If
Jesus were to walk down the street where we live, would we understand our own
blindness well enough to cry out, “Son of David! Have mercy on me!”
In Gil Bailie’s wonderful book, “Violence Unveiled,” he reminds
his readers many times that what we see still remains partial, we will surely
appear blind to the generations that come after us. The only thing that saves
us from “scapegoating” those who came before us is constant repentance
for our own blindness.
Jesus asks us, “What do you want me to do for you?” What will
our answer be?
There is hardly an analogy for the need
to see.
Recognizing our need to see is the doorway
to our in-sight.
Seeing is also an important metaphor
within the world of myth. "Myth," as we understand it in mimetic
theory, operates effectively only when it operates invisibly. The desire to
see in dear Bartimaeus mimics our own desire to be freed from the cultural
blinders that have held us captive "from the foundation of the world."
Christ frees us to follow him by exposing the mechanisms of victimage that
once held us, and by exposing them, he takes away their power. It is interesting
that those around Baritmaeus seek to silence him as he begs to be freed. This
is surely our experience as well, as we grow in our understanding of the principalities
and powers. Those around us prefer to keep us in our crippled state, because
if they witness our being freed, their own secret awareness that there is
something imprisoning them becomes less bearable, knowing that it isn't inescapable.
************************************
All through our narrative this Year
B we have observed Jesus’ conflict with authorities, his healings and
exorcisms and the incomprehension of the disciples. We have seen that when
reading either Mark or the Fourth Gospel one can read it from a theological
perspective and from an anthropological perspective at the same time when
you begin with a theology of the cross, as the canonical Gospels do. We have
sought to produce a plethora of evidence that a mimetic theoretical interpretation
of the Scriptures both illumines and is illumined by biblical and theological
scholarship.
We have connected, over and over again,
this theology of the cross to the trinitarian history of God. We have followed
Barth, Jungel and Moltmann in this regard. Furthermore we have concluded that
the reading of the Scriptures as done by those who engage mimetic theory illumines
our anthropology, particularly when it comes to observing desire, mimesis
and their negative effects. We have tried to make the case for positive mimesis
in the life of Jesus. His desire for God, and God alone, is the true desire
that each of us may desire by desiring what he desired, namely his papa’s
will. This is the only non-rivalrous desire that exists.
We hope we have made the case that one
can utilize the categories of the Nicene Creed in terms of mimetic theory
and the end result is an emphasis on what the Peace Church refers to as ‘discipleship.’
There is something very concrete going on here. There is a positive mimetic
Christology in the Gospels.
While there are still four weeks to go
in Pentecost, in a sense this will be conclusion of our time in Mark together.
Jeff and Michael would like to thank you for joining us in our explorations.
We believe that there is a real positive direction Christian theology could
take, if it was willing to go the way of the cross. (Unfortunately, anything
short of that is a theology of glory.)
PreachingPeace.org has grown in its first
ten months to more than a thousand visitors a week. We enjoy hearing from
you so please e-mail us and let us know who you are. We also seek to continually
improve our site with added features every few months. (This stuff is a lot
of work). While we do not solicit contributions, we greatly appreciate your
feedback. So write us and say hi!
Now, like Bartimaeus, Jesus asks the
question of you: ‘What do you want me to do for you?” Do you…desire
to see?
OK. First here’s what not to do with
a text if you are seeking to engage a non-sacrificial reading. William Lane(Commentary
on the Gospel of Mark), says about blind Bartimaeus that “ it is difficult
to be certain of the significance of the component parts in his appeal for help.”
Lane cannot figure out what ‘Son of David’ and ‘Have mercy
on me’ have to do with one another. We think it is simple. The one who‘sees’
is the one who recognized that the Son of David was all about mercy. The one
who sees is the one who recognizes that the promised '‘messiah’
(as though there was a single view of ‘messiah’ in Judaism) is non-retaliatory
and merciful. Surely it must have been strange for folks to hear so many wonderful
things about Jesus, his healings and miracles, his ripostes with authorities
and yet hear no stories about conquest of the Romans or holy war or the need
for an army or some such.
Lane later comments: “The healing
of Bartimeaus displays, without any concealment, the messianic dignity of
Jesus and his compassion on those who believe in him…” This sounds
strangely ‘American Evangelical." Where does the text say anything
about ‘messianic dignity?’ Lane then moves in a strangely anti-Semitic
fashion when he continues “…and throws in bold relief the blindness
of the leaders of Israel, whose eyes remained closed to his glory.”
Lane has missed the entire point that even the closest disciples were blind
to Jesus’ person and significance. Since Lane cannot blame the disciples
‘who believed in Jesus’, and who function paradigmatically for
the modern ‘believer’, he must excoriate the Jewish leaders, as
though the mimetic mechanism hadn’t sucked just about everybody up into
its vortex of violence, both Jews and non-Jews alike.
[It is this ‘blame it on the Jews’
rendering of the Passion, by the way, that some are afraid is going to be
communicated in Mel Gibson’s upcoming film. We haven’t seen a
preview so we cannot say what the film does or does not communicate regarding
culpability. However, if Jewish leaders and Jewish disciples, Roman administrators
and Temple authorities, along with crowds from all over the Mediterranean
are not shown to be mutually uncomprehending, if one group is singled out
as ‘good’ there will be the necessary correlate of the scapegoated
group, and the point might be made that, unfortunately, Mel Gibson’s
The Passion could be interpreted in an anti-Semitic fashion. And that would
be sad, both for Mr. Gibson and for Jews.]
The placement of the Bartimaeus story just prior to the entry into Jerusalem
is all the more valuable because it is a ‘paradigmatic story’
about the ‘true disciple’, the ‘one who sees and follows
Jesus.’ It has all the hallmarks of authenticity, especially when viewed
from a mimetic perspective. Either way, it is still expressive of the fact
that these great and wonderful apostles and disciples followed Jesus all the
way to the gates of Jerusalem in a stupor of incomprehension. And by God,
modern Christianity appears to be a pale echo. We have a desperate need to
see but we do not know that we are blind.
In our Historical/Cultural section this
Year B we have sought to argue several theses about how we understand the
development of early Christianity and modern Jesus studies. Through a mimetic
reading of Mark and the Fourth Gospel we have seen that there is no need to
interpret either document through a (strictly) Hellenistic (often = Platonic)
lens. Both documents are Jewish through and through.
Furthermore, we believe that modern Jesus
scholarship will end up on the rocks of skepticism every time it fails to
take into consideration that there is something going on in the Fourth Gospel
that has to do with Jesus. Strauss’ theory regarding Jesus and the Fourth
Gospel (Bousset, Bultmann, the Jesus Seminar, etc) is challengeable on every
level. It is a theory that has too long held the academy in thrall. But the
Church’s rendering of the Fourth Gospel into either Hellenistic (often
= dualist) categories or seccessionistic thought has needed deconstruction.
The academy has provided that. It is now the time to measure our gains. What
have we learned this past one hundred years?
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)
Jb 42:1-6,10-17 or * Jer 31:7-9
Ps 34:1-8,(19-22) * Ps 126
Heb 7:23-28
Mk 10:46-52
(Job 42:1-6)
Then Job answered the LORD: "I know that you can do all things, and that
no purpose of yours can be thwarted. 'Who is this that hides counsel without
knowledge?' Therefore I have uttered what I did not understand, things too
wonderful for me, which I did not know. 'Hear, and I will speak; I will question
you, and you declare to me.' I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear,
but now my eye sees you; therefore I despise myself, and repent in dust and
ashes."
(Job 42:10-17)
And the LORD restored the fortunes of Job when he had prayed for his friends;
and the LORD gave Job twice as much as he had before. Then there came to him
all his brothers and sisters and all who had known him before, and they ate
bread with him in his house; they showed him sympathy and comforted him for
all the evil that the LORD had brought upon him; and each of them gave him
a piece of money and a gold ring. The LORD blessed the latter days of Job
more than his beginning; and he had fourteen thousand sheep, six thousand
camels, a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand donkeys. He also had seven
sons and three daughters. He named the first Jemimah, the second Keziah, and
the third Keren-happuch. In all the land there were no women so beautiful
as Job's daughters; and their father gave them an inheritance along with their
brothers. After this Job lived one hundred and forty years, and saw his children,
and his children's children, four generations. And Job died, old and full
of days.
* (Jeremiah 31:7-9)
For thus says the LORD: Sing aloud with gladness for Jacob, and raise shouts
for the chief of the nations; proclaim, give praise, and say, "Save,
O LORD, your people, the remnant of Israel." See, I am going to bring
them from the land of the north, and gather them from the farthest parts of
the earth, among them the blind and the lame, those with child and those in
labor, together; a great company, they shall return here. With weeping they
shall come, and with consolations I will lead them back, I will let them walk
by brooks of water, in a straight path in which they shall not stumble; for
I have become a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.
(Hebrews 7:23-28)
Furthermore, the former priests were many in number, because they were prevented
by death from continuing in office; but he holds his priesthood permanently,
because he continues forever. Consequently he is able for all time to save
those who approach God through him, since he always lives to make intercession
for them. For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy,
blameless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens.
Unlike the other high priests, he has no need to offer sacrifices day after
day, first for his own sins, and then for those of the people; this he did
once for all when he offered himself. For the law appoints as high priests
those who are subject to weakness, but the word of the oath, which came later
than the law, appoints a Son who has been made perfect forever.
(Mark 10:46-52)
They came to Jericho. As he and his disciples and a large crowd were leaving
Jericho, Bartimaeus son of Timaeus, a blind beggar, was sitting by the roadside.
When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout out and say,
"Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!" Many sternly ordered him
to be quiet, but he cried out even more loudly, "Son of David, have mercy
on me!" Jesus stood still and said, "Call him here." And they
called the blind man, saying to him, "Take heart; get up, he is callingyou."
So throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus. Then Jesus said
to him, "What do you want me to do for you?" The blind man said
to him, "My teacher, let me see again." Jesus said to him, "Go;
your faith has made you well." Immediately he regained his sight and
followed him on the way.
New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright
1989, Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches
of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights
reserved.
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
