The Upside Down Kingdom
In Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, he characterizes his teaching as so implausible that he came to the community "in weakness and in fear and in my trembling" (2:3-4) because he proclaimed "Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles" (1:23).
He contrasts human wisdom with God's power that was secret and hidden. He argues that none of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory" (2:8). God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, things that are not, to reduce to nothing things that are, so that no one might boast in the presence of God." (1:27-30).
Paul describes God's habit, to which the Old Testament witnesses, of holding up that which is weak and dispossessed of power by worldly authorities. Those who enter his kingdom, "the hungry and thirsty," "the poorly clothed," the beaten and homeless," the reviled, persecuted and slandered," "the rubbish of the world, the dregs of all things" (4:11-13) are "rich" and "have become kings" (4:8).
This is the upside down kingdom in which those who have power and privilege serve those who do not, thus, ensuring that the abundance of God's kingdom is shared by all.
But God's kingdom is not simply upside down because the direction of service is turned on its head. Many traditional values are subverted; conventional wisdom is flauted; those mechanisms that prevent peace are precisely dismantled. This is a topsy turvy kingdom that prevents the structure from righting itself.
What are the mechanisms of violence, conflict, and injustice in our world?
B.The demand for justice itself leads to conflict and violence.
The stories of Zimbabwe and South Africa and their struggles to establish equity and a just society provide contrasting pictures to help us discuss this topic. For those stories, visit the following sites:
Justice in the realm of the criminal court means assigning
guilt.
Justice in the realm of the civil court means assigning responsibility.
If we look at the Amadou Diallo case, we can see how justice does
not serve peace.
In the human justice system, guilt must be followed by revenge.
In the Bible, acts of righteousness and justice are those done on behalf of the poor and less fortunate. Jer 7:5-6; 22:3-4; Isa 32:1; Zech 7:9-10
We demand fairness when we demand justice, but the biblical notion of justice does not prescribe an even balance:
Look at Matthew's Fifth (on Retaliation) and Sixth (on love of enemies) Antitheses.
Moreover, in Jesus' vision of the Kingdom, the task of assigning guilt and responsibility is not longer directed toward others but is a reflexive activity.
"Do not judge, so that you may not be judged. For with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck in your neighbor's eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye? Or how can you say to your neighbor, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' while the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor's eye." (Matthew 7:1-5)
See Vengeance
C. Lebensraum
[W]ithout consideration of "traditions" and prejudices, it [Germany] must find the courage to gather our people and their strength for an advance along the road that will lead this people from its present restricted living space to new land and soil, and hence also free it from the danger of vanishing from the earth or of serving others as a slave nation.
--- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf 1
This concept leads to colonial expansion, laws restricting immigration, and territorial expansion.
For more on the concept see the article on Lebensraum in The History Net.
Manifest Destiny: "The expansive future is our arena and
for our history. We are entering on its untrodden space with the
truths of God in our minds, beneficent objects in our hearts,
and with a
clear conscience unsullied by the past. We are the nation of human
progress, and who will,
what can, set limits to our onward march?" (John L. O'Sullivan,
1845)
Sam W. Haynes, University of Texas at Arlington Manifest Destiny
Countermeasures:
D. The Grasshopper is right and the Ants are wrong:
We'll always have a hedge against uncertainty in the future, in our military forces and in the nuclear weapons that the United States will continue to retain. It is a hedge against the future, because there are other nations that possess nuclear weapons or might come to possess nuclear weapons. Secretary of State Colin Powell, May 28, 2002, Practica di Mare Air Force Base Rome, Italy
Matt 6:19-21 treasure in heaven
Matt 6:25-34 Don't worry, be happy.
The limits of charity are unbounded. Matthew 18:18-22 the
Rich Young Man
14:12-14 when you want to give a big dinner don't invite those
who can reciprocate.
E. Fear of death
"I do not believe in death without resurrection. If they kill me, I will be resurrected in the Salvadorian People." Oscar Romero March 1980 (Romero died on March 24, 1980)
"Finally we saw that we were achieving our objectives. The movement in South Africa was becoming radicalized. People in South Africa had lost their fear of the police. They had lost their fear of death. When the fear of death is gone, the repressive regime has lost its clout." Reverend Ken Carstens
Ken Carstens is a South African Methodist Minister who helped
prepare the case against South Africa in the World Court in 1966.
This along with an earlier publication "Torture and
Mind-Breaking in South Africa," published in the Journal
of Christianity and Crisis, contributed to the anti-aparteid
movement in the U.S. and Europe which led to sanctions against
South Africa and the eventual dismantling of aparteid.
I am a pacifist because I think nonviolence is the necessary condition for a politics not based on death. A politics that is not determined by the fear of death means no strong distinction can be drawn between politics and military force.
At the heart of the American desire to wage endless war is the American fear of death. The American love of high-tech medicine is but the other side of the war against terrorism. Americans are determined to be safe, to be able to get out of this life alive. On September 11, Americans were confronted with their worst fear -- a people ready to die as an expression of their profound moral commitments. Some speculate such people have chosen death because they were desperate
or, at least, they were so desperate that death was preferable to life. Yet their willingness to die stands in stark contrast to a politics that asks of its members in response to September 11 to shop.Christians are not called to be heroes or shoppers. We are called to be holy. We do not think holiness is an individual achievement, but rather a set of practices to sustain a people who refuse to have their lives determined by the fear and denial of death. We believe by so living we offer our non-Christian brothers and sisters an alternative to all politics based on the denial of death. Christians are acutely aware that we seldom are faithful to the gift God has given us, but we hope the confession of our sins is a sign of hope in a world without hope. This means pacifists do have a response to September 11, 2001. Our response is to continue living in a manner that witnesses to our belief that the world was not changed on September 11, 2001. The world was changed during the celebration of Passover in A.D. 33. Stanley Hauerwas "September 11, 2001: A Pacifist Response" Religion and Ethics. For more quotations go to Newsweekly WNET PBS New York
Overcoming the Fear of Death : Whether they admit it or not, Americans, who are usually immersed in a death denying culture, are now in a deep reflection on the meaning of life and death."What if I had been there or was on that plane or had been exposed to anthrax, etc" We are being confronted with the great truth that all forms must pass away, including our own. So the question arises, "who dies and who goes on to other dimensions?" Many of those who called their loved ones before they died said they would see them again a growing recognition that there is a life beyond death. When we, as humanity, fully understand that our souls are immortal and continue through many lifetimes, it will do much to liberate us from our enslavement to materialism, and from our greatest fear, the fear of death. Also, the acute awareness that we could be called from this plane of existence to another one at any time can stimulate us to focus on what is truly essential.
INVOKING THE SOUL OF AMERICA:
THE SPIRITUAL MEANING OF THE 9-11 CRISIS
Gordon Davidson and Corinne McLaughlin, 2001
Matt 10: 28-31 (resurrection)
Matt 16:25-26 For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit them if they gain the whole world but forfeit their life?"
John 11:25,26 He who believes in Me will live, even though
he dies; and whoever lives and believes
in Me will never die.
Micah 4:3-5 "they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nations shall not life up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more; but they shall all sit under their own vines and under their own fig trees, and no one shall make them afraid "
For the record: David Hume argues that fear of death is proof that there is no immortality of the soul. The essence of his argument is syllogistic: fear of death is a natural instinct, if life after death were natural, we would not fear death.
F. Hatred and Intolerance: See Love of Enemies
Matthew 5:43 Love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you.
Be perfect as God is perfect the rain falls on the wicked
and righteous alike so should your concern and care.
G. The Principle Responsibility of the King is to protect the nations' interests and its social institutions that provide stability, continuity and the survival of the state.
PBS News Hour Debate on the Bush First Strike Policy
The following discussing addresses the question: Did Jesus Accept the Fact of War?
Is there a tension between being a Christian and being a soldier?
Those who answer yes to the first question and no to the second
usually appeal to the following scriptural evidence:
Parables of warring Kings: Luke 14:31-32; Luke 19:27; Matt
22:7
The Parable of the Vineyard owner Mark 12:9 par.
The apocalyptic battle: Mark 13:7-8 There will be "wars and
rumors of wars... Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom
against kingdom."
Jesus payment of taxes to Rome (Mark 12:13-17 par). The taxes
are used to support the Roman army and military campaigns.
Jesus is at the center of conflict.
Some of this can be refuted by appealing to John 18:36: If my kingdom were from this world, my followers would be fighting.
But then there is Matt 10:34 (par.) "Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword."
What do we do with this? Do we say, Jesus is speaking metaphorically here. Does he simply mean that his teaching will lead to disagreements that lead to division within families. Some will choose to follow Jesus and become Christians and some will remain faithful to their Judaism.
What if we suppose that Jesus is drawing from the divine warrior king narrative? What would it mean then? Let us return to the hallows of the king.
In a paper, entitled "The Sword, the Stone and the Holy Grail" I present such an argument.
The sword of the messianic king according to tradition will
bring judgment upon the nations. In a similar fashion, God's divine
cup (a positive image in Psalm 23), becomes a means of punishing
the nations (Jeremiah 25;15-27; cf, Deut 32:32-35).
When Jesus laments, "My father, if it is possible, let this
cup pass from me; yet not what I want but what you want."
Matt 26:39 ... "My Father, if this cannot pass unless I drink
it, your will be done," (Matt 26:42), he is not expecting
to make the nations drink the cup, he is expecting to drink it
himself. His death becomes the means of reconciling the world
to God, the means of bringing peace.
Similarly, the disciples are also to drink from the cup:
"Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, 'Drink from it all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.'" Matt 26:27-28
It is the disciples who suffer the sword's blows. They are cut off from their families, a metaphor and a real death.
Jesus seems to take his sword to the family in a number of texts: Mark 3:31-35 (who are my mother and my brothers) and Luke 11:27-28 (Blessed is the womb that bore you.)
Here is another institution in which we place great value as a stabilizing force or a source of continuity in our society, but it is a force that can be at odds with shalom.
How so?
J. Dominic Crossan, "A Kingdom of Nuisances and Nobodies" in Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, (San Francisco: Harper, 1989) p. 60 argues that "the attack is upon the Mediterranean family's axis of power, which set father an d mother over son, daughter, and daughter-in-law. The family is society in miniature, the place where we first and most deeply learn how to love and be loved, hate and be hated, help and be helped, abuse and be abused. It is not just a center of domestic serenity; since it involves power, it invites the abuse of power, and it is at that precise point that Jesus attacks it. His ideal group is, contrary to Mediterranean and indeed most human familial reality, an open one equally accessible to all under God."
To some extent, Jesus dismantling of the patriarchal family and reconstitution of family as the eschatological family presents us with a paradox. On the one hand, he affirms that the family is the constitutive social institution of God's kingdom. On the other hand, the biological family with its hereditary rights and its heirarchical structure that facilitates the transference of property without conflict seem to be rejected.
Crossan's work drew my attention to another characteristic of the Kingdom that is upside down related to our discussion of Rene Girard's work.
In John 11:49-50 Caiaphas utters the ironic truth, "You know nothing at all! You do not understand that it is better for you to have one man die for the people than to have the whole nation destroyed."
A sort of utilitarian ethic guides most societies insofar as we are prepared to sacrifice the individual's welfare for the good of the community. How else could we justify conscripting young men to fight and die for their countries? How else can we justify not providing universal health coverage?
Crossan sets the story of Jesus receiving little children (Mark 10:13-16 par.) in this context and cites an ancient papyrus letter from Oxyrhynchus (west bank of Nile, 120 miles south of Cairo) dated June 18, 1 b.c.e.:
Hilarion to his sister Alis [his wife] many greetings, likewise to Berous [his mother-in-law?] and to Apollonarion [their first and male child]. Know that we are even yet in Alexandria. Do not worry if they all come back [except me] and I remain in Alexandria. I urge and entreat you, be concerned about the child [Apollonarion] and if I should receive my wages soon, I will send them up to you. If by chance you bear a son, if it is a boy, let it be, if it is a girl, cast it out [to die]. You have said to Aphrodisias, "Do not forget me." How can I forget you? Therefore I urge you not to worry. 29 [year] of Caesar [Augustus], Payne [month 23 [day]. (Crossan, 63)
Crossan points to a number of ways that the New Testament values an infant (54):
Matthew 18:1-4 as having appropriate humility
Gospel of Thomas 22 as sexual asceticism
John 3:1-10 as having received baptism [a sacramental interpretation]
The attitude that some human life is disposable seems to be negated by Jesus habits of table fellowship. The wedding banquet is a key element of the extended metaphor of the kingdom. Luke 14:21b-23 and Matthew 22:9-10 present us with two complementary pictures of who is invited or included.
Perhaps we could also draw Jesus' treatment of the adulterous woman in John 8 into this discussion. Use of the death penalty suggests that the life of the convicted is not valued by the community, that the death of the convicted will preserve the community. While one might argue that Jesus did not think death was a suitable punishment for adultery, I would not hesitate to say that Jesus did not think death was a suitable punishment full-stop.
I also include a series of biblical texts about Eunuchs in this discussion. After Jesus' discussion with the Pharisees about divorce in which Jesus makes clear that he thinks that men can also be guilty of adultery against their wives, his disciples respond, "If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry." (Matt 19:10). They seem to be arguing that if there is no male privilege what is the point of marriage. Jesus responds with an enigmatic statement about Eunuchs: "Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can." I do not think that Jesus is recommending self-castration. It seems to me that he is making the point that male privilege, property and procreation have nothing to do with the kingdom.
In most exegetical discussion of Acts 8:27, emphasis is placed upon the idea that Ethiopian is the first Gentile convert. I suspect that the fact that he is a eunuch is equally, if not more, important. This story fulfills the prophetic vision of Isaiah 56:3-8: Do not let the foreigner joined to the Lord say, "The Lord will surely separate me from his people"' and do not let the eunuch say, "I am just a dry tree." I suspect that the story in Acts was alludes to Jeremiah 38:7-13 in which Ebed-melech (servant of the king) an Ethiopian eunuch in the king's household petitions to the king on Jeremiah's behalf and rescues him from the cistern in which he has been tossed. The story relates how the Ebed-melech collects old rags and worn clothes from the king's wardrobe storehouse for Jeremiah to put between the ropes and his armpits as he is being pulled from the cistern. Daniel also receives favor and compassion from a palace eunuch (Daniel 1:9).
Crossan entitles the chapter in which he discusses purity codes "In the Beginning is the Body." Under the rubric of the body as a microcosm of society he explores Jesus treatment of those who suffer the violence of social exclusion because of impurity. Just last year (1999), the last Leper colony in the United States was closed. NPR broadcast a series of interviews with people who had called it home. People who were separated from their parents by force. Parents with leprosy who had to hand over their children to be raised by others.
Jesus' healing of lepers, of the woman who was a perpetual menstruant, his conversation with the Samaritan woman who was considered to be a perpetual menstruant by the Jews, according to Crossan, are as much changes in the social world as in the physical world (82). In response to the pragmatic question of whether Jesus meant for us to actually do anything in response to his teaching, Crossan concludes: "We ourselves can already make the physical world totally uninhabitable, the question is whether we can make the social world humanly habitable" (82).