July 12, 2009 Proper 15
It is generally agreed that the sequence of events as well as the actual setting of the stories in the Gospels is largely the creation of the writers. The "and King Herod heard of him" is likely a good example of this practice - there seems little doubt that Herod Antipas did indeed hear of Jesus but the stories which follow are difficult to authenticate with the episode of the circumstances of John the Baptist's death being most probably an adaptation of an Hellenic-Jewish tale. (1)
Nonetheless what is presented here reveals that the question - Who was Jesus? - was driving the speculation which created the stories which follow. Of course, these are clothed in the cultural/religious mythology of the time. There was the view that Jesus was a prophet after the likes of Elijah who according to tradition was to return as a sign of the beginning of the messianic era. There was a popular belief that a person whose death was of a violent nature could return to haunt his enemies. Mark saw John's death as plying on Herod's conscience and suggests his terror as proof that he was awed by the possibility of such mighty spirits returning to reek their havoc on him by allying themselves with Jesus.
We cannot leave this account as if the events of which it takes notice are fully explored with these references to the mythology of the period - important as this world view may be for our understanding of the time. From mention elsewhere of the Baptist in both the canonical and extra-canonical gospels (notably Thomas) we know that there were significant disagreement between those who were influenced by John's preaching and those who became "Companions of Jesus" to use Crossan's phrase. Most importantly, they became thoroughly entangled in the theology that developed in the early church. These differences are expressed in the different emphasis which is placed upon the nature of apocalyptic as expressed in the somewhat ambiguous phrase - the kingdom of God is at hand.
John was preaching a message of impending doom (The Kingdom of God is at Hand) - the images of which have produced vivid depictions of the end and the destruction of the earth with the only suitable response being repentance .The emphasis is very individual - you must acknowledge your failings and be baptized as a sign that you were cleansed and could look forward to the judgment which was associated with the appearance of the messiah. The negation is aimed particularly at the impossibility of this world as the host for the kingdom of God. In the apocalyptic setting, membership is individual and the personal assurance which it produces allows for resolving the end-game of this world and its dis-harmonies of life into an eternal union with God. Personal repentance solves the apparent dichotomy between the evil and the pious that makes this world such a hellish and unfair venue. Because all earthly differences will soon be erased - there is little emphasis upon present status, whatever advantages exist are only temporary against the eternal time of the kingdom of God and its impending arrival.
In terms of future developments, what is central is its justification for endless repetition of confession and repentance. Great significance is given to the naming of sin - allowing for an educational emphasis which trains followers to be conscious of that which separates them from the eternal kingdom. It is always individual matter with the devil held in a kind of reserve to account for those situations which seem to overextend individual culpability. From this view there has grown up our tradition of castigating the individual whenever a particularly heinous set of events takes place. We give Bernard Mahdof 150 years but those responsible for creating a system of greed and deception which makes his billions look trivial get a bail-out.
Contrast this with Jesus' quite different interest in the general outcasts of society, often marginalized by their sinful behavior, impurity or even occupation. They were the destitute and the dispossessed - because in his day they were those who were the victims of rural commercialization. (In Lower Galilee the eviction of small farmers from property bought up by the equivalent of factory farms which became incredibly profitable in the Roman occupation.) Of course, the plight of these groups revealed something about sin that was often ignored by those who saw only sinners - namely its societal nature which adds an element which is often ignored by apocalyptic eschatology. (Except, of course in their general condemnation of this world as very evil.) The possibility that the Kingdom of God has as its primary goal the confrontation with the structural quality of evil suggests our attention should be with this world not the next. (If you will, this is another way of talking about original sin and being able to leave out the sex part.) Now if you are primarily interested in social structure and particularly the way in which it renders individual effort, even the will to do good totally helpless - then you may wish to look, in addition to individual persons, to those groups who for their time make manifest the effects of structural evil - hence Jesus' concentration in his time upon peasants, homeless artisans, tax collectors and prostitutes.
For both traditions of course there is an end in sight (this is the meaning of apocalyptic). As the passage of time turned into centuries it became a real factor in trying to understand what was ahead - these two traditions became intermingled and remain so to the present day. For those in power it is quite convenient to ignore the structural evil which they perpetuate - it's easier to fall back on the old original sin and make sex the enemy. However, as we well know, sex is rapidly losing its ability to drive our theology in the face of more important challenges which do indeed put forward a very real possibility of the end.
Muichael Sandel's recent Reith Lectures on the BBC have provoked a sober comment from Madeleine Bunting in a recent Guardian Weekly. In them he calls for a remoralization of politics - we must correct a generation of abdication to the market of all measures of value. He declares most political questions are at their core moral or spiritual - they are about our vision of the common good.
She is skeptical of Sandel's belief that religion and its value systems can be the basis for the renewal which is so desperately needed. Bunting argues religion is for the most part outmoded because it can no longer provide a collective story of transformation that we can believe in. She then concludes: Every other modern narrative - communism, socialism even such destructive narratives as neoliberalism and fascism - did aim to a version of the kingdom of God, a better world that could nurture a better human being. They were all narratives of redemption and salvation. All that we have now is apocalypse and it is paralyzing. How then can we build hope?
I would suggest that what we in the community of Christ need to do is once again construct a an apocalyptic vision . It must speak of this world - the end may be only a century away unless we can stop the destruction of our planet. As in the past only our current victims have the power and the hope to create a future. Only they know can name the evil one. Somehow we must be their voice.
