If Jesus and the gospels give us a critical
hermeneutic, it is this: the Creator is not like all the other gods. The Creator
is beneficent and kind, merciful and compassionate, long-suffering and full
of joy. The Creator is neither vindictive nor retaliatory. This is the singular
theological presupposition that begins the differentiation of Jesus experience
and understanding of the Creator. This is the point of the cross. This is the
point of the resurrection. Life is just an endless stream of opportunities to
‘repent and believe.’
For the next five Sundays we will be occupied
with John 6. We wished we had time to comment concurrently on the Ephesians
text that runs alongside in the liturgy. Alas! Nevertheless, the Johannine text
is rich in both meaning and significance for the church today, not the least,
in its understanding of the relations that exist between the politics of God
and what Robert Kysar calls the ‘separated community.’ (Stumbling
in the Light).
Mimetic theory will help us as we discern
the pattern of thinking that is occurring in our text. We will note in the
following weeks several important elements in the politics of God. In the
Historical/Cultural section for today we will explore juxtaposing the theses
of C.H. Dodd and Peder Borgen regarding our text. The larger question of sacraments
will occupy us later, and we will find sacramental meaning enlarged by juxtaposing
the theory of Girard with creation-spirituality. Cullmann’s thesis regarding
the sacramentality of the Fourth Gospel (also endorsed by C.F.D. Moule) will
offer another window into reframing eucharistic meaning and therefore practice.
Breaking bread is far more than we think or imagine in the language games
that are played in theology. We will see that celebrating the eucharist is
the most destabilizing influence in ‘the world.’
John 6 evokes a theology of the cross through and through. From the crowd’s
reaction to the miracle to ‘eucharistic allusions’ of flesh and
blood, the entire narrative is suffused with the violence of the cross. It
is not too much to say that ‘the gospels are passion narratives with
extended introductions.’ The Passion runs through the entire life of
Jesus. The crowds would place Jesus in mimetic competition with Herod. Even
though Jesus refuses their desire by going alone into the wilderness (behavior
consonant with a prophet), he has now come to the attention of one who has
no problem slaying the prophets of Israel (as Mark observes). The common people
had cast Jesus into a role in which he wanted no part, namely, warrior-king.
We do ourselves a disservice when we
do not consciously ask this particular question: How seriously did Jesus take
his commitment to non-violence? If, as we have sought to show this Year B,
there is a direct relationship between Jesus experience of the Creator as
his ‘abba’, his teaching on non-retaliation and active non-resistance,
and his own actions and responses, then it can be appreciated that for Jesus,
doing the Creator’s will means that the Creator is non-retaliatory,
and hence, forgiving. This systematic theological conclusion cannot be avoided.
And isn’t this the gospel anyway?
Unlike the Markan text, the Johannine text
is very explicit concerning the political reality behind our narrative. However,
like Mark, John 6 shares a larger pattern of thought, a similar structure which
would seem to indicate that the juxtaposition of the stories in our lesson today
is in probability, historical (C.H. Dodd: Historical
Tradition in the Fourth Gospel). Having said this it is absolutely incredible
that after witnessing such a display of power, the disciples are basically still
clueless and the multitudes have got it all wrong. What should we say for ourselves
today?
John 6 has given rise to many theories.
Displacement theories argue that the chronology of John 5 and 6 should be
reversed and that John 6 originally came before John 5. Source theories argue
for several sources and a plurality of editors (e.g., Bultmann). As we have
been exploring the Fourth Gospel, we have seen the value of reading this document
through Jewish eyes. John 6 is no exception. One does not need to read this
chapter as though it was Platonically oriented. This does not mean that our
author was not clever enough to use language and terminology that resonated
both within and without the synagogue. He or she certainly was capable of
this, as we have also seen. Peder Borgen (Bread
From Heaven) in the early 1980’s articulated a thesis that has stood
the test of time and vitiates the need to speak of John 6 in the context of
alleged sources, editors or displacements. Borgen is able to demonstrate a
specific homiletic pattern that occurs in Philo, some Palestinian midrashim
and John 6. The similarity of structure and form are obviously apparent as
well as the use of biblical texts, commentary style and subject matter. We
are dealing here with a very Jewish thought process.
Now it might be objected that we are
going to argue that the discourse of John 6 comes from the historical Jesus
(sic). This is not the case. The author of the Fourth Gospel did not know
a historical Jesus, he or she only knew that Jesus had not been there for
three days and after that he was there again. Our tradition is from an eye-witness,
remember. Now, if Borgen is correct, then this means that our author was also
familiar with the way in which the story of the feeding in the wilderness
has a common tradition of commentary. This would indicate that our author
was not afraid to think through this momentous time in Jesus’ ministry,
the only demonstrable turning point in his ministry. And that which initiates
the connection is the manna/wisdom tradition. This entire narrative unit has,
as Dodd has shown, a remarkably similar structure to that found in Mark 6
and 8. Thus it is highly probable that while the discourse is more than likely
Johannine, the narrative sequence of events provides a viable context in which
to place both the Markan as well as Johannine understandings. And once again,
just as in Mark 6 so in John 6 there runs blood. The politics of mimesis have
been engaged, the (perceived) rivalry is on and there is only one outcome.
Neither fight nor flight are options. It’s a no-brainer, the Son of
Man is going to suffer. The masses have got it all wrong and the disciples
are barely cognizant. It’s the critical turning point in Jesus ministry.
And this turning point is a shift away
from the masses and to the disciples as a group. It will also channel Jesus
into the stream of the suffering servant, it is at this point in the ministry
that the disciples are told that ‘the Son of Man must suffer many things..’
So what occasioned this crisis, this
crucial turning point? Why was this sequence of events remembered? Of all
the events in Jesus’ ministry, why do we see confluence at this point?
Perhaps John 6 is more significant than that. Perhaps one could argue that
the entire Gospel is structured in a giant interlocking chiasmus and at the
center of that great chiasm stands John 6 (Peter F. Ellis). In short, this
Johannine community homily, reflects both the historical significance of these
events and sequences as well as the continued developing relationship that
this author has with one and the same Jesus only now Jesus known through the
Spirit. If such is the case, then it is proper to read this text on both of
the levels that J.L. Martyn spelled out for us, the historical and the contemporary
Johannine perspective. In fact, we would expect to find both woven together
throughout this Gospel like a fine fabric and we do. “Did Jesus say
this (John 6:25-70) or did the author make it up?” is a false question
for it separates the earthly Jesus from his risen Spirit-self.
Furthermore, as we shall see, the reading
gains when this text is read through the lens of the notion of agency found
in Jewish law, not through some amplified Platonic scheme. If our author does
anything brilliantly, he is able to completely deconstruct both Judaism and
Hellenism in one stroke and lay to rest the dualism of apocalyptic and covenantal
exclusivity as well as that dualism nurtured in Oriental and later Mediterranean
cultures generated by the mechanism of sacred violence. Girard has shown this
is the case for the ‘Logos,’ we believe that it is also the case
for much of the author’s ‘apparently limited vocabulary.’
No matter how you slice or dice the gospels they will always point you to
the cross, to the place of violence.
Historical, exegetical, hermeneutical,
christological and ‘sacramental’ understandings are woven into
a common pattern. Those who insist on separating the garment into this or
that patch or source or redaction must first of all falsify Borgen’s
thesis. If that cannot be done, then it is possible to see the author’s
connections in how he uses a theme and a tradition, and has more historical
credibility that putative authors, redactors and sources.
Either this page has not yet been completed, or we have not found any significant textual issues in the lectionary texts for this Sunday.
Introductory Articles
We will add articles as we are able,
or as users of the site request them, so if you have suggestions for additional
pieces, please write to us!
"Introduction
to Mimetic Theory"
"Mimesis"
"The
Scapegoat"
"The
Pillars of Culture"
"Jesus"
"The
Four Gospels"
A Brief Introduction
to Luke
What's New: (Hover your mouse over to pause cycling)
2 Sm 11:1-15 or * 2 Kgs 4:42-44
Ps 14 * Ps 145:10-18
Eph 3:14-21
Jn 6:1-21
(2 Samuel 11:1-15)
In the spring of the year, the time when kings go out to battle, David sent
Joab with his officers and all Israel with him; they ravaged the Ammonites,
and besieged Rabbah. But David remained at Jerusalem. It happened, late one
afternoon, when David rose from his couch and was walking about on the roof
of the king's house, that he saw from the roof a woman bathing; the woman
was very beautiful. David sent someone to inquire about the woman. It was
reported, "This is Bathsheba daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the
Hittite." So David sent messengers to get her, and she came to him, and
he lay with her. (Now she was purifying herself after her period.) Then she
returned to her house. The woman conceived; and she sent and told David, "I
am pregnant." So David sent word to Joab, "Send me Uriah the Hittite."
And Joab sent Uriah to David. When Uriah came to him, David asked how Joab
and the people fared, and how the war was going. Then David said to Uriah,
"Go down to your house, and wash your feet." Uriah went out of the
king's house, and there followed him a present from the king. But Uriah slept
at the entrance of the king's house with all the servants of his lord, and
did not go down to his house. When they told David, "Uriah did not go
down to his house," David said to Uriah, "You have just come from
a journey. Why did you not go down to your house?" Uriah said to David,
"The ark and Israel and Judah remain in booths; and my lord Joab and
the servants of my lord are camping in the open field; shall I then go to
my house, to eat and to drink, and to lie with my wife? As you live, and as
your soul lives, I will not do such a thing." Then David said to Uriah,
"Remain here today also, and tomorrow I will send you back." So
Uriah remained in Jerusalem that day. On the next day, David invited him to
eat and drink in his presence and made him drunk; and in the evening he went
out to lie on his couch with the servants of his lord, but he did not go down
to his house. In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab, and sent it by
the hand of Uriah. In the letter he wrote, "Set Uriah in the forefront
of the hardest fighting, and then draw back from him, so that he may be struck
down and die."
* (2 Kings 4:42-44)
A man came from Baal-shalishah, bringing food from the first fruits to the
man of God: twenty loaves of barley and fresh ears of grain in his sack. Elisha
said, "Give it to the people and let them eat." But his servant
said, "How can I set this before a hundred people?" So he repeated,
"Give it to the people and let them eat, for thus says the LORD, 'They
shall eat and have some left.'" He set it before them, they ate, and
had some left, according to the word of the LORD.
(Ephesians 3:14-21)
For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in
heaven and on earth takes its name. I pray that, according to the riches of
his glory, he may grant that you may be strengthened in your inner being with
power through his Spirit, and that Christ may dwell in your hearts through
faith, as you are being rooted and grounded in love. I pray that you may have
the power to comprehend, with all the saints, what is the breadth and length
and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge,
so that you may be filled with all the fullness of God. Now to him who by
the power at work within us is able to accomplish abundantly far more than
all we can ask or imagine, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus
to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.
(John 6:1-21)
After this Jesus went to the other side of the Sea of Galilee, also called
the Sea of Tiberias. A large crowd kept following him, because they saw the
signs that he was doing for the sick. Jesus went up the mountain and sat down
there with his disciples. Now the Passover, the festival of the Jews, was
near. When he looked up and saw a large crowd coming toward him, Jesus said
to Philip, "Where are we to buy bread for these people to eat?"
He said this to test him, for he himself knew what he was going to do. Philip
answered him, "Six months' wages would not buy enough bread for each
of them to get a little." One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's
brother, said to him, "There is a boy here who has five barley loaves
and two fish. But what are they among so many people?" Jesus said, "Make
the people sit down." Now there was a great deal of grass in the place;
so they sat down, about five thousand in all. Then Jesus took the loaves,
and when he had given thanks, he distributed them to those who were seated;
so also the fish, as much as they wanted. When they were satisfied, he told
his disciples, "Gather up the fragments left over, so that nothing may
be lost." So they gathered them up, and from the fragments of the five
barley loaves, left by those who had eaten, they filled twelve baskets. When
the people saw the sign that he had done, they began to say, "This is
indeed the prophet who is to come into the world." When Jesus realized
that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, he withdrew
again to the mountain by himself. When evening came, his disciples went down
to the sea, got into a boat, and started across the sea to Capernaum. It was
now dark, and Jesus had not yet come to them. The sea became rough because
a strong wind was blowing. When they had rowed about three or four miles,
they saw Jesus walking on the sea and coming near the boat, and they were
terrified. But he said to them, "It is I; do not be afraid." Then
they wanted to take him into the boat, and immediately the boat reached the
land toward which they were going.
Occasional Articles
As with the Introductory Articles, we
will add other articles as time permits or as our readers request. If you
have a suggestion for anything, please let us know.
Michael Hardin
Is the Apocalypse Inevitable?: Native American Prophecy and the Mimetic Theory presented to the Colloquium on Violence and Religion 2008
Michael's Essay for a Celebration Volume honoring Rene Girard
Michael's Response to Willard Swartley's Covenent of Peace at the November Colloquium and Violence Meeting
Does
Peace Make A Difference? - Michael's essay in response to Rick
Warren's P.E.A.C.E. plan (which somehow never mentions peace).
An Analysis of Rick Warren - Michael's response to "The Purpose Driven Life."
"The
God of Pat Robertson" - a response to Pat Robertson's words
to the people of Dover, PA.
"A
response to Charles Stanley's "A Nation at War"
"Must
God be violent? A Diagnosis and Prescription for Modern Christianity"
The
Scapegoat: Christologies in Conflict - A Study in Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Biblical
Testaments as a Marriage of Convenience: Rene Girard and Biblical Interpretation
Finding
Our Way Home: A Brief Note On The Authority and Interpretation of Scripture
"Does
The Passion of the Christ Preach the Gospel?"
A
sermon for the holiday devoted to Dr. Martin Luther King. (requires
Adobe Acrobat Reader.)
GRASPING
GOD: Philippians 2: 1-11 in the Light of Mimetic Theory
Rene Girard and the Recovery of Early Christian Perspectives (Brethren Life and Thought)
The Dynamics of Violence and the Imitation of Christ in Maximus Confessor (St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly)
"EcoSpirituality"
Or What Happens When You Sit Down With A French Literary Critic
Jeff Krantz
Mighty
One or Crucified Messiah? Competing Christologies and the Chiastic
Structure of Mark's Gospel
There's
No Such Thing as the Rapture - A sermon preached at the Church
of the Advent, Westbury (requires Acrobat Reader)
Holy
Scripture and the Consecration of Gene Robinson - a response
to the request of the Windsor Report for a Scriptural rationale. (requires
Adobe's Acrobat Reader)
Worship - The Redemption of Desire by Jeff Krantz
Myth
and Film - a piece written for the City of Angels Film Festival
The Stations of the Cross - Rewritten by Jeff Krantz
A Dramatic Presentation of the Stations of the Cross for Youth by Barb Fabijan-Waddell
Escaping
the Power of "My" - A NonViolent Approach to Stewardship
Preaching
Peace in Hollywood: The Theologies of Terminator, Lord of the Rings, and the
Matrix
V
for Vendetta - The Name Says It All A review of the movie.
Essays, Sermons and Liturgical Pieces by Friends of Preaching Peace
"Jesus and the Gibeonites: Reading the Bible from the Perspective of the Hidden Victim" by James Warren.
Mark Heim's "No More of This" - A hymn on Nonviolent Atonement
Kate Layzer's "No More of This" - A hymn on Nonviolent Atonement (and inspiration for Mark Heim's hymn!)
Alan Cork, "Transformation" in L'Arche: A Mimetic Account presented to the Colloquium on Violence and Religion 2008
"The Wisdom of God's Peace" a sermon by Jim Amstutz, co-pastor of Michael's church.
Girard's Christology - Per Bjornar Grande
Violence, Anarchy and Scripture: Jacques Ellul and Rene Girard - Matthew Patillo
Comparing
Plato's Understanding of Mimesis to Girard's - Per Bjorner Grande
C. Frank Terhune, an Easter Sermon: "God's Big But" (no kidding!)
Gerald Biesecker-Mast's paper from Theologia Pacis on Pacifist Gospel Epstimology.
An essay by the Rev. John Hill on Mimetic Theory and Catechesis
