Hi David, my friend and yours Mike Love gave me your book. On reading it I had to stop halfway to explore the writings of Walter Benjamin, Gershom Scholem and others (I found a good book on Archive.org but I think the site has been compromised and all my history has gone!). I now have a clearer picture of where you are coming from. When I finish I hope to do a review.
I don't have your book on hand but remember the term "anarchic breeze" - and the idea of anarchy being quite prevalent and I think the hope is one of freedom but freedom from what? I guess we all have our own answers to that one. Anarchy seems to imply freedom from "hierarchy"?
Alas I can't remember his name, but In my study I came across someone in the Benjamin/Scholem era whose messianic vision is freedom from LAW which I have also been studying outside of the writings of the Bible. (Which seems to be the trend nowadays!) One person of great interest is William Blake. I am looking at his ANTInomian stance but was corrected by Mark Vernon that his stance is TRANSnomian - I love that!
While Blake stretches law to be scientific law and any other framework that inhibits artistic freedom and spontaneous life (I love your exploration of greek words btw Viz: Zoe,bios, and psuche), I have not found any more radical than Paul in the Bible who interprets the freedom from sin to be actually freedom from the law ... ("The power of sin is in the law") This freedom could not be so complete as the term "dead to the law" intimates - dead: unresponsive and disconnected. I've done a few essays on this.
That, I think, is my messianic hope that the most powerful moral catalyst is divine (100%, no strings attached) unconditional love which is that "anarchic breeze" of the Spirit. Christ is that messianic representation - whose perfection was not moral exactitude (as most of my fellow believers claim) but rather that of relational freedom - an unconditional abandonment to unconditional boundless generosity.
I think what I am saying is that, if we dig deep enough, we don't have to go further than the Bible, especially the writings of Paul, to discover that Anarchic Breeze of the Spirit - the Spirit of Christ - the Messiah.
Whether this can be accomplished here on earth without divine intervention I doubt, at least as we understand the terms. However, it is my conviction that there is such a thing as relational power which is not coercive (see an excellent article by Bernard Loomer, a process theologian - "Two conceptions of power"). Could it be that love, the essence of relational power, with all its uncertainty, is infinitely greater than the certainty of unilateral control? I believe so!
Hello Bruce. I believe so too. Its lovely to hear from you. I look forward to your review! Perhaps we might cross paths in Scarborough sometime, if you're still there?
This is helpful, David, the distinction between personal and collective salvation/redemption. It's always a good day when one of your notes rolls in. Thank you for writing.
I too encounter the otherworldly focused Christianity, which places so much weight on heaven that earth and her inhabitants sometimes are seen as valueless, even evil, something to be escaped from. Christ as messiah acting in our world is demoted and the cross is elevated as his only reason to be. Such interpretations land poorly on me and make me uneasy. The messianic Christ of the incarnation is lost. Christ alive and acting through us, the church, redeemed yes but also redeeming, should be emphasized more to bring a proper balance. Christ is more than just a ticket to heaven. We who are his body, and his bride, have work to do in the here and now. Work with the “least of these.” The new heaven and new earth are waiting for us to bring it into fruition.
Thank you David, and apologies for my slow response. Last week got away from me. As far a Christian tradition goes, I see two tasks. One is to re-intoduce messianic imagination into Christian language and tradition. Happily, a lot of christian theology has moved this way in the last 50 yrs or so. The second task is more difficult, I think: to then unmake the enclosure of language that is in danger of giving the mis-impression that the messiah (or the messianic) is the property of a religious tradition. Very difficult to say what I mean in brief, but subsequent posts will hopefull reach a little further in this direction.
Good questions from start to finish. Do you think messianic themes are emerging in the UK from the ashes of institutionalised religion? An opportunity to reorient to what is essential?
Good question. On one hand, perhaps so. Emerging religious sensibilities at the back door of modernity seem to be characterised by a sense of awe and sacredness around material life and experience. It's become "worldly" (in a positive sense) as Bonhoeffer foresaw. Religion has become political. Religion has become complex and porous at the edges, more than religious: that is to say, its no longer an inanimate thing to be categorised as knowledge by its overseers, as it was under modernity... now it has a mind of its own. Its become folkish: by which I mean it's being formed by people's own experiences, curiosities and longings, rather than being wholly managed by authoritative institutions. Its formed by a sense that the present order of things is running out. All this feels attuned to messianic sensibilities, to me. On the other hand, while I see decentred messianic sensibilities everywhere (for both good and ill), I don't see people using this language or framing, except for a few oddballs. While it strikes me as deeply resonant with present energies, messianic language seems to be both alien and confusing to most of my spheres today. I'm not sure how important the language is, really. I feel somewhat adrift and in the thick of everything all at once. Your thoughts and responses are welcome as ever, Catherine.
The word "Messianic" itself can be a bit scary since it is owned, culturally, by the worst sort of evangelicals (speaking as someone who grew up in Texas.) Hell, it's why I initially avoided your stack. But I feel like this messianic language that you have been circling around here and in your book is far more potent than much of the philosophical and spiritual language elsewhere. It is has direction and responsibility without reducing the mystery. Like singing Koine to seals...
Hey Jack. I'd be really fascinated to know how the term gets used in Texas.. P.s. I've asked Andrew at Bog Down & Aster to pass something on to you. Blessigs
I don't think I have anything truly insightful to say about the term. I've never heard the word "Messianic" outside of academic contexts, usually referring to the populist religious movements after the Civil War. But as Molly Ivins used to say, "Texas is like the rest of the country, only more so" and it has a huge grab-bag of charismatic, Pentecostal and evangelical churches (that mostly hate each other). Any experience of these on my part was purely tangential. In my memory, "Messiah" was used interchangeably with "Savior" but it was more musical and lent itself to more aggressive preaching- "mu-SAI-uh." Very much the warrior version of Savior who punished all the sinners. That's my take. My grandfather, who was a very liberal Presbyterian Minister from Mississippi often used Hebrew in his sermons to antagonize his conservative flock and I don't have any memory of him using the term in any significant way. That's not much, but it's something. And Andrew passed on your something. It's brilliant. Can't wait for the vinyl.
Hi David, my friend and yours Mike Love gave me your book. On reading it I had to stop halfway to explore the writings of Walter Benjamin, Gershom Scholem and others (I found a good book on Archive.org but I think the site has been compromised and all my history has gone!). I now have a clearer picture of where you are coming from. When I finish I hope to do a review.
I don't have your book on hand but remember the term "anarchic breeze" - and the idea of anarchy being quite prevalent and I think the hope is one of freedom but freedom from what? I guess we all have our own answers to that one. Anarchy seems to imply freedom from "hierarchy"?
Alas I can't remember his name, but In my study I came across someone in the Benjamin/Scholem era whose messianic vision is freedom from LAW which I have also been studying outside of the writings of the Bible. (Which seems to be the trend nowadays!) One person of great interest is William Blake. I am looking at his ANTInomian stance but was corrected by Mark Vernon that his stance is TRANSnomian - I love that!
While Blake stretches law to be scientific law and any other framework that inhibits artistic freedom and spontaneous life (I love your exploration of greek words btw Viz: Zoe,bios, and psuche), I have not found any more radical than Paul in the Bible who interprets the freedom from sin to be actually freedom from the law ... ("The power of sin is in the law") This freedom could not be so complete as the term "dead to the law" intimates - dead: unresponsive and disconnected. I've done a few essays on this.
That, I think, is my messianic hope that the most powerful moral catalyst is divine (100%, no strings attached) unconditional love which is that "anarchic breeze" of the Spirit. Christ is that messianic representation - whose perfection was not moral exactitude (as most of my fellow believers claim) but rather that of relational freedom - an unconditional abandonment to unconditional boundless generosity.
I think what I am saying is that, if we dig deep enough, we don't have to go further than the Bible, especially the writings of Paul, to discover that Anarchic Breeze of the Spirit - the Spirit of Christ - the Messiah.
Whether this can be accomplished here on earth without divine intervention I doubt, at least as we understand the terms. However, it is my conviction that there is such a thing as relational power which is not coercive (see an excellent article by Bernard Loomer, a process theologian - "Two conceptions of power"). Could it be that love, the essence of relational power, with all its uncertainty, is infinitely greater than the certainty of unilateral control? I believe so!
Hello Bruce. I believe so too. Its lovely to hear from you. I look forward to your review! Perhaps we might cross paths in Scarborough sometime, if you're still there?
Thanks David, helpful!
This is helpful, David, the distinction between personal and collective salvation/redemption. It's always a good day when one of your notes rolls in. Thank you for writing.
I too encounter the otherworldly focused Christianity, which places so much weight on heaven that earth and her inhabitants sometimes are seen as valueless, even evil, something to be escaped from. Christ as messiah acting in our world is demoted and the cross is elevated as his only reason to be. Such interpretations land poorly on me and make me uneasy. The messianic Christ of the incarnation is lost. Christ alive and acting through us, the church, redeemed yes but also redeeming, should be emphasized more to bring a proper balance. Christ is more than just a ticket to heaven. We who are his body, and his bride, have work to do in the here and now. Work with the “least of these.” The new heaven and new earth are waiting for us to bring it into fruition.
Thank you David, and apologies for my slow response. Last week got away from me. As far a Christian tradition goes, I see two tasks. One is to re-intoduce messianic imagination into Christian language and tradition. Happily, a lot of christian theology has moved this way in the last 50 yrs or so. The second task is more difficult, I think: to then unmake the enclosure of language that is in danger of giving the mis-impression that the messiah (or the messianic) is the property of a religious tradition. Very difficult to say what I mean in brief, but subsequent posts will hopefull reach a little further in this direction.
Yes, the messianic seems like a human rather than sectarian longing
Good questions from start to finish. Do you think messianic themes are emerging in the UK from the ashes of institutionalised religion? An opportunity to reorient to what is essential?
Good question. On one hand, perhaps so. Emerging religious sensibilities at the back door of modernity seem to be characterised by a sense of awe and sacredness around material life and experience. It's become "worldly" (in a positive sense) as Bonhoeffer foresaw. Religion has become political. Religion has become complex and porous at the edges, more than religious: that is to say, its no longer an inanimate thing to be categorised as knowledge by its overseers, as it was under modernity... now it has a mind of its own. Its become folkish: by which I mean it's being formed by people's own experiences, curiosities and longings, rather than being wholly managed by authoritative institutions. Its formed by a sense that the present order of things is running out. All this feels attuned to messianic sensibilities, to me. On the other hand, while I see decentred messianic sensibilities everywhere (for both good and ill), I don't see people using this language or framing, except for a few oddballs. While it strikes me as deeply resonant with present energies, messianic language seems to be both alien and confusing to most of my spheres today. I'm not sure how important the language is, really. I feel somewhat adrift and in the thick of everything all at once. Your thoughts and responses are welcome as ever, Catherine.
The word "Messianic" itself can be a bit scary since it is owned, culturally, by the worst sort of evangelicals (speaking as someone who grew up in Texas.) Hell, it's why I initially avoided your stack. But I feel like this messianic language that you have been circling around here and in your book is far more potent than much of the philosophical and spiritual language elsewhere. It is has direction and responsibility without reducing the mystery. Like singing Koine to seals...
Hey Jack. I'd be really fascinated to know how the term gets used in Texas.. P.s. I've asked Andrew at Bog Down & Aster to pass something on to you. Blessigs
I don't think I have anything truly insightful to say about the term. I've never heard the word "Messianic" outside of academic contexts, usually referring to the populist religious movements after the Civil War. But as Molly Ivins used to say, "Texas is like the rest of the country, only more so" and it has a huge grab-bag of charismatic, Pentecostal and evangelical churches (that mostly hate each other). Any experience of these on my part was purely tangential. In my memory, "Messiah" was used interchangeably with "Savior" but it was more musical and lent itself to more aggressive preaching- "mu-SAI-uh." Very much the warrior version of Savior who punished all the sinners. That's my take. My grandfather, who was a very liberal Presbyterian Minister from Mississippi often used Hebrew in his sermons to antagonize his conservative flock and I don't have any memory of him using the term in any significant way. That's not much, but it's something. And Andrew passed on your something. It's brilliant. Can't wait for the vinyl.
Oh I can hear the chant. This reads like the synopsis of a coen brothers film.