So What
We have not dealt yet with the ending
of the parable, in part because interpreters of this text have often set it
apart as an alternate ending or one added on. In fact, though, it is in perfect
keeping with the contrast between theologies of glory and those grounded in
the Cross. That is, the Rich Man's request that his brothers be warned is
met with the declaration by Abraham that "if they do not listen to Moses
and the prophets, neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from
the dead.” The irony here is inescapable. Jesus' resurrection is surely
intended. And the resurrection will convince no one! The moment of
glory will convince no one. Only the Cross, the suffering of the innocent
one, speaks the word that converts the heart.
To preach this text, our congregations
can be led to the place of utter neediness, a place where they can allow themselves
to rely on a mercy they do not deserve. No facile identification with "poor
ol' Lazarus" here, but rather, we can help them to see how close they
(or most of them) are to the Rich Man. Once they can see how "unclean"
they are in the eyes of the parable, in the eyes of their own gods of "deserving",
once they see how undeserving of mercy they are in the eyes of their own gods,
they may be willing to turn to the God that Lazarus knows, the God who chooses
them apart from any sense of worth.
Anthropological
Reading
Today we merge the Anthropological Reading
with the Historical/Cultural Section. The parable of the rich man and Lazarus
reflects many rich and varied interpretations. Some see one parable, others
a parable with two endings. Some see part or all of it as traceable to the
historical Jesus; others see primarily Lukan creation. We have looked at several
interpretations of this parable and all of them can be seen contributing an
essential element to the overall anthropological reading we will offer. Hopefully,
in so doing we will demonstrate the appropriateness of applying mimetic theory
not only to the biblical text itself but also to its interpreters (not least
of all ourselves).
There are some assumptions that we engage
when we come to a text like this. The first is that while Jesus may have utilized
popular categories of apocalyptic (as a genre) to communicate with his contemporaries,
the content of the categories is fundamentally altered. It is difficult to
read the various Jewish apocalyptists and their writings and come away feeling
that Jesus proclaimed such a view of God and God’s kingdom. The language
may be the same but the substance has been transformed. One of the (admittedly
few) merits of the Jesus Seminar was to come to this conclusion. For example,
Jesus reverses the normal expectations of who comprises the in group and the
"out group" at the last judgment.
Apocalyptic may well have been, as Kasemann
puts it, ‘the mother of early Christianity.’ J. Christian Becker
argued such for the Apostle Paul, Theissen for the development of the Synoptic
tradition. But apocalyptic was not the only language system by which to conceive
Jesus’ person and work. The Johannine literature and the ‘deutero’
Paulines as well as Luke-Acts are not structured with such an emphasis, their
foundation is the wisdom-Torah tradition interpreted now in the light of the
work of the Holy Spirit in the community. We must reconsider Jesus’
relation to apocalyptic, particularly in the light of what mimetic theory
advances in regard to the ‘apocalypticism’ of the New Testament.
As Tony Bartlett puts it, “Apocalyptic is an anthropological category.”
Girard advances several important theses
regarding apocalyptic, particularly as found in the Gospels. In Things Hidden
Girard observes that the apocalyptic discourse of Mark 13 (and par.) does
not stipulate God as the origin of violence (cosmic or otherwise). The apocalyptic
distress that visits the creation is all of human origin. God’s wrath
then, is that he “gives us over” to the consequences of our own
violent evil. This is a major hermeneutical shift in apocalyptic thinking.
All other apocalyptic Jewish literature attributes the destruction of the
end of the world to the Creator. Not so Jesus or the gospel writers.
Second, the apocalyptic scenario is set
up as a consequence of the proclamation of the gospel to the ends of the earth.
The victimage mechanism escalates out of control because, in the preaching
of the gospel, it is exposed and rendered ineffective and inoperable. Vengeance
therefore, is never sated. Violence grows and grows, but we do nothing different.
How can we imagine that humankind would not respond to the growing crisis?
One of the worst genocides in history is occurring right now in the Sudan
and the world barely notices. The apocalypse is triggered when the victimage
mechanism fails to bring "peace." Violence contiues to seeks better
scapegoats, escalating out of control, and humanity experiences the ‘war
of all against all.’
According to mimetic theory, Jesus and
the gospel writers have consistently applied the hermeneutic that God is not
violent even and especially here in their use of apocalyptic. If we do not
subscribe to the Prince of Peace of the gospel we are left with the warrior
Christ of Albert Schweitzer, Rudolf Bultmann or Tim LaHaye. Egads!
This parable then “does not aim
to give information on the furniture of heaven or the temperature of hell.
Dialogue and description is all designed to point up the contrast in the conditions
of the departed and to reinforce the Lukan doctrine that external circumstances
on earth are no criterion of moral worth.” Frederick Danker (Jesus and
the New Age).
We would miss the point of interpreting
this parable were we to a) either see ourselves as ‘saved’ Lazarus
and others as ‘damned’ or b) see ourselves as ‘poor’
Lazarus and others as the condemned ‘rich.’ Mimetic theory reminds
us that "labeling" is a precursor to "lynching," to the
death of the scapegoat. When we identify too quickly with the "saved"
we merely switch victims, but we maintain the victimage mechanism. If God
is not violent, then the categories of the parable need to be re-understood.
There are not categories of "in" and "out," unless we
see them as mimetically derived.
What then, is this unbridgeable chasm
between Lazarus and the Rich Man? What does it represent? It is none other
than the gap between theology grounded in the Cross and the "theology
of glory." One belief makes available the God of forgiveness, the other
only the god of wrath. In the parable, each lives with the "god"
he has chosen. The Rich Man lives with a "god" who torments him
because he believes in a "god" who gives him (and Lazarus) only
what he deserves. Lazarus, who lives his life as one forever unclean, lives
in the bosom of Abraham because he has chosen to believe in the God of the
Cross, the God of mercy. Lazarus cannot traverse the chasm because the Rich
Man does not believe in mercy.
Jesus points out to us that wealth like
that of the Rich Man can only be accumulated by those who reject the God of
the Cross, who actually believe that they "deserve" the "blessings"
they receive, that they are truly separate beings from those whose lives do
not bear the marks of holiness or blessing. It is impossible for one who views
life from the perspective of the Cross to remain unmoved by the plight of
the poor, or to feel deserving of the "blessings" entrusted to them.
There is no crossing from one back and forth to the other (a wonderful image
of "noblesse oblige") because "charity" of this sort does
not alleviate the inner torment of the one who shares "her" wealth.
It does not change the nature of her "god."
Historical/Cultural
As noted, there are many interesting
interpretations of this parable that grasp elements of the mimetic problem
and hermeneutic. Jesus (or Luke) appears to be drawing on a stock of common
folklore that the righteous and wicked can see each other in the age to come
(4 Ezra 7.85, 93 and Syriac Baruch 51.5ff). The use of a common folk tale
does not indicate Jesus’ own beliefs regarding the afterlife, rather,
it is the astonishing turn of events within the parable that would have had
his listeners heads spinning. They would have expected the rich man to be
blessed in the afterlife and Lazarus punished but instead Jesus reverses these
popularly expressed views.
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)
Jer 32:1-3a,6-15 or * Am 6:1a,4-7
Ps 91:1-6,14-16 * Ps 146
1 Tm 6:6-19
Lk 16:19-31
(Jeremiah 32:1-3a)
The word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD in the tenth year of King Zedekiah
of Judah, which was the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar. At that time the
army of the king of Babylon was besieging Jerusalem, and the prophet Jeremiah
was confined in the court of the guard that was in the palace of the king
of Judah, where King Zedekiah of Judah had confined him. Zedekiah had said,
"Why do you prophesy and say: Thus says the LORD: I am going to give
this city into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he shall take it;
(Jeremiah 32:6-15)
Jeremiah said, The word of the LORD came to me: Hanamel son of your uncle
Shallum is going to come to you and say, "Buy my field that is at Anathoth,
for the right of redemption by purchase is yours." Then my cousin Hanamel
came to me in the court of the guard, in accordance with the word of the LORD,
and said to me,"Buy my field that is at Anathoth in the land of Benjamin,
for the right of possession and redemption is yours; buy it for yourself."
Then I knew that this was the word of the LORD. And I bought the field at
Anathoth from my cousin Hanamel, and weighed out the money to him, seventeen
shekels of silver. I signed the deed, sealed it, got witnesses, and weighed
the money on scales. Then I took the sealed deed of purchase, containing the
terms and conditions, and the open copy; and I gave the deed of purchase to
Baruch son of Neriah son of Mahseiah, in the presence of my cousin Hanamel,
in the presence of the witnesses who signed the deed of purchase, and in the
presence of all the Judeans who were sitting in the court of the guard. In
their presence I charged Baruch, saying, Thus says the LORD of hosts, the
God of Israel: Take these deeds, both this sealed deed of purchase and this
open
deed, and put them in an earthenware jar, in order that they may last for
a long time. For thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: Houses and
fields and vineyards shall again be bought in this land.
* (Amos 6:1a)
Alas for those who are at ease in Zion, and for those who feel secure on Mount
Samaria, the notables of the first of the nations, to whom the house of Israel
resorts!
* (Amos 6:4-7)
Alas for those who lie on beds of ivory, and lounge on their couches, and
eat lambs from the flock, and calves from the stall; who sing idle songs to
the sound of the harp, and like David improvise on instruments of music; who
drink wine from bowls, and anoint themselves with the finest oils, but are
not grieved over the ruin of Joseph! Therefore they shall now be the first
to go into exile, and the revelry of the loungers shall pass away.
(1 Timothy 6:6-19)
Of course, there is great gain in godliness combined with contentment; for
we brought nothing into the world, so that we can take nothing out of it;
but if we have food and clothing, we will be content with these. But those
who want to be rich fall into temptation and are trapped by many senseless
and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the
love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, and in their eagerness to be
rich some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many
pains. But as for you, man of God, shun all this; pursue righteousness, godliness,
faith, love, endurance, gentleness. Fight the good fight of the faith; take
hold of the eternal life, to which you were called and for which you made
the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. In the presence of
God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who in his testimony
before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, I charge you to keep the commandment
without spot or blame until the manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ, which
he will bring about at the right time--he who is the blessed and only Sovereign,
the King of kings and Lord of lords. It is he alone who has immortality and
dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see; to him
be honor and eternal dominion. Amen. As for those who in the present age are
rich, command them not to be haughty, or to set their hopes on the uncertainty
of riches, but rather on God who richly provides us with everything for our
enjoyment. They are to do good, to be rich in good works, generous, and ready
to share, thus storing up for themselves the treasure of a good foundation
for the future, so that they may take hold of the life that really is life.
(Luke 16:19-31)
"There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and who
feasted sumptuously every day. And at his gate lay a poor man named Lazarus,
covered with sores, who longed to satisfy his hunger with what fell from the
rich man's table; even the dogs would come and lick his sores. The poor man
died and was carried away by the angels to be with Abraham. The rich man also
died and was buried. In Hades, where he was being tormented, he looked up
and saw Abraham far away with Lazarus by his side. He called out, 'Father
Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in
water and cool my tongue; for I am in agony in these flames.' But Abraham
said, 'Child, remember that during your lifetime you received your good things,
and Lazarus in like manner evil things; but now he is comforted here, and
you are in agony. Besides all this, between you and us a great chasm has been
fixed, so that those who might want to pass from here to you cannot do so,
and no one can cross from there to us.' He said, 'Then, father, I beg you
to send him to my father's house-- for I have five brothers--that he may warn
them, so that they will not also come into this place of torment.' Abraham
replied, 'They have Moses and the prophets; they should listen to them.' He
said, 'No, father Abraham; but if someone goes to them from the dead, they
will repent.' He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets,
neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'"
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
