I left a question at Stan's blog which I'm addressing here. I'm addressing my question AND addressing Stan's response.
Stan answered a question (well, no, he didn't) I left at his blog by saying this:
without
posting your question (MY QUESTION: where is the rubric by which you can know WHICH lines are metaphorical and which aren't?)
I will point out that I answered it in the post.
No, Stan didn't. Not at all. It's interesting that he thinks he did and it makes me wonder what he thinks my question was.
He "preached the gospel to the poor" and we still have the poor.
He
proclaimed "the release of the captives, the recovery of sight to the
blind, the freedom for the oppressed.
He declared, 'Today this Scripture
has been fulfilled in your hearing' (Luke 4:21).
But ... Jesus lived
and died and, with some exception, the poor were still there (Matt
26:11),
the captives were still captive,
the blind were still blind,
and
the oppressed remained oppressed."
If you say He meant it literally (as
you do), He lied. It still is not fulfilled in that sense.
Or
... He meant it spiritually.
You complain that the gospel that Paul
gives (which he calls "the gospel of Christ") isn't "good news" for
everybody,
No, I don't. I complain that modern conservative
religionists' IDEAS of what Paul preached isn't good news. And it's
clearly not. It's not even bad news. It's a trainwreck of a atrocious
horror story where most of humanity will be tortured for an eternity for
the "crime" of being imperfect humans. Only a few (those "god"
"selects") will be saved.
But for me, I do not set up Paul
against Jesus. I interpret Paul's words, THROUGH Jesus' words and
teachings. Now, an argument CAN be made that Paul taught a "different"
Gospel than Jesus (I think STAN has even suggested this! That Jesus
never got around to preaching the actual "good news" of most of humanity
being eternally tortured!), but I don't think so.
Good news for
the minority who were spared the everlasting torture given to their
loved ones is STILL not good news, even for the few who were "spared."
but your version of a "social gospel" isn't either
since all
those categories of people are still suffering and it's not good news to anyone who isn't suffering.
Or ... the gospel isn't merely the physical reality of suffering, but an actual remedy for spiritual suffering available to all.
This
is the problem with a limited imagination and binary/ONLY TWO POSSIBLE
WAYS approach to studying texts and philosophy. WHO SAYS, we're only
limited to those two options? Jesus never said, "I came to preach good
news to the poor and marginalized AND THE ONLY WAY I CAN DO SO IS BY
"FIXING" ALL THE POOR AND MARGINALIZED. GIVING MONEY TO THE POOR,
HEALING ALL THE SICK, ETC!!!" That isn't what Jesus said, but Stan is
trying to make that case. It's not what Jesus said and it's not what I'm
saying.
Jesus said he'd come to preach good news to the poor and marginalized.
THEN, Jesus began going out visiting with, welcoming, including, helping, associating with, healing the poor and marginalized.
THEN,
John the Baptist asked Jesus, How do I know you're the One? And Jesus
responded by saying, "Look, I'm going around, hanging out with the poor
and marginalized, preaching good news TO THEM and healing them."
THEN,
Jesus taught his disciples to do the same thing. Hang out with the poor
and marginalized, heal them, teach them the good news that was FOR
them.
etc.
Now, it can be very difficult for the privileged
and wealthy to understand how "hanging out with, welcoming, accepting,
being friends with those dirty outsiders and their sick illnesses and
gross selves" is good news to the poor and marginalized. BUT, it is,
even if they don't understand it. For the poor and marginalized, being
welcomed, accepted, loved and included as part of a greater beloved
community, that IS INCREDIBLE good news. Literal good news.
And
for most of humanity, we recognize that magical, unlikely healings of
normal serious illnesses and oppressions and poverty just don't
generally happen. And it's not even the most important thing. Consider: I
work daily with people with disabilities (and less regularly, with the
impoverished and immigrants) and for them, their most serious disability
(at least, many would say this) is NOT that they can't use their legs
or eyes. It's being excluded, marginalized, impoverished, kept OUT.
That is an imposed disability that causes real harm and damage in ways that their physical disabilities just don't cause.
The
miracle of Jesus' good news is not magical healings for everyone - that
just doesn't happen in an imperfect world and no one - not even
conservative religionists - is making that claim. And, after all, we're
ALL at best only temporarily or partially healthy, with a perfect body,
not needing glasses or canes or hearing aids or a therapist. Physical
disabilities can be a pain, but we all got our things, sooner or later.
NO, the greatest disabling condition is not being included, not being
welcomed, or, at best, being included grudgingly, "because Mom told us
to invite you to our birthday party..."
The good news that Jesus
brought to the poor and marginalized was the good news of love, of
welcome and inclusion and acceptance. THIS, we can see clearly in who
Jesus spent his time with, loving, laughing with, partying with,
embracing.
THAT is deeply good news. Here, now. There, then.
Jesus didn't promise magical healings and banks full of money. Jesus promised love, acceptance, welcome... a beloved community.
Good
news indeed. AND, it's good news because it's actionable. It CAN and
DOES happen. We see it all the time, we who are of the Beloved
Community. God's realm come, God's will be done, HERE, on earth, as it
is in heaven.
THERE is the good news! And what amazing,
empowering, life-altering good news. It doesn't require that we repent
in just the right way or understand some human religious traditions and
theories just the right way. It doesn't require a human or animal
sacrifice (which was always just a metaphor, right?) It just requires an
embrace of grace and love and welcome. And not even a perfectly lived
out embrace of grace. But an acceptance of that Way.
Further, this good news was not a one off. It was designed to be systemic.
It was a new and better Way. And that was the Way of those who followed
Jesus, of the church. We see this right away in the book of Acts and
the "birth" of the church - followers of this Way of Good news of love
and inclusion for the poor and marginalized. The more fully we follow in
Jesus' steps - as a group, deliberately, lovingly, joyfully,
systematically, the MORE that it truly will be good news for ALL the
poor and marginalized... or at least, it's good news for the poor and
marginalized to the degree it's embraced. One person - even one son of
God in human form - can only befriend, welcome and love so many people.
BUT, a whole new way? A systemic embrace of love and grace? That's where
we can do, as Jesus said, " Very
truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been
doing, and they will do even greater things than these!"
To
be clear, the passage there in John does not spell that out in so many
words, but it's just an obvious truth. Many can do more than one. Many
doing good and kind things can do more than one doing good and kind
things.
As to Stan's complaint that "and it's not good news to anyone who isn't suffering." again,
Stan is missing my point and, I think, the point of Jesus. Jesus quite
literally WELCOMED the rich man to join them. "Sell your stuff, give it
to the poor and follow me..." Jesus was not - I am not - excluding
anyone. But the starting point is that it's good news for the poor and
marginalized. THEY are the ones this realm is specifically for, as Jesus
literally said. Others are invited to join in, but it's a
joining with, allying with, being friends with the poor that they're
joining. And in some senses, one needs to leave that wealth behind, at
the very least, leave behind the love of money, which is the root of all
kinds of evil.
And why is that? Well, we can see in the real
world that the wealthy have things go their way, all the time. It's one
of the trappings of wealth... you become privileged and it's hard not to
live into that privilege. I think all of us who are at least middle
class in this hyper-wealthy nation can recognize that to some degree.
And so, without it being a Beloved Community specifically for the poor
and marginalized, the wealthy and powerful inevitably have things bend
their way. But we are arguing for a better moral arc of the universe,
one that bends towards justice.
And the
question I asked that led me down that road? What is your Rubric, Stan,
where you can perfectly understand which lines are metaphorical and
which are literal? There was no answer to that question. And even if he
thinks, "it's in the text... we can understand which lines are literal
and which figurative by reading the texts..." Well, Stan and I (et al)
ARE reading the texts and we're reaching opposite conclusions,
sometimes. So, where is the rubric to decide that for us?
If one
lives in a gospel of bad news for vastly most people, where
understanding and accepting the RIGHT way and repenting the RIGHT way
which requires a pretty perfect understanding of the texts in question,
well, they simply have no rubric to ever fully decide the right
orthodoxy.
The rest of us live in a welcoming beloved community of grace, where a rubric is not necessary.