthless slackers. It might be the “radicals” in The Church who look reactionary. Sort of like Hitler.

h00die_R (Rod)

priestly abolitionist time travelling supervillian

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
Twitter

The Liberating LORD of Peace, part 2: Revelation #TheNewPacifism

Debunking The Myth that Christian Pacifists Are Allergic to the Old Testament

Ground Rules: Part 1 of The Liberating LORD of Peace.

There is a popular belief that continues to be universal, unchallengeable truth in Christian circles: Christian pacifists run and hide from the Hebrew Bible because of the Holy Wars and violence. Not only is this a fallacy in the worst, it is quite untrue of myself. In the first place, as Christians, Christian pacifists and advocates of non-violence have a love of the Christian canon; if they did not, they would cease to call themselves Christians. That is what separates Christan non-violent artists from secular as well as other religious pacifists.

For example, Lisa Sowle Cahill, in her Love Your Enemies, on more than one ocassion, takes the liberty of questioning the pacifist Christian’s loyalty to the Jewish Bible. For example, her comments on pacifist and early Christian theologian Tertullian:

“The nature of that faith and life are defined in relation to Scripture, the New Testament taking precedence over the Old” (1)

“The primacy of the teaching of Jesus in regard to killing is developed in the context of Terullian’s polemics against Judaism, and by means of a distinction between the ‘old’ and the ‘new’ divine laws.” (2)

This dis-ingenuity continues in her analysis of the Alexandrian Fathers, as she typically subsumes Origen and Clement in the same boat.

“While the Alexandrian School did not deny the historical meaning of most biblical texts, it subordinated them to a high meaning. It was this freedom over against the literal sense to which the Antiochene exegetes reacted so negatively. However, the ability to transcend the literal sense without rejecting it allows interpreters such as Origen to retain the Old Testament while refuting the Jewish Tradition, which retained the Mosaic Law, and gnostic Christians who rejected the Old Testament because of its ostensible incompatibility with the New.” (3)

I reject Lisa Sowle Cahill’s view of Church history and the church in Alexandria, but if one goes along with Cahill’s particular and all too familiar narrative, it goes something like this: The strength of Augustine’s Just War theory, so it goes, is that it incorporates the story of the Hebrews into the narrative of the early Christians and thereby avoids the racial and religious violence of supercessionist Christendom.

A non-violent AnaBlacktivist theology begins with the God of Peace (Judges 6:24). Now, I object to certain Christian theologians who would call upon “The Nonviolent God” without having their foundation being the Hebrew Bible, for to address God in this manner, without doing so, is to do linguistic violence upon God’s revelation, for upon revelation in the very notion of non-violence. We cannot address God as we please. Contrary to relativism or much that gets accepted as theology today, Christians are dependent upon revelation first.  As James Cone put in his A Black Theology of Liberation, “In the Bible, revelation is inseparable from history and faith. History is the arena in which God’s revelation takes place.” The Exodus is the beginning of revelation history, or God exposing Godself to humanity; in the choosing of enslaved Hebrews under the crushing oppression of Pharaoh, God communicated to humanity what type of God YHWH was: a Deity in solidarity with the poor.  Reading the First Commandment as a call to faithfulness to YHWH alone, the second commandment initiates a non-violent religious response to the world order by teaching the Jew and the Christian how to communicate with God, for we cannot have a relationship with God on our own terms, for that would be the beginning of violence.  True peace is sustained by fellowship with the Godhead, by the Divinity’s playbook, or what we call covenant. Stanley Hauerwas and William Willimon comment on the Second Commandment:

“To be able to call God’s name entails moral obligation. Because we had to be told God’s name, we cannot make God mean anything that we want. God must reveal who “I AM” is through loving actions toward Israel and by the resurrection of Christ.  Revelation is the way we name our discovery that God has discovered  us.  God has chosen to come close to us, to be intimate, to reveal the “name that is above every name” (Phillipians 2:9) in order that we might joyfully witness to the whole world that we have not been left to our own devices.” (4)

In addition to the revelation of the Creator as well as the Ten Commandments, the Hebrew Bible provides a plethora of resources that I will briefly outline, with the help of John Howard Yoder and Black theologies:

A. The Imago Dei: Revert back to Genesis 1, and then chapter 9; all of humanity is found to be in the image of God before & after the “Fall.”  To argue that the somehow that image within us is lost, I would have to disagree for the lack of sufficient evidence posed in Scripture. Murder is prohibited because all people are stamped with the divine image (Genesis 9:6), and that image no one can measure for only God has rights over human life as Creator. African American Christianities have throughout the years found new and exciting ways to uphold the doctrine of all of humanity’s sacred worth. In the mid-20th century, it was Martin Luther King Jr. who appropriated Boston Personalist philosophy to proclaim the infinite value of every human being. Today, one could argue that Womanist theologians are the bearers of this tradition.

B. The Notion of Blood as Sacred: John Howard Yoder suggests that at the most, the idea that blood is sacred was an idea prior to Israel being placed in exile. The shedding of blood is wrong; thus Leviticus is quite graphic in detail about the consequences for eating the blood in the meat from animals (check Leviticus 19:26 & 1st Samuel 14:33). Eating blood is strictly forbidden–thus uncritical Christian endorsement endorsements of the Twilight novels and movies comes into question (couldn’t help myself there). The blood is the life of the creature, and this includes humanity. (5) The power of the blood has historically been a mainstay in Black Churches, with spirituals such as “Were You There, When They Crucified My Lord” and in “secular” poetry and song such as Billie Holiday’s “Strange Fruit” which help us to remember the bloodshed during the times of lynching & Jim/Jane Crow.

C. A Close Reading of the Wars of the Holy One: Rather than label the crusades in the Hebrew Bible the Holy Wars, I prefer the Wars of the Holy One, particularly the Holy One of Israel.  It is a far more accurate label for biblical and theological reasons. One cannot generalize that the military efforts of modern society are compatible with the Ancient Israelites. In fact far from it! One does not see today that prophets are giving military instruction or doing espionage; what we see are professionals whose lives are geared toward the MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX. The wars of the Holy One have at their core, “Yahweh himself gives the victory. […] [Victory is a miracle.]”(6).  Complete dependence upon God, the YHWH of Armies (Chad’s translation for YHWH Sabatoah) is what gives humanity the victory and not dependence upon chariots and horses (Psalm 20:7).

A concrete example from the biblical text that I ran into actually one morning during my devotional reading of Our Daily Bread was 2nd Kings 6: 8-22.  The YHWH of Armies has surrounding hosts around his prophet Elisha (verse 17), and rather than slaying his enemies the Aramean army, Elisha asks YHWH to strike them blind, as the prophet leads them into another city.  The king of Israel, being the power-monger that the monarchs tended to be, desired to kill (ahem, re: take credit away from YHWH of Armies) his enemies. Instead, Elijah advises the Israelites to feed their enemies (v 22)  The victory of fellowship is  far superior to the victory of the sword. Indeed this is exactly the reason why YHWH of Armies restricts the Israelite kings from warmongering and institutionalizing human enslavement (which, of course, YHWH’s word goes unheeded, thus, the Exile) like in Deuteronomy 17:14-20. The imagery of YHWH Sabatoah/YHWH of Armies was expressed vividly in David Walker’s “Appeal To The Color Peoples of the World.”  The theological usefulness of the YHWH of Armies  for Walker was viewed as a resource of liberation to give hope for the downtrodden in their time of despair. 

D. Diasporic Judaism: Lastly, what I find most compelling  about Yoder’s reading of the Hebrew Bible is his understanding of the Jews mission within the Exile.  Along with the rejection of the Maccabees (as well as the Zealot model) as heretics since God, in the eyes of some, had not blessed their violent revolution, God’s command to God’s people to seek the peace of the city where they are sent (Jeremiah 29:5-7) for no longer is the divine activism of YHWH found in the centralized  location of  Judah, but throughout the world.  Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s restorationism in light of the prophets should be seen as a FAILURE theologically. (7)

In a similar vein, Black Christianities’  existence as part of the African Diaspora better enables these practicioners to witness to a New Pacifism, by way their history of marginalization. It is only by learning from those who have a history of subjugation that the privileged can learn what it means to live powerless; that is, a refusal to live by Western, violent notions of “being powerful.”

For part 3, I shall look at Jesus, the apostles Paul and Peter, as well as the Johannine literature to observe their continuity with the Jewish non-violent tradition.

1.Lisa Sowle Cahill. Love Your Enemies: Discipleship, Pacifism, and Just War Theory. Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 1994. Page 48

2. Ditto. Page 45

3. Ditto. Page 49

4. Stanley Hauerwas & William Willimon. The Truth About God: The Ten Commandments in the Christian Life. Nashville, Abindgon Press, 1999. Page 42

5. John Howard Yoder. The War Of The Lamb: The Ethics of Nonviolence And Peacemaking. Editted by Glenn Stassen, Mark Thiessen Nation, and Matt Hamsher. Brazos Press, Grand Rapids Michigan, 2009. Page 74

6. Ditto. Page  69

7. Ditto. Page  72-73

Recommendations:
Stanley Hauerwas and William Willimon. The Truth About God: The Ten Commandments In The Christian Life. 1999.

h00die_R (Rod)

priestly abolitionist time travelling supervillian

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
Twitter