Week 9: “Racial Discourse and Irish History” -Gibbons (Castle)

In his piece on the construction of Irish history, Gibbons, pays considerable attention to the formation of a national identity with specific focus paid on the effects of race. The most interesting aspect of this article was the discussion on the similarities and differences between the English depiction of American Indians, Blacks, and the Irish. With considerable time spent on the difficulty of the English to define the Irish as an ethnically inferior group, despite the apparent similarities in skin tone. According to Gibbons the Irish, in the eyes of the English, began to resemble the American Indians with which a paternalistic viewpoint was given, one of inferiority, but of a less vitrolic nature, than say that of the Blacks. Although the Indians were admired to a degree for the ruggedness and freedom, both of which the Irish did not appear to possess. This comparison ultimately confined the Irish to a place somewhat more inferior to that of the American Indian, one of an uncouth nature, but lacking the freedom and admirable qualities of the Native Americans. This view of ethnicity began, as all race categories ultimately do, to become internalized in Irish culture, ultimately, according to Gibbons, resulting in an ever-increasing desire for equality, but solely on English terms, literature, and sensibilities…a gap that ultimately the Irish would never be able to dissolve.

Week 9: “Inventing Ireland” -Kiberd (Castle)

In his discussion on the fluidity surrounding the construction of a national identity, Kiberd, uses the proliferation of the Irish language as well as the rise and fall of the Gaelic League, to discuss the subsequent identities of the Irish citizenry. The most interesting aspect of his piece was the discussion of the nationalists’ desire to construct an Ireland that was merely anti-English, rather than pro-Irish. A similar logic appears to pervade our current Church culture, one in which we as Christians define ourselves not by what we are, per se, but rather by what or whom we are not. This kind of logic is posited as merely being “Christian” in nature, and the activites that fall outside of this paradigm are described as “non-Christian” in nature (whether or not Christianity had anything to do with their inception). These ideas can be most clearly seen in the backlash surrounding the “atheistic” movie “The Golden Compass” in which numerous Christians are opposing because of its supposed atheist overtones. Which ultimately will create a great deal of buzz and probably increase the audience for a children’s movie about a talking bear and a nautical device…ironic to say the least.

Week 9: “Reading a Woman’s Death” -Bourke (Castle)

In her piece on the death of Bridget Cleary, Bourke shows how its mythology formed a framework of masculine savagery and a necessity for the colonizer to rescue the highly eroticized and fearful indigenious woman. This framework was also seen in the Spivak’s discussion on the sati in Indian culture, and how the British viewed this again as masculine savagery and saw themselves as necessity for preserving the helpless female culture. Bourke also discusses how the proliferation of the image of indigenious males as “savage” promotes not only a continued subjugation by the colonizer, but also promotes a patriarchial view of women as both highly eroticized and helpless. Therefore, according to this view, the colonizer is justified in all activities of subjugation and control over the indigenious because of their inability to behave as “humans”. This framework has been used to control and dissolve culture after culture because of the inherent inequality and savage nature of their indigenious practices. A question arises from this framework…Can anything be savage? Does any practice transcend cultural appreciation, into a violation of human rights? Is there an inherent humanity within us all?

Week 9: Monday

In today’s class Ryan gave an interesting lecture on his work both about and within the Emerging Church. The most engaging aspect of this lecture, was his discussion on the work of many Emerging leaders and how they incorporate the charisms of their community in a way that fosters realization. This seems to me, a very difficult idea, especially in the way of moving these high, esoteric ideas, into a routinized, modern church. The real debate arises when one begins questioning structure and ecclesiology, and that is, What is worth fighting for? What is our motivation? and Are we fighting for a more authentic presentation of the gospel, or are we merely attempting to be different than the traditions of the past? These questions to this day continue to serve as accountability both within and outside this movement.

Week 9: “God at the Crossroads: Sophia” -Rivera (Sugirtharajah)

In her article on the hybridized spirit figure ‘Sophia’ in Old Testament literature, Rivera, brings up the necessity of hybriditized individuals within cultures, to enact change and question normative beliefs. Rivera does this in light of a feminist reading of the term “logos” used in John’s gospel as a term of continuity and divinity for Christ, but she proposes that this same term could be read in light of the feminine spirit Sophia. In this reading Rivera uses this to show the importance of claiming and exalting figures who, in history, have been difficult to place and to name. She states these figures as those most important to igniting change within our beliefs and orthodoxies, because they not only allow for ambiguity, but they also embody it. I struggled with this reading a bit, mainly because I am severly unfamiliar with the “myth of Sophia” and again I find the logic of this piece somewhat difficult to follow, seeing as Rivera is attacking a strictly patriarchial reading of canon, while only still allowing for a severly feminist re-wording. This is remniscient of several other pieces of post-colonial biblical interpretation that we have encountered over the quarter.

Week 9: “Maori “Jews”: Resistant Reading of John 5:10-47″ -Huie-Jolly (Sugirtharajah)

In her piece on the Maori tribes of New-Zealand, Huie-Jolly, brings up an interesting point on the nature of native interpretations in light of colonial missionaries. Huie-Jolly proposes that the Maori tribe who chose to identify themselves not with Early Christians and the Orthodox Imperial Church, but rather with the exiled and anti-thetical “Jews” spoken of in John’s Gospel, did so due in large part because of the interplay between Christian missionaries and Imperialist powers. Huie-Jolly uses the orthodox presentation of Jesus as Son to be the Imperalist dogma associated with the colonial powers, and subsequently believes that this lead to Maorist reading of “the Jews” who in John’s Gospel were the antithesis of this Sonship belief as the heroes of anti-Imperialism. This article raises several questions on the nature of evangelism and how we are presenting the “gospel” to those both in as well as outside our particular contexts? Are we presenting a clear and fair picture of the message of Jesus to those who do not share our particular worldview? or Are we presenting a message of Jesus that those living in oppression would choose to avoid, because of its coupling with oppressive and subjugative forces?

Week 9: “Mission of the Church” -Fuellenbach

In his final chapter Fuellenbach discusses the role and mission of the Church both from the point of view “as the Kingdom of God”, “mediator of the Kingdom”, or as merely another servant within the Kingdom. This chapter presented some very interesting ideas, especially in the area of the Church’s role in the salvation of humanity. The two views that Fuellenbach posits are a) The Church as chief mediator, and only avenue through which one can join the Kingdom. and b) The Church as one of several avenues within the Kingdom, but is not intrinsically necessary for one to embark in Kingdom activities. This brings up a larger issue within pluralistic debate, and the role of the “saving knowledge of Christ” and one’s ability to experience salvation. Fuellenbach, I believe, answers this question by stating that downplaying the Church as chief kingdom mediator and only avenue for which individuals can experience Kingdom life is not watering down the necessity of Christ, but instead is merely opening doors for new ways in which individuals can experience Christ both inside, as well as outside the Church. It is my belief that this view fosters a larger view of God and His truth, one that is not a box with borders and boundaries, but is instead a tangible force that exists both in the world through humanity, and around the world in creation.

Week 8: Wednesday

In today’s class it was refreshing to hear several different viewpoints on the debate between nationalism and kingdom citzenship. This debate is something that is very nuanced in both its presentation and interpretation for many different peoples, and ultimately is likely, among all other things, based upon context rather than a hard and fast rule. A question that arose for me during this debate was where, as Christians bound to the illumination of the gospel for others, should we draw the line in terms of resisting and oppossing things, that for most people, appear peripherial? Where should we ultimately become all things to all people in the sense of choosing the importance of gospel illumination over principled discussion and argument winning? I most appreciated the comments that Ryan made about his daughter’s oppositional stance to the current hegemonic nationalism, but oppositional in the sense of non-participatory instead of outright revolt, which I would argue, is the third path that both Stassen and Jesus proclaim.

Week 8: Comment on Terry Mak’s Blog

In his blog on Liew’s argument and discussion of pro-imperialist rhetoric in the Gospel of Mark, Terry, brings up a very important point about the desires of Liew. Stating that Liew misunderstands the message and intention of both the gospel authors as well as Jesus, simply because it is the goal of both to usher in a new kingdom where God’s reign is both sovereign and un-ending. For Liew this appears unacceptable, but for almost all individuals living in the Ancient Near East, especially those within the Jewish diaspora, a sovereign and unending reign by God is what they had hoped and dreamed for throughout their exilic situation and oppression. The inability of Liew to grasp this desire for kingdom comes out of his own understanding of this language. Instead of rooting himself within a narrative of kingdom language both within ancient and 1st century Judaism, but also within the early christian church, he has chosen to bring to the text a 21st century understanding of kingdom and egalitarianism. Thus is the great difficulty in communicating a “kingdom” of equality, justice, peace, and love to those who carry with this term a great degree of baggage, but this is the way of Jesus, to reclaim that which has been lost, misunderstood, and hijacked by hegemonic power, and to restore it to its original intention. While Liew may believe that the author of Mark is quite backwards and regressive in his interpretation of kingdom language, what he misunderstands is that within his first century context Mark’s kingdom ideas, vis-a-vis Jesus, were the most progressive ideas the world, at that time, had seen. Jesus always calls us to a higher plane of consciousness/living, no matter the context we find ourselves within.

Week 8: “Adulteration and the Nation” -Lloyd (Castle)

In his piece on nationalism and the development of an authentic identity, Lloyd, uses the hybridization of Irish culture as a case study on the larger picture of “authentic cultural identity development”, specifically through the study of a culture’s literature. The most interesting aspect of Lloyd’s argument was his discussion on the ability of a formerly colonized people to gain an “authentic” identity that has not been hybridized by the former colonizer and further marginalized by the institution of subsequent nationalism. This posits an interesting question, one that is inherent in all nationalistic self-definitive language, and that question is, Does an authentic, inherent identity exist in the world? or Has this identity been hijacked and beleaguered by the former colonizer who has instituted a colonial language, religion, and race? These are questions relevant for all of us in the world today, whether we be colonizer, colonized, or both.