Clarion: Journal of Spirituality and Justice

Thinking Outside the Box about Retribution -- Henk Smidstra

We are probably all familiar with the phrase, “thinking outside the box.” As the phrase suggests, to solve a problem we must get outside the box, our frame of thought, and its inherent assumptions and rules in order to analyse and solve problems within the box. It’s not as easy as it sounds, since what is reality for us is that which is within the box. Thinking outside of what is considered normal and acceptable is often considered fantasy or unrealistic. Dr. Elizabeth M. (Liz) Elliot (2011) has noted that in our searching for an alternative paradigm regarding justice, we must get out of the box of retributive thinking. She writes, “Because we are inclined to consider punishment within a paradigm that is punishment based, reconsidering the notion of punishment itself seems ludicrous. Abandoning punishment in this context amounts to doing nothing in response to wrongdoing” (p. 27). This implicit deeply rooted logic in the mind of individuals and society is at the heart of the persistence of retributive justice practices. A paradigm shift is necessary; only by getting outside the box of mythical habitual, logic, will we be able to see that not punishing is not equal to doing nothing (Elliot 2011, p.27). She notes further that adherence to the belief that punishment is necessary for justice to be done is the biggest challenge in making a change in thinking from retributive justice to restorative justice (p.297).

To read the rest of this article: Download the PDF HERE 

Erasmus and Church Unity - Ron Dart

Layering the Rich Man and Lazarus - by Brad Jersak

Throughout the ‘hell debates’ of recent years, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) has repeatedly begged our attention, especially in Q&A times following the documentary, Hellbound? The dialogue has urged me towards a sharper focus on the layered functions of the parable than I offered in my contemplative read in Her Gates Will Never Be Shut.[1] Herein, I will introduce an outline that I hope invites fuller treatment.

False functions

First, we ought to dismiss the false functions of the parable as assigned by traditional (but sloppy) literalism. Readers often imagine that Jesus’ intent is to describe the nature of divine judgment and the state of the damned—or ‘hell’ (lit. hades), defined as an inescapable place of fiery judgment. The symbolic nature of parables is frequently negated and the passage treated as a revelation of the afterlife.

Briefly, interpreting the story of Dives (Lat. ‘rich man’ in the Vulgate) and Lazarus as descriptive of ‘hell’ ignores the difference between hades and paradise vis-à-vis heaven and hell, both biblically and theologically, even by literalist standards. The text says the rich man is in hades, borrowed from Greek language and mythology to correspond with the Hebrew Sheol—the place of the dead or the grave prior to the final Day of Judgment. This is confirmed by the rich man’s desire to send a warning to his brothers before it is too late. Thus, whatever the rich man is suffering, it is a precursor to the Day of the Lord and distinct from the infernalist’s typical everlasting ‘lake of fire.’

Moreover, aspects of the story make a crass literalism awkward: how does the rich man communicate with Abraham across the chasm? Does everyone there have a direct line to the patriarch? Does someone being incinerated in a furnace care about thirst? Are these literal flames? And since hades precedes the resurrection of the body, do we have literal tongues with which to feel thirst? Is this also the literal Abraham? Do the millions in his care take turns snuggling with him? Or is his bosom big enough to contain us all at once? How big he must be! And so on into implausibility.

Taking the parable seriously means we mustn’t take it so literally. Rather than text-mining for the architecture of the underworld, we ought to be digging for the intended message of Jesus. He is using the afterlife to illuminate some truth about this life. If we read carefully, we begin to see hints of the rich strata of meaning that beckon us deeper beneath the surface. I will propose three such layers here.

To read the rest of the article, click here

---

[1] Brad Jersak, Her Gates Will Never Be Shut: Hope, Hell and the New Jerusalem (Wipf & Stock, 2009), Excursus 1: The Rich Man and Lazarus.

The Onion: a Parable - Brian Zahnd

THE ONION

“Once upon a time there was a woman, and she was wicked as wicked could be, and she died. And not one good deed was left behind her. The devils took her and threw her into the lake of fire. And her guardian angel stood thinking: what good deed of hers can I remember to tell God? Then he remembered and said to God: once she pulled up an onion and gave it to a beggar woman. And God answered: take now that same onion, hold it out to her in the lake, let her take hold of it and pull, and if you pull her out of the lake, she can go to paradise. The angel ran to the woman and held out the onion to her: here, woman, he said, take hold of it and I’ll pull. And he began pulling carefully, and had almost pulled her all of the way out, when other sinners in the lake saw her being pulled out and all began holding on to her so as to be pulled out with her. But the woman was wicked as wicked could be, and she began to kick them with her feet: ‘It’s me who’s getting pulled out, not you; it’s my onion, not yours.’ No sooner did she say it than the onion broke. And the woman fell back into the lake and is burning there to this day. And the angel wept and went away.”

(From The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky)

Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

Let’s think about this onion in Dostoevsky’s parable.

Erasmus and the Fathers - Ron Dart

This is Water (abridged speech) - David Foster Wallace

For the full text of the speech: http://www.businessinsider.com/david-foster-wallace-graduation-speech-2013-5