I have not written for several years about the progressive Presbyterian Church (USA). I have written much about ultra-rightwing Christians. They came together in my mind today. They are using the Church and the good news of Jesus’ death and resurrection to advocate for their particular interests. For the PCUSA, because it is Holy Week they are using scripture to address the needs of trans people. Because it is the beginning of an election year the ultra-right are using scripture and supposed Christian needs to advance their advocacy for Donald Trump.
As I began studying the issues and the two groups as well as some of the scriptures connected to Holy Week, the text of the two disciples on their way to Emmaus (Luke 24: I3-32). With the help of E. Earle Ellis’ commentary on Luke, I see that parts of that story can be applied to both movements.
Today I saw a link to the Presbyterian outlook on Facebook. The article was A Call to Celebrate the Trans Day of Visibility on Easter Sunday. The Emmaus story is used. The important idea the author, Shea Watts, uses is scripture text that the two disciples recognized Jesus in the breaking of the bread. Watts writes:
One way of interpreting the story suggests that the men only recognize Jesus when they welcome his presence at the table. In other words, it is not their piety but their hospitality that makes their seeing possible.
He goes on to suggest that, “One way to understand Christ’s transfiguration is to see Jesus as “a template for other transfigured, transfiguring bodies,” including transgender persons.”
And not only is this a skewed interpretation of the disciple’s recognition of Jesus but also of Jesus as a template of transfiguring bodies, “including transgender persons.”
Yes, the disciples were hospitable; they were in fact amazed and wondered at the exposition of the whole of scripture that Jesus had given while explaining the fulfillment of the messianic promises. No, it was not their piety that opened their eyes to see Jesus, nor was it their hospitality. It was God and their realization through the given word of a proper expectation of Jesus ministry and purpose.
When Jesus had first started to walk with the two he asked them what they were talking about. They explained to him the crucifixion of Jesus and how they had expected him to be the messiah that would deliver Israel, meaning the nation of Israel. “But we were hoping that it was he who was going to redeem Israel.”
Part of Jesus’ answer was, “Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and enter into His glory.” Beginning with Moses he then explained all that the prophets foretold about Himself. Ellis in his commentary writes:
The dialogue is characterized by opposite interpretations of Jesus’ death. For the two disciples it is a tragedy, the end of a ‘a prophet’ who they had hoped was Messiah (19-21). From the Scriptures Jesus interprets His death as a necessity, the ordained way in which Messiah was to ‘enter His glory’ (25-27). Messiah did ‘redeem Israel’ and will ‘restore the kingdom to Israel’ (Ac: 6). But it is not the ‘Israel’ of nationalist definition. And His redemption is not the political victory of current messianic expectation.
The two disciples’ false interpretation of Jesus’ death arose from a false messianic expectation. In turn, this had its roots in a false understanding of the. Scripture. To ‘know’ the events one must ‘know’ the Scripture. Only after it is ‘opened’ to them are they prepared to ‘see’ Jesus in His resurrected glory (31f). This order is as significant as the occasion of their recognition (30). After knowledge of the biblical understanding of Jesus’ suffering and glory the disciples were prepared to see Jesus.
So, we also see Jesus. Jesus calls us to love and care for those who are trans or any sinner as we all are. But he does not call us to affirm sin. Not any kind of sin. Not the sin of those who seek power and influence either. And that is who I will turn to next using the same scripture text.
As usual I keep listening to and hearing about those involved in Christian nationalism and the New Apostolic Reformation adherents as well as the political and religious movement Maga. Many have been listening to Charlie Kirk founder of Turning Point USA. Recently giving an interview in a church, he stated:
I want to make sure that we all make a commitment If the election doesn’t go our way the next day we fight …. A lot of people don’t won’t to hear that they say what do you mean it doesn’t go our way it has to go our way we have to win, I agree but if your answer is no I’m not going to fight if I don’t get my way then you are a summer, sunny what do they call it a sunshine patriot I’m not ready for the winter storm and you’re and there were a lot of people that were on board for the American Revolution.
And then he goes on to say that when they had to march through the snow and face a smallpox’s epidemic they quit. In other words, Kirk is liking his idea of a fight to the American Revolution.
From so many corners the threats are coming. See
Julie Green, Eric Metaxas, ‘Still’ it is said, ‘still, shall the City of God abide, lusty beside her tiny stream’
I see this need for fighting so called political enemies and the desire for political power not different then the misunderstandings of the two disciples on the road to Emmaus. They hoped that Jesus would fight an earthly battle that would free Israel from Rome. Instead, he fought a battle that overcame sin, death and hell. Jesus was willing to suffer such a horrible death that led to glory and to the redemption of fallen. broken, sinful humanity. Yet, like His early followers—the call is not to seek power, position or prosperity but to take up a cross.
[1]
E. Earle Ellis, General Editors Ronald E Clements, Matthew Black, The New
Century Bible Commentary: The Gospel of Luke, (Wm. Eerdmans Publ. Co. Grand
Rapids reprint 1991) Luke 24: 13.
No comments:
Post a Comment