Clarion: Journal of Spirituality and Justice

On Christian Nationalism & 'the Bride of Babylon' - Bradley Jersak

Christian nationalism in any nation is what John the Revelator described as the bride of Babylon, 'the whore' in bed with the Beast (Rev. 17) ... It's an unholy alliance of would-be strongmen and whatever church cares to be bedded by them.

 

Christian nationalism is often comprised of political powers that seduce the church with a promise of moral reforms, harnessing a populist revulsion against hedonism (e.g., frequently distilled to legalized repression of the queer community) and some hated ethnic-religious other (e.g., Jews or Muslims) in order to harness and co-opt the Christian lobby as a political crony for its authoritarian and militarist goals. 

 

Here's a sample from a classic speech:

The National Government will regard it as its first and supreme task to restore to the German people unity of mind and will. It will preserve and defend the foundations on which the strength of our nation rests. It will take under its firm protection Christianity as the basis of our morality, and the family as the nucleus of our nation and our state.

Adolf Hitler, 1933    

The need for authoritarian politicians to develop a religious base is especially true when they turn to expansionist aggression. It is very difficult to send one's children off to die in battle for nationalism or freedom or oil unless one can further sell such a sacrifice to the parents as a sacred religious endeavor (cf. Brian Zahnd, Farewell to Mars). It seems to me that whether Evangelical or Orthodox believers, Eastern or Western, we have in common this Achilles' heel for Christian nationalism, even in weaker states, wherever the Cross is wrapped in their flag.

 

It's rancid and, in fact, not truly Christian at all. It's a death-dealing cult of civil religion with a thin veneer of Jesus-talk, with ethics of moralism that have nothing to do with love for neighbor, especially the most vulnerable.  

 

The good news is found in a closer reading of Revelation indicates that, as in Ezekiel and Hosea, God's heart is to cleanse his adulterous spouse of every stain so that she becomes the spotless bride! This is doable, but apparently not until she experiences the grief of her lovers' fall (Rev. 18) and hears Christ's call to 'come out' of that Babylonian alliance. Until then, she's de facto disqualified herself as a representative and servant of the Prince of Peace. 

 

It remains for me to ask how I am complicit and how I might opt out of that system without simply flying headlong into the opposite ditch. It's always easier to point at the despicable 'them' than to see our own blindspots because we forget that we can feed any ugly tendency by signing on OR by opposing them in the same self-righteous spirit. On that note, I pray this line from Lent Prayer of St. Ephrem, "Lord, help me to see my own faults and not to judge my brother."

 

Lord, have mercy.   

"Out the Embers" - OTC conversation (Jersak, Young, Fee, Murrell, MacMurray)

My Journey "Out of the Embers" - Nicky Martini

Bradley Jersak's Out of the Embers caught me by surprise. I thought my time to look back was done. At the beginning of this year, over a whole month, I experienced a creative miracle where, by the end, I knew God had healed my PTSD. Within the pages of Bradley's book, I can feel more waves of release and healing. 

 

From the “Prodigal Test” 

 

“God gives us the dignity of finding our own bottom. Once that happens, we might truly come home in a way that the elder brother apparently never did.”

 

It’s taken me days to get through the sections on Nietzsche and Simone Weil. Within those pages, I revisited the worst days of my deconstruction, primarily the grief that had consumed me. 

 

I never said “God is dead” but some nine years ago, the second part of my deconstruction came as what I can only call a wrecking ball. I remember the moment it happened. I was in church, mic in hand, about to blissfully share some grace encouragement. And before I could get a word out, God popped my bubble. It was like I had rose-coloured glasses on... and then I didn’t. All I could see were faces in the pews who were not interested in my wonderful grace words. They were suffering silently in a place where suffering was not allowed, or at least not talked about. Ours was a toxic positivity church of happy grace clappers, and I was one of them. I put the mic down, grabbed my husband and my children, and ran like a madwoman. I never went back.

 

Immediately after, my mum was diagnosed with cancer. She was in Greece with my dad and my brother, so the family flew her and my dad back to Australia. 

 

She survived another six weeks. I prayed for more time with her; I prayed for her healing, and when it became evident that that was not going to happen, I prayed that I would be there with her when she took her last breath. I lay on the floor next to her bed so as to be with her. It was important to me because we hadn’t had a great relationship when I was growing up. I was a terrible teenager. But for years, I had longed to live close to her and to have the opportunity to love on her as she deserved. To make up for lost years. 

 

The moment my mumma took her last breath, she was surrounded by her whole family. Except me. I was on the toilet. 

 

My faith at that moment collapsed. The wrecking ball hit with no mercy. Didn’t we learn in church that "all God’s promises were yes and amen" and that He gives us the desires of our hearts? Not only did God no answer the desire of my heart that I had hoped and prayed for over many years, but He took Mum home while I was on the toilet, shitting. It was like He had taken a knife, jabbed me in my heart, and twisted it to drive it home. I wasn’t angry with God; I was deeply hurt. I felt like the only One who I could trust had hurt me in the worst possible way. I can’t describe the pain in my heart. 

 

One morning after her funeral, I got in my car to go to work, and I said out loud, “God, you and I are done. Don’t talk to me anymore. I won’t be looking to hear from you or to feel you. I won’t be in any relationship with you. I won’t be loving you and certainly won’t be waiting to receive any love from you. You can leave me alone now.”

 

I said it and I meant it. I would repeat this many, many times over the next two years when I was alone. For the first time in my whole life, I stopped talking to God. I didn’t question his existence. I knew He was real and I knew He was with me all the time. But I chose deliberately not to be in relationship with Him. 

 

Still, my mumma’s death was not my rock bottom. It happened over the two years of ripping my heart out day after day. It was the numbing myself and not allowing myself to love and be loved by the God who had once swept me off my feet.

 

My rock bottom came when I had so shut myself off from God out of deep hurt that I could no longer feel Him. I don’t know how to describe living without God except to say I felt dead. I starved myself to death. I went about my days mechanically. No joy; just deep, deep sadness and inconsolable grief for my loss. I cut myself off from whatever few friends I had left because I somehow felt like my darkness would contaminate them, plus there was no room in my despair. 

 

Two years passed. My hubby Brett and I were driving a long distance and he had his music playing on random. What used to be my all-time favourite God song came on: Lifehouse's “Everything.”

 

Find me here and speak to me
I want to feel you, I need to hear you

 

I started to cry and Brett asked what was wrong. I told him that the hardest thing for me, doing this life without God, has been that I’m no longer moved by Him. Every time I used to hear this song, it was like every cell in my body would be caught up into some ecstatic place of joy indescribable but now I am not moved by Him anymore. Brett laughed and said, "Well, that’s an easy fix! You just have to let Him." 

 

And so I prayed, “Lord I miss you, I still feel hurt by you, but Lord, if you never answer a single prayer of mine it doesn’t matter. If I see no miracles but only pain and suffering in this world, nevertheless, I don’t want to do it on my own anymore. There’s no life for me apart from you. I need you, and I want to be moved by you again." And so He did. Once again, I fixed my eyes on the Lover of my soul for no other reason than to be loved and to love.

 

Reading Embers today, specifically Simone Weil's words about coming home, God reminded me of a recurring nightmare I used to have after my mum had passed. In the dream, my mum and I were lost and both of us trying to find our way home. Somewhere in the dream, I would lose her and desperately try to find her so we could find home together. The dream would always end before I found her and before we found home. 

 

Today, God spoke to me about how my mumma suffered from terrible grief in her life, something she never got over. Both my sister and I would say we don’t ever want to be like her, always grieving. For my sister, it stopped her from being able to grieve. And for me, I seemed to grieve immensely. I felt God saying, “Your mumma is home now with me and she no longer grieves. And you know I am always with you, and I am healing this grief." 

 

I think I read somewhere that Out of the Embers is like the healing balm of Gilead. Indeed it is.
I know it will bring much healing to many. 

“Wait a minute…!” Clarence Jordan’s “Inconvenient Gospel” – Review by Bradley Jersak

“Wait a minute…!” Clarence Jordan’s “Inconvenient Gospel”
Review by Bradley Jersak

Clarence Jordan, The Inconvenient Gospel: A Southern Prophet Tackles War, Wealth, Race, and Religion (Plough Spiritual Guides: Backpack Classics, 2022).

CLICK HERE TO READ A SAMPLE

“Wait a minute!” One day I may not be so surprised and delighted by the books Plough Publishing sends me, but they’ve done it again! Before I dive into the substance of Clarence Jordan’s Inconvenient Gospel, I must first commend Plough from a publisher’s perspective. The design and layout of the physical copy make for a beautiful product, bound on good-quality stock and a heavier-than-paper cover. More important, though, is that this particular book is a welcome addition to their “Spiritual Guides” series, which is a treasury of authors including:

• Dorothy Day
• Simone Weil
• Eberhard Arnold and Richard Foster
• Eberhard Arnold and Thomas Merton
• Oscar Romero
• Amy Carmichael
• Abraham Joshua Heschel

Seriously, contact Plough and ask for the whole set—it’s an incredible collection of great hearts and minds, and each work includes a distilled biography and introduction along with a treasury of primary source material from each author.

Now to Clarence Jordan's Inconvenient Gospel. The book opens with Frederick L. Downing’s fine biography of Jordan (1912-1969), his wife Florence, and their Koinonia community. Jordan is described as a white Baptist minister from Old South Georgia who broke every mold associated with that stereotype. The “Wait a minute!” moments on those first pages stack up quickly. Here we have a Southern Baptist-trained preacher (with a Ph.D. in NT Greek) who embraced nonviolence, racial integration, and communal living decades before the Civil Rights movement picked up steam! Utterly countercultural, monitored by the government, harassed by the Klansmen… his story is so gripping that when Martin Luther King Jr. heard Jordan was practicing what King was preaching, he said, “I went to Koinonia [Jordan's community] to see it for myself and couldn’t wait to leave because I was sure the Klan would show up and kill us both.” The Koinonia project, a gospel-centered, interracial, alternative economic project, struck me exactly as the title suggests—an “inconvenient Gospel.” 

After Downing’s biography, readers are treated to an Introduction by Starlette Thomas, titled “Reading Clarence Jordan Today.” Wait a minute! THAT Starlette Thomas? For those unfamiliar with her, Thomas is the director of The Raceless Gospel Initiative; she's a practical theologian and blogger, and a serious womanist preacher in ministry. When someone of her stature shares her perspective on Clarence Jordan and his “raceless gospel” (not to be confused with “color-blindness”!), I am arrested in the most important way. I.e., she had my attention.

But then we’re exposed to Clarence Jordan firsthand in a series of thirteen of his articles and sermons. It's worth sharing the chapter titles to catch a glimpse of key themes from this “wait a minute!” provocateur. I'm especially bearing in mind the religious and social cultures of his Baptist audiences (churches, journals, and conventions from 1941-1955) and later, his Mennonite listeners (Goshen College) in the 1960s. 

1. Impractical Christianity
2. The Meaning of Christian Fellowship
3. What is the Word of God?
4. White Southern Christians and Race
5. No Promised Land without the Wilderness
6. The Ten Commandments
7. Jesus, Leader of the Poor
8. Love Your Enemies
9. Jesus and Possessions
10. Metamorphosis
11. The Man from Gadara
12. Things Needed for Our Peace
13. The Humanity of God

Through his penetrating messages, Jordan presses some truly inconvenient "wait a minute!" facts. For example, the radical polarization around economic and racial issues that are right now tearing apart our frayed society are nothing new. He was there and underwent that reality directly, overtly, frequently suffering intimidation from the church, the FBI, and the KKK alike.

Further, his active opposition against white supremacy before the Civil Rights reached a critical mass was prophetic and intensely risky. Hatred from what we now call the “far right” was still the norm then,… and couple that problem with preaching a gospel of nonviolence that refused to hate domestic oppressors or wage war against foreign enemies. Well, call him crazy, call him communist, call him the devil... and many did. But we cannot call his nonviolence "complicity with injustice." His nonviolent witness was an active living martyrdom... as dangerously naïve as Jesus' foundation sermon, perhaps? I hope so, because so far, “the ways that make for peace have been hidden from our eyes.” Jordan has a word for us all, right now. He IS a prophet to speaking to the 21st century. 

But even if I can follow his call to radical forgiveness, enemy love, and anti-racism, that only gets me through the Matthew 5 section of his Sermon on the Mount example. Jordan ventures into the implications of a Matthew 6 life—I’m referring to how seriously he took renouncing personal wealthy and possessions and heeding Jesus’ command [?] not to lay up earthly treasures for ourselves. Jordan preached and practiced a communal gospel reminiscent of the church in those first chapters of Acts, where everyone shared, and no one was left impoverished. "Wait a minute!" That’s a “hard word” for those of us (I mean me) with mortgages and homes, deeply attached to our pensions and investments. Maybe now that middle-class wealth is being gobbled up by inflation and greed, and a home is no longer even an option for my children, Jordan has my attention—and after him, who knows? Might I listen to Jesus, too—but this time with fresh ears in Clarence Jordan’s Southern-seasoned voice. 

It's worth saying how closely aligned Jordan was with Tolstoy, Gandhi, Thurman, and King Jr., in that same Sermon on the Mount tradition, living its practicability in his own way. Even without the same global name recognition, he is surely due the same honor as these, his peers. 

Finally, one last bonus “Wait a minute!” Have you ever heard of the southern retelling of the Jesus story, The Cotton Patch Gospel? I had not realized Clarence Jordan wrote was the author! In fact, he was composing it when he departed this life for the next. One might have wished he had more time for that endeavor, but then again, what a beautiful way to complete one’s journey. 

Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb: In Quest of Equity - Interview with Bradley Jersak

Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb (www.rabbilynngottlieb.com)
is a Jewish Rabbi (of 50 years!), master story teller, folk artist and seasoned peace pilgrim.

See full bio below. 

Lynn Gottlieb, one of the first women to become a rabbi in Jewish history, is a pioneer Jewish feminist, human rights activist, writer, visual artist, ceremonialist, community educator and master storyteller.

Lynn has been a congregational rabbi since the fall of 1973, and founded the Congregation Nahalat Shalom in Albuquerque, NM, in 1980. Lynn engages in multifaith, intergenerational and multicultural organizing in solidarity with racial, indigenous, gender justice and Palestinian liberation struggles.

Currently, Lynn sits on the Rabbinic Council of Jewish Voice for Peace and is board chair of Interfaith Movement for Human Integrity. Rabbi Lynn is the author of several books, including Peace Primer II, She Who Dwells Within: A Feminist Vision of Renewed Judaism, World Beyond Borders Passover Haggadah and Trail Guide to the Torah of Nonviolence.

Rabbi Lynn is a Shomeret Shalom, a practitioner of the Torah of nonviolence.
To get in touch, click here.

 

Healing from and through Deconstruction - Felicia Murrell with Susan Carson

Thursday, October 27, 6:00 pm EST 
Susan Carson (Roots & Branches network)
will host a livestream fundraising event:

"Healing From and Through Our Deconstruction"
An evening with Dr. Bradley Jersak, Felicia Murrell and Wm. Paul Young"

CLICK HERE for Registration details

 

In preparation for this event, Susan Carson raised the following questions on deconstruction and the healing journey. Author, editor, and foodie extraordinaire, Felicia Murrell, responded beautifully, a great teaser for what we're in for:  

SUSAN: When we talk about deconstruction, what do we mean?

Felicia: I would say deconstruction means releasing our grip, attachment from ideas, beliefs and theories we once thought to be true; unknowing the things we’ve erected and built, dismantling all of our conceptual constructs. My teacher, Mirabai Starr would say, it’s “when the religious scaffolding crumbles and we are plunged into radical unknowing.”

My mind conjures images of Samson bracing the two middle pillars on which the house rested and bending with all his might, upending the house and all therein.[1] But for me, as it relates to deconstruction, the two middle pillars would be my pillars of arrogance and certainty upon which all my tenets of faith and belief and interpretations rested. For sure the image loses some of its relatability at the end because of the destruction, but I imagine for some, deconstruction may actually feel like a sort of catastrophic death.

SUSAN: In what ways have you experienced or observed deconstruction as destructive? 

Felicia: I think when we are as fundamental and certain about deconstruction as we are about religion, that can be destructive. Rene Girard spoke often about scapegoating, and when we find ourselves trapped in the need to blame our pain or our lived experience on someone, deconstruction can turn vengeful and destructive. But if we don’t understand this process as a path to infinite Love, we will lose ourselves in the terror and chaos of our unraveling which can be very harmful.

Drinking Well from Others Wells - Bradley Jersak

Drinking Well from Other’s Wells
Reading Sacred Texts – Four Invitations

Address by Bradley Jersak at the "Peace through the Reconcilation of Our Holy Books" interfaith conference on 9-11.

By Bradley Jersak

 

Your Excellencies, Sisters and Brothers in God’s expansive family,

Grace and Peace,

Today I would like to express my gratitude for our common commitment to peacemaking and to share four brief reflections about reading one another’s sacred texts with openness, respect, and wonder. I was personally raised in a tradition of religious certitude where we were all too convinced that our provincial faith and our particular way of reading our Scriptures defined the sealed boundaries of truth. Regardless of whether what I share in this paper resonates with others, I sincerely hope that you will hear my good-faith repentance for the narrowness I am still overcoming.

In my attempts to drink well from the wells of other Holy Books, I’ve developed four invitations that I will briefly clarify and illustrate. My sense is that reading well includes the following:

1. I invite us to read well from each other’s Scriptures with open hearts, attentive to points of connection.
2. I invite us to read well from each other’s Scriptures, seeing them as unique songs to the One True God.
3. I invite us to consider how others read their own Scriptures.
4. I invite us to consider how others read our Scriptures.

Interfaith Peacemakers Summit with Safi Kaskas & Friends - by Brad Jersak

“Blessed are the peacemakers. They shall be called children of God.”

—Jesus

I write this testimony of God’s grace while the events are still fresh in my mind and warm in my heart.

For the anniversary of 9-11, I was invited to participate in an international gathering of Peacemakers from the three major Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Islam, Judaism), including various scholars, activists, imams, and rabbis from across the globe. The title of the conference was "PEACE through the Reconciliation of Our Holy Books"  

It was truly an amazing and beautiful day! 

I was so thrilled with each of the presenters and, just as much, their attentive and gracious responses to one another.

I was personally very moved by Dr. Safi Kaskas’ leadership. My Muslim brother and Qur’anic scholar spoke some very kind words about our first encounters that brought back precious memories. 

I was very impressed by the quality of the speakers that Safi assembled, and all on such short notice that we both recognized God’s hand in swinging open these doors to dialogue.

The speakers showed remarkable expertise and clarity about many pressing issues in the world today and an uncanny knack for addressing tender topics without condemnation of the Other. This was evident as we expressed remorse for the sins of our own movements, along with the willingness to advocate for the vulnerable.

Specifically, Muslim representatives denounced the violence done on September 11 by fellow radicalized Muslims, Christian representatives repudiated our violent response through the so-called “war on terror,” and Rabbi Lynn, for example, issued a clear call for the state of Israel to repent and practice equity toward the Palestinian people.    

In some ways, none of that surprised me, but I was delighted that several of the talks (back-to-back, unplanned except in heaven) brought into focus the injustices done toward indigenous people and the need for reparations. There was nothing in Safi’s invitation that indicated we should or could ‘go there,’ but I had the strong sense that it was a topic heavy on God’s heart and his people were tuned in.

All of that was very, very good. But I want to shift to the highlight of the day, when the ‘felt presence’ of God flooded our solemn assembly with joy and tears.

Our friend Mercy Aiken, a Christian peace activist and bridgebuilder, began to expound on Jesus’ words from Luke 19. She said, “On his way to the cross, we read about one of the few times that we hear Jesus wept. He is approaching Jerusalem, and the gospel says,

⁴¹ And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, ⁴² saying, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes.”

Mercy emphasized that phrase, “Now they are hidden from your eyes,” to lament the terrible spiritual blindness that has caused each of the Abrahamic religions to choose hatred, violence, and war over “the things that make for peace.” The fact that the way to peace has remained hidden to us is both tragic and obvious, especially when we consider Jerusalem as a geographical and symbolic center for millennia of conflicts… between the very faiths gathered at the conference.

Through those words, a powerful sense of sobriety descended and in my headphones, I heard quiet groans of awareness expressed. What are we to do? At just the right moment, Mercy began to spontaneously intercede that the Holy Spirit would mercifully open our eyes and draw us back onto the way of peace.      

And then I was stunned to tears, as were others, as she responded to her own challenge with a song of invocation—a Muslim worship chorus—“Open Your Eyes” by Maher Zain. I believe she sang these lyrics:

Open our eyes, our hearts and minds 
If we just look right, we'll see the signs 
We can't keep hiding from the truth
And let it take us by surprise
Protect us in the best way
Guide us every single day
Keep us close to You 
Until the end of time

(please watch the full song HERE and I have embedded it at the end of this article) 

Tears began to stream down my cheeks; I saw others wiping their eyes; an Imam posted Jesus’ words into the group chat; and as soon as Mercy finished, one of the Muslim men asked, “Could you also please sing a song for our Christian and Jewish brothers and sisters?”

Mercy responded, “Well, that sone really was meant for all of us… But I did think about that, too, in case it came up. So here is a song from the Jewish Scriptures that Christians also love to sing:

For Thou, O Lord, art high above all the earth
Thou art exalted far above all gods
For Thou, o Lord, art high above all the earth
Thou art exalted far above all gods

I exalt Thee, I exalt Thee
I exalt Thee, O Lord
I exalt Thee, I exalt Thee
I exalt Thee, O Lord

(you can see this song HERE and again, it's embedded at the end)

I could tell we were on holy ground, in a transcendent moment—we were encountering the heart of God as constructive dialogue gave way to worship in spirit and in truth, described and yes, prophesied by Jesus when he said in John 4 (MSG),

^{21 “}The time is coming—it has, in fact, come—when what you’re called will not matter and where you go to worship will not matter.

^23-24 “It’s who you are and the way you live that count before God. Your worship must engage your spirit in the pursuit of truth. That’s the kind of people the Father is out looking for: those who are simply and honestly themselves before him in their worship. God is sheer being itself—Spirit. Those who worship him must do it out of their very being, their spirits, their true selves, in adoration.”

How did we get there? I believe it’s because God’s heart for peace and justice must be so broken that one whiff of that aroma draws his manifest presence in a heartbeat. So many of our religious meetings have not only ignored peace and justice—worldwide, our churches (I’ve seen it), synagogues, and mosques alike have been infested with hate, propaganda, and sermons encouraging vengeance and death-dealing. It’s an ancient problem.

The Jewish prophet Amos (5:21-24 MSG), speaking for God, prophesies,

“I can’t stand your religious meetings. I’m fed up with your conferences and conventions. I want nothing to do with your religion projects, your pretentious slogans and goals. I’m sick of your fund-raising schemes, your public relations and image-making. I’ve had all I can take of your noisy ego-music. When was the last time you sang to me? Do you know what I want? I want justice—oceans of it. I want fairness—rivers of it. That’s what I want. That’s all I want.

In my view, this conference served as an act of living repentance for just that problem.

This gathering exceeded my expectations, and I believe the individual recordings (forthcoming) will make a powerful series with the potential for long-term and widespread impact. Even better, I pray that our encounter would lead to lasting new friendships and created networks that extend beyond what we can ask or imagine... and that those who watch will experience the insights and wonder that were such a gift to me.

With love and gratitude,

Bradley Jersak

Conference Participants             

HOSTS:
Nahid Saiyed
Paul Armstrong

SPEAKERS:
Safi Kaskas
Brad Jersak
Samira Benturki Saidi
Mark Braverman
Muhammad Eissa
Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb
Tariq Mustafa
Mercy Aiken
Dawud Abdur-Rahman
Rabbi Steve Weisman
Daisy Khan

 SONG 1 - "Open Your Eyes"

Song 2 - "I Exalt Thee"

Bradley Jersak, "Out of the Embers: Faith After the Great Deconstruction" (pre-orders)

Now available for pre-order!

OUT OF THE EMBERS: 
FAITH AFTER THE GREAT DECONSTRUCTION

by Bradley Jersak foreword by Brian Zahnd

CLICK HERE to order now

Description:

Deconstruction: Trendy brand name for falling away from belief in God? Or a process essential to authentic faith? Liberation or trauma? Prison break or exile? It’s complicated. Just like you. Christian history records a Great Reformation and a Great Awakening. But today’s “Great Deconstruction” will surely leave an equally profound impact.

In Out of the Embers, Bradley Jersak explores the necessity, perils, and possibilities of the Great Deconstruction—how it has the potential to either sabotage our communion with God or infuse it with the breath of life, the light and life of Christ himself.

In this collection of vulnerable memoirs, philosophical memos, and candid provocations, Jersak resists both the hand-wringing urge to corral stray sheep and the exultant desire to play the happy-clappy Ex-vangelical cheerleader. He employs the wisdom and expertise of the great deconstructionists—Christianity’s ancient influences (Moses, Plato, Paul, and the Patristics), “beloved frenemies” (from Voltaire to Nietzsche), and the masters of deconstruction (Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, and Weil)—to double down and deconstruct deconstruction itself. Where is faith after deconstruction?

The author’s heart is to engage and empathize with the bereft and disoriented, stoking the brittle ashes for live embers. In this quest for the resilient gospel of the martyrs, the marginal, and those outside the threshold...inexplicably, in this liminal space, life stirs.

A Light shines through the ashes. We find, often for the first time, that living connection Jersak calls “presence in communion.” There is a sea change occurring across the Western church and civilization. Whether we’re watching a radical course correction or a complete collapse remains to be seen, and how it pans out will likely depend on how we see what’s happening, who we are becoming, how we live in response—and, most important, where we find Christ situated in this storm.

CLICK HERE to order now

Foreword to Alvin Kimel's "DESTINED FOR JOY" - by Bradley Jersak

AIDEN KIMEL, DESTINED FOR JOY

Foreword by Bradley Jersak, Ph.D.

With great joy, I have for a decade followed Fr. Aiden Kimel as he forged a path of inquiry that unveiled answers, advanced an exploration that yielded discovery, and posited a hope that became deep conviction—for me and in many others. His biblical, historical, and philosophical posts have completely convinced me that the apokatastasis panton (the restoration of all things) is not merely a doctrinally tolerable idea—it is, as Kimel says, “the gospel of Christ’s absolute and unconditional love sung in an eschatological key.”

As he has faithfully posted his treasury of findings, I have come to believe without reserve in Christ’s bold claim that through his Passion he will indeed draw all of humanity and the entire cosmos to himself. For that reason, I now see apokatastasis as intrinsic and indispensable to proclaiming the ancient gospel in this fraught and faltering century.

In Destined for Joy, Kimel has gathered a “best of” collection of his insights that, together, paint a vista I cannot unsee, and wouldn’t ever want to!          

Even for those who follow Fr. Aiden’s posts regularly, Destined for Joy is well worth reviewing and having on hand as a definitive resource. The book faithfully and creatively reflects the faith of those great saints of the past (Origen, Macrina, Gregory of Nyssa, Isaac of Nineveh, Maximos the Confessor, Silouan the Athonite, and yes, George MacDonald) and the boldest minds of our era (Sergius Bulgakov, Robert W. Jenson, Thomas Talbott, Ilaria Ramelli, David Bentley Hart, John Behr). It also offers essential and sometimes startling corrections, revealing, for example, how the fifth-century anathemas against Origenism—long thought to have decisively condemned universal salvation—were never conciliar or even synodal. Kimel demonstrates that they amount to nothing but an imperial edict that has no doctrinal authority. He has at last firmly closed the door on centuries of misconception, divorced the anathemas from the Fifth Ecumenical Council, and removed them from the Infernalist arsenal. 

But by far, his most powerful contribution to me personally (by accumulated 'convincement') was guiding me to this very simple question: Does the New Testament foresee the salvation of all or doesn't it? Clearly, it does. Repeatedly. Unequivocally. And all the “But what about . . . ?” counterpoints fail to address these Scriptures directly. Regardless of the difficulties we have interpreting judgment texts or harmonizing them with ultimate redemption, Christ and his apostles tell us how it all ends: "God will be all and in all.” But nothing. Full stop. Amen and hallelujah!

The issue of 'the End' now boils down to these questions for me:

a. Do the Scriptures require a free and willing faith response to Jesus Christ? Yes! Many times.

b. Do the Scriptures forecast a final judgment? Yes! Many times.

c. Do the Scriptures foresee the salvation of all? Yes! Dozens of times.  

How can all three of these statements be true without marginalizing any of the pertinent biblical texts? They can only all work if: 

a. Death has been defeated so that a free and willing post-mortem response is possible.
It has been. 

b. The judgments of God are restorative and penultimate rather than retributive and ultimate.
They are.  

 c. The human will is healed and freed from its delusions so we can freely respond to perfect Love when we see Christ face to face. I call this a 'freed will' response. 
It will be.

While we can pile Scripture upon Scripture to verify these truths, I repeat, we have Jesus Christ's overt claim in John's Gospel: "If I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all people to myself." 

And we have the End described in expressly inclusive ways . . . every eye shall see him, every knee shall bow, every tongue will confess, God shall be all and in all. What others regard as exclusive conditions to this outcome, apokatastasis enfolds as the necessary means. The Incarnation, the Cross and Resurrection, faith in Christ, restorative judgment according to the first Christians—these are the means by which the foretold glorious, all-inclusive End will surely come about.

I can make these audacious assertions without presumption because whatever warrant our faith needs to embrace them, Destined for Joy offers in abundance. Over to you, Fr. Aiden. 

CLICK HERE TO ORDER AIDEN KIMEL, DESTINED FOR JOY

Proclaiming the Unknown God (Acts 17) - Bradley Jersak at the Meeting Place (Winnipeg)

Symposium II: "If there is any excellence - a conversation on Arete" - with David Goa, Vladika Lazar & Eden Jersak

Symposium I: Morality vs. Moralism - Lazar Puhalo with David Goa & Bradley Jersak

God Cannot Fix This. But They Made a Way. Bradley Jersak

GOD CANNOT FIX THIS.  BUT THEY MADE A WAY. 

Another mass shooting motivated by racial hate.

Another elementary school massacre.

Another foreign invasion, escalating civilian slaughter, evidence of war crimes.

Another moment of silence, another flag lowered, another platitude.

Another thought, another prayer, another child in a body bag.

God cannot fix this.

I received an angry message from someone who lives near Uvalde, TX—directed at Christians in general, berating us for doing nothing and for making matters worse, demanding proof for our faith and lashing at the hypocrisy of the church. Where’s this miracle-making God of ours? Why aren’t we out there, performing signs and wonders, and raising the dead?

Why isn’t God fixing this? Why aren’t we fixing this?

I hear the grief beneath the rage. I feel it too.

We cannot fix this.

Not even God can fix this.

God is not a fixer.

And when we become fixers, just look at what happens! Yes, we make it way worse.

Fix it? How? With magic prayer incantations? With louder sermons? With more morality police? With political force? With more guns and bombs? That’s exactly how we broke it in the first place.

God doesn’t fix this because God is not a ‘fixer.’ God doesn’t control or coerce or impose his will on anyone. We know this—just watch the news tonight. God is not that kind of saviour. And when we demand that kind of saviour, or try to vote in that kind of a saviour, or choose to be our own saviour, we create the very problem we need to be saved from.

We hear, “I alone can fix it.” And then we watch the mess get deeper and smellier and deadlier.

If God can’t fix it, what good is our faith?

And this lie slips in—that if God doesn’t intervene to fix our mess, then God can’t save us. That God’s ‘saviour’ label is belied by God’s criminal negligence as heaven passively watches the world burn. The absence of fixes by force feel like God has abandoned us and is ghosting our cries for help.

That’s how it feels.

And now here is the truth. Not a truth or my truth or some theory. I don't have time to waffle with those who demand a fix or fell for the fixers. The truth is that God knows the only way to restore everything and redeem everyone that is lost, broken, damaged, or demented. And God has, in fact, sown that way into the world and shown that way in Jesus Christ.

God says, “You want this fixed? No. It can’t be. But I’ve made a way.”

God has made a WAY to live, to walk, to be, through which all things shall ultimately be made new. That WAY has already been forged by the One who has shown us the path and has sown the seeds that [die to] save the world. That One, Jesus Christ, says no to fixing and yes to following.

If we want to be free—not the ‘freedom’ that says, ‘It’s my right to live as I please’ but freedom from fear for our children from hatred, bullets, guns, and bombs—all we’d need to do is live the WAY Jesus taught us to live in the grace he’s given us to live it. If we trust him enough to actually follow his lead, he will free us from the fear that leads to the hatred that leads to the violence that we expect God to magically force-fix. Even in the midst of this mangled shit-show humanity has created for ourselves.

No, God cannot fix this. But God made a Way. What is it?

The Way is not simply a vague, theological “faith in God and do as you please.”

It’s an actual, prescribed program for a completely nonviolent social revolution that establishes peace on earth (aka “the kingdom of God”).

It IS the grace of God revealed in Jesus' blueprint for the salvation of the world.

If we’re willing. [spoiler alert: we currently aren't]

Essentially, the blueprint is simple. Live the golden rule. “Treat others as you want to be treated.”

The golden rule is so basic to being human that it needn’t be a such a profound revelation—but I guess we needed one, because it appears across the teachings of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Taoism, Zoroastrianism, and more. You’d think we’d give it a try.

But Jesus also knew that to get there, we’d need grace to transform us from the inside out. Jesus knew that conformity to external laws without a renewed heart always leads to workarounds and loopholes to skirt God’s eternal law of love (which is all the Jewish Law and Prophets were about, according to Jesus). So to internalize the love rule, in his Sermon on the Mount, the Rabbi from Nazareth added five ‘commandments’ that deepen the ten given at Sinai.  

In chapter six of his foundational book, What I Believe (1884), Leo Tolstoy summarized and explained the five straightforward requirements of the Jesus Way manifesto—what ‘follow me’ meant to Christ, specifically, in practice:

• “Be not angry, do not judge”—hatred in heart and on the tongue are the germ that leads to murder. (Matthew 5:21-26)
• “Do not lust”—coveting another person’s spouse leads to adultery and divorce (5:27-32).
• “Do not swear oaths”—which is a pledge to obeying the disobedient powers (5:33-37)
• “Resist not evil”—retaliation by violence is itself the evil we thought to resist (5:38-42)
• “Love your enemy”—Christ erases boundaries of hostility to the other, from personal animosity to xenophobia against foreign peoples (5:43-48)

Fix this? No. Follow this!

Tolstoy concluded,

If men abstain from practicing any one of these commandments, peace will be violated. Let men practice all these commandments, which exclude evil from the lives of men, and peace will be established upon earth. The practice of these five commandments would realize the ideal of human life existing in every human heart. All men would be brothers, each would be at peace with others, enjoying all the blessings of earth to the limit of years accorded by the Creator. Men would beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks, and then would come the kingdom of God.

So, no, God does not fix this world, if that means restoration by coercive or magical forces that suspend and thus violate human freedom. God cannot fix this way because God is love.

Instead, God has sent a parade of messengers of peace, including the great prophets in many faiths, and ultimately Jesus... and continues to do so even now. As a would-be follower of Jesus, I can see and say that he established his peaceable kingdom and showed us, in a human life, the Way to bring it about.

Sadly, humanity continues to rush for the opt-out door—and worse, my critic is right: Christians are barging out the exit at the head of the mob-herd. Humankind, including his own movement, continues to reject the Jesus Way and the tragic results are observable.

Yeah, but…

If the Jesus Way requires my participation, what should I do if no one else signs up? If Jesus says, for example, NO WEAPONS OF DEATH, but everyone else says, “I'll give you my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead hands,” then is it foolish or naive to be the sole exception? What happens if I'm the only unarmed person in the bunch? If everyone else is packing heat, aren’t I defenseless? Don’t I need to be the “good guy with the gun,” just in case? Otherwise, am I not throwing away my life?

You know, like Jesus?

Jesus responds in his sermon, “The wise person hears these words of mine and puts them into practice. It’s the fool who ignores them or justifies disobeying them. Take up your Cross and follow me, because only this narrow road—this minority report—leads to a social environment conducive to life and peace. Follow me because the broad road—the way of the herd—inevitably leads to death.” The way we’ve chosen has been falsified in this escalation of death—of racist massacres, school shootings, and military invasions. The militarized masses have not made us safer—any such claim is falsified by the blood of children.

Only the Jesus Way can lead to life and peace and freedom, even if you’re the only one who takes that path, even if that path includes losing your life to find it (Matthew 16:25).

The problem today is exacerbated by those who claim to follow Jesus while rejecting the requirements he describes as ‘following.’ We’re seeing a public phenomenon where those who retain the Jesus brand are the primary public lobbyists against the Jesus Way.

No wonder my critic lashed out.

I get it. And I can’t fix it.

But I’ve heard there’s a Way.

So now, I begin with the mirror, asking where I’m still walking the Jesus Way and where I’m not. I have my own eye-planks to deal with, starting with malice.

As my friend Jarrod says, “It’s easy to call someone out. Harder to call someone in. But it begins with confession.” So today, I confess. I have not followed Jesus well. This morning, I have stewed on some hate and called my brother “Raca” (lit., worthless, fig., asshole). I have already violated the first of Jesus five amendments to the Decalogue. 

Lord, have mercy. Don’t fix me. But please save me.

Religious Particularity & the Cultural Canopy - Beyond Multiculturalism - David Goa w/ Brad Jersak

The words of Jesus Christ, “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes unto the Father except by me” frame the backdrop for this conversation on particularity and universals.

The Jewish patrimony accents the gift of particularity. Christianity, like Islam and Buddhism, treasures its revelation and sees its significance for all times and places, a “universal” insight.

In modern liberal democratic societies the particularity of cultural gifts and the civil striving for universal rights and responsibilities is often confused and entangled.

David Goa and Brad Jerak, in conversation, walk into the thickness of religious particularity and think about the importance of the civil canopy of “universals.” The danger of absolutes and the importance of holding with care our ultimate concerns are tempered with and through friendship.   

“YOU ARE GODS” – A COIN FROM HART’S TREASURY – Reflection by Bradley Jersak

 David Bentley Hart, YOU ARE GODS: On Nature and Supernature 
(Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 2022) – Reflection by Bradley Jersak

Based solely on repetition in every one of David Bentley Hart’s books, articles, lectures, and podcasts, his most scathing condemnation of any opposing argument is that it’s incoherent—i.e., confusing, incomprehensible. Given this savant’s comprehensive genius for language, philosophy, theology, history, mythology, literature, music, and baseball (a shortlist of his expertise), it’s not inexcusable if he seems to be the offender-in-chief of incoherence. But bear with me (and him)…  

HART’S UNINTELLIGIBLE PATOIS

In his efforts to reteach peons the English language, Hart’s penchant for using precise, inaccessible, archaic, and invented vocabulary can seem self-defeating, if not self-indulgent. That’s aside from the dozens(?) of foreign languages he can use.

But I want to learn from him, so I keep track of words and ideas he thinks I should know. I’m reading You Are Gods: On Nature and Supernature right now. I’ve recorded the following terms for further study since I could only guess what they meant and wouldn’t dare define, much less use in polite company. Please, repeat them aloud:

These are just from the Introduction and Chapter 1: dessicating, repristinated, recrudescence, fustian, theogonic, contrapuntal, fugal, pleonasm, patiency, goetic, leporine/leporinity, rapitude, ship of Theseus conundrum, mereological, deictic, patois, asperous, necrophile, adventitious, velleity, cyclophoria, inchoate, conduced, irrefrangible, aetiological, proleptic, incommiscible, quiddity.

Even my spell-checker was bewildered by seven in the list! But so what? My omniscient cell phone is within arm’s reach. Using a dictionary isn’t just time-consuming; it’s educational—learn or do not! If discovering new words and new ideas is not your thing, Hart’s not your guy and theology is not your passion. Far better to bypass this gibberish about God and get right to talking directly to God. And please pray for us while you’re there.  

HART’S INCOHERENT OPPONENTS

Hart’s assaults on opponents’ ideas and reasoning can also feel convoluted, but from my vantage point, that’s largely because he’s right—whether their logic is incoherent or morally repugnant (Hart’s other big slam). His main targets, Calvin/Calvinism and the Manualist or Two-Tier Thomism are a case in point.

I’m not so sure the sane man is to blame when diagnosing a disorder. Sometimes the doctor must enter the fantasy world of his patients to beckon them out. Remember how the prisoners in Plato’s cave of delusion ridiculed their newly freed companion when, compelled by love, he returned from the sunlight back into their world with good news. He was judged as deluded and disoriented, when really,… well, you get it.    

HART’S INCOMPREHENSIBLE TOPICS

But aside from their disagreements, Hart and his interlocutors are debating topics that can seem obscure, irrelevant, and a bit silly all on their own. Eye-rolling is not always out of order. Yet Hart’s concerns may also have pastoral consequences, especially where the gospel has been perverted by errors (e.g., eternal conscious torment, limited atonement, original sin) and the flock suffers spiritual abuse under toxic teaching. So, what he does kind of matters, if indirectly, even to the casual ‘believer.’

That’s where we rely on the patient souls who will wrestle through his words, debates, and topics (and even enjoy it) to bring back a sample coin from his treasury. Distilling Hart can be as hard as understanding him, and when one presumes to interpret him, the odds of misrepresenting him are high. Nevertheless, I occasionally dare to give it a go because he’s worth it and so are those who can’t read him. I can bear the guilt of saying it wrong. Or better, I’m happy to offer an imperfect reflection that makes sense to me.

For today, I’ll share just one coin, but it’s good and important. I hope readers find it helpful. If so, credit to Hart. If not, my bad.

ON “FINAL CAUSE”  

 In You Are Gods, David Bentley Hart advances five premises (p. xvii), the first of which reads,

“The sole sufficient natural end of all spiritual creatures is the supernatural, and grace is nothing but the necessary liberation of all creatures for their natural ends.”

The essays in his book expand on this thesis, which, once you see it, shouldn’t be unseen.

To begin with, let’s take a moment to learn about “final cause.” The Greek philosopher Aristotle thought about different ways we talk about “cause.” He named four types of cause in our world:

• Material cause: that from which something is made. The material cause of a wooden chair is the tree from which it is crafted.

• Efficient Cause: the agent that interacts with the object to change it. The efficient cause of the chair is the carpenter, who makes the chair what it becomes.

• Formal Cause: the essence or form of a particular object that makes it what it is. This would be like a blueprint or design that makes a chair a chair instead of a table.

• Final Cause: the ultimate end (telos) or purpose of the object, what the object is made for. The final cause of a chair is to be something we sit on.

I want to focus on this fourth type of cause. The wonderful thing about “final cause” is that the end goal of a thing actually causes its creation. Chairs allow for sitting, they don’t create sitting. The desire to sit causes and creates the chair! That’s how the end can cause the beginning.

Now let’s take a living thing, like an acorn that grows into an oak tree. The final cause of the acorn is… the oak tree! That is, acorns are created to produce and become oak trees. And so oak trees cause acorns so that acorns grow to maturity as oaks. It’s like the ultimate purpose or end of a thing (the oak) is calling what it causes (the acorn) to become what it will finally be.        

Further, Aristotle taught that the ultimate purpose or telos of a thing (the oak) is already somehow internal to what it has caused (the acorn). That is, the properties of the oak tree are already there in that little acorn, intrinsic to it. We now know this to be true from DNA and genome studies. The longevity of an oak tree is already baked into the DNA of the acorn.

ON “NATURAL ENDS”

What Aristotle called the “final cause” is, therefore, also the “natural end” of that thing. The natural end of an acorn is the oak. The end is there in the beginning, so that acorns don’t magically become something else… they become what they were always to become by nature.

Now Hart turns to spiritual beings, such as people. What is your natural end as a spiritual being? To discover this our final cause, we look to the Scriptures. Paul says that we are being “transfigured from glory to glory into the image of Jesus Christ” (2 Cor. 3:18). Peter says that we are “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet. 1:4). John says that when Jesus appears, “we shall be like him” (1 Jn. 3:2).

Paul called this transformation metamorphosis (transfiguration). The church fathers called it theosis, divinization, or deification. Their formula was, “God became human [Incarnation] so humanity could become divine [deification]… that’s right: in Christ, we are prospective “gods.” Hence Jesus striking claim that became Hart’s book title: “You are gods” (Jn. 10:34/Ps. 82:6).   

Shocking, yes, but here’s the math: Jesus is, by nature, the image of God (fully human, fully divine). You are, by nature, created in that image, and by grace, being transformed into that same image (fully humanized, fully divinized). And what you will become (your natural end) is intrinsic to who you are now. You are, in the words of Gary Best, naturally supernatural. Your “final cause” is calling you into this transformation, from acorn to oak, caterpillar to butterfly, natural to supernatural, because that is your natural end.

A NECESSARY LIBERATION

Now back to Hart’s premise:

 “The sole sufficient natural end of all spiritual creatures is the supernatural, and grace is nothing but the necessary liberation of all creatures for their natural ends.”

If I understand him, Hart is saying that as a spiritual creature, your natural end can be nothing less than supernatural. That by necessity, grace will free all creatures, all people, you and me to our natural ends, without fail. In fact, in premise 3, he says,

“No spiritual creature could fail to achieve its naturally supernatural end unless God himself were the direct moral cause of evil in that creature, which is impossible. Conversely, God [since God is good] saves creatures by removing… impediments to their union with him.”

In other words, your transformation from acorn to oak cannot not happen in a universe where God is good and not evil, because saving grace removes every impediment to that end. A God that could, but would not, so free us, would be immoral and not a savior at all.

Note too that Hart further specifies our natural end and final cause: the final cause of our supernatural end is union with God. Union with God inexorably draws humanity (and all creation) to its telos (end) where “God is all and in all” (1 Cor. 15:28). And that ultimate union is, again, intrinsic to our humanity because God has already united Godself to humanity in Jesus Christ—(1) from the creation of the cosmos, (2) in the Incarnation of Jesus of Nazareth, and (3) through his Passion and resurrection.

See for example Colossians 1 (the italicized all and everything are my emphasis):

¹⁵ The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. ¹⁶ For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; allthings have been created through him and for him. ¹⁷ He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. ¹⁸ And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. ¹⁹ For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, ²⁰ and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

THE HUMANITY OF GOD

Now with the words of Jesus, his apostles, and the church fathers behind him, Hart’s radical 4^th premise may resonate:

“God became human so that humans should become God [a la Athanasius]. Only the God who is always already human can become human. Only a humanity that is always already divine can become God.”

Wait, what? I was ready for the first and third elements of this premise. If our natural end (divinization) is intrinsic to humanity, then it follows that something divine already appears in us now in seed form. Hart identifies that seed as our natural desire for the Transcendent Good (even when our desires are obviously disordered). He argues that we cannot have a natural desire for transcendence unless that desire is internal to who we are—spiritual beings whose first cause is our supernatural, divinized end.

But what does Hart mean by saying “Only the God who is always already human can become human?” Very odd, right?

Yet maybe no more odd than John calling Jesus Christ “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev. 13:8).

The key here is the divine humanity of Jesus Christ, the God-man—in eternity and in time. Where “through the Passion, Jesus Christ, as man, becomes that which, as God, he always is” (Fr. John Behr). As Behr teaches it, it’s not that there was an eternal "pre-incarnate Word" who was not human, then later became human. Rather, we must always start with the One Lord Jesus Christ, human and divine, crucified and risen, and then we say, “This One, the cruciform Lamb, is the eternal Word and Son of God, Creator of all things, whose image was the pattern for humanity, and in whose image, humanity is becoming.”

Why? Because eternity is not “before” anything. Eternity is not on some “before and then later” everlasting timeline. Eternity is timeless and every point in time is immediately present to the eternal now.

When Jesus says, “Before Abraham was, I AM,” who is talking? The human God who descends from above time, from eternity, from outside of time. And eternity is forever indivisibly and directly united with time through the Cross. On this, see John Behr, The Mystery of Christ.

So in Hart, perhaps the humanity of God “is already” as for Behr, “As God, he always is,” as for Jesus, “Before Abraham, I AM.” The grammatical clue is the present tense of eternity (as in "Christ IS risen), the union of the eternal God to his human life in space and time, so that God always IS the human Lamb slain from both the foundations of the cosmos and outside Jerusalem, at once.

This is a Mystery. Don’t worry. Be at peace. If I sound incoherent, be gracious. I’ve been reading David Bentley Hart. We’d covet your prayers.

Revisiting Satisfaction & the Cross - Bradley Jersak

Far beyond crucifixion by execution, the Cross of Christ has, historically, generated a Good News proclamation—the gospel of God’s saving work through Jesus’ death and resurrection. That gospel was announced through a great banquet of biblical metaphors describing the means, meaning, and outcomes of the Paschal Mystery—with the Passover Lamb’s liberation from death and bondage as the central New Testament image.

In addition to the gospel message and the biblical metaphors that fill out its meaning, theologians have speculated as to WHY and HOW the Cross (both death and resurrection) saves people across time. We call the array of responses to those questions “atonement theories.” These should not be confused with the gospel as such or Scripture’s metaphors.1

SATISFACTION THEORIES OF ATONEMENT:
A QUICK REVIEW

Some of these theories use the language of “satisfaction,” a theme that recurs in some of the key Messianic texts of the Hebrew prophets. This begs the questions, (1) who was satisfied, (2) what was being satisfied, and (3) what brought that satisfaction. Some key Latin theologians opined on these questions, always narrowing the question to how God is satisfied:

Augustine – early 5^th century

Augustine describes God’s satisfaction in On the Holy Trinity, where he vehemently denies any sense that Christ’s death was required to appease the Father. He argues that the Father did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all, and so was already satisfied from all eternity. The triune God is forever satisfied by their own superabundant, eternal love, prior even to (and resulting in) the Incarnation. There was no lack in God that needed satisfaction, since God IS infinite love and cannot be diminished, but out of the fulness, God sent the Beloved Son.

Anselm – end of the first millennium

Anselm was not so sure. When he asked why God needed to become human (in Cur Deus Homo), Anselm defaulted to medieval tort law and the bygone practice of dueling for honor. He concluded that our sin had offended God’s honor and needed to be redressed. God’s honor could only be adequately satisfied by someone both divine and human. In Anselm, God’s honor was satisfied by the perfect obedience of Jesus.

John Calvin – early 16^th century

The Genevan reformer, John Calvin, doubled down on satisfaction as wrath-appeasement. In Calvin’s Institutes, he writes that our sin is an affront to the justice of God, whose wrath (not love, not honor) needed to be appeased—not by mere obedience, but by a punishment that fit the crime. Since God is eternal, the penal debt for human sin had to be paid out in an eternal person. It’s not enough to crucify an innocent man for half a day—the infinite wrath of God needed to be poured out in Christ’s body, soul, and spirit. In fact, Christ had to endure the tortures of eternal hell (while on the Cross) to satiate God’s wrath.

Paganizing the Gospel

If we review the trajectory of satisfaction in these theories, they drift further from divine grace into projections of angry human retribution. In The Day the Revolution Began, Tom Wright called this devolving progression “paganizing the gospel” (p. 147). He says that John’s Gospel does not say, “God so hated the world that he killed his only Son.” The gift of the Incarnation and the power of the Cross is that we see infinite Love and Light and Life come into the world out of the plenitude of God’s heart, even as it is refracted through human rebellion and violent retribution. Thus, God in Christ subverts the Cross into our salvation, but that’s galaxies away from assigning the pound-of-flesh justice to our heavenly Father.

REVISITING BIBLICAL SATISFACTION

That said, expunging satisfaction of implications of a diminishment in God’s nature or need for appeasement does not mean jettisoning satisfaction altogether. In fact, we can read its broader and more beautiful sense in two key passages that prefigure the Passion of the Christ. In fact, teasing out satisfaction in these texts magnifies the gospel message.

Psalm 22

I’ve written extensively on Psalm 22 both in A More Christlike God and online (here, here, and here,  focusing specifically on how the “cry of dereliction” (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me”) is drawn from the larger crucifixion narrative described in David’s poem. And I have regularly noted how verses 22-24 explicitly proclaim of God:

For he did NOT despise or abhor the affliction of the afflicted; he did NOT hide his face from me, but heard when I cried to him.

The cry of dereliction is, therefore, not a statement of God-forsakenness, but a plea that God hears and answers, so that Jesus will say in John, “You will leave me all alone. Yet I am NOT alone, for my Father is with me” (John 16:32) But in this essay, I will proceed to the verses that follow to pick up on the satisfaction motif.

The Poor Shall Eat and Be Satisfied

In the paragraph following the prophecies of Christ’s suffering and God’s salvation, the Psalmist turns to some specific, glorious outcomes. In verse 26, who is satisfied?

²⁶ The poor shall eat and be satisfied;     those who seek him shall praise the Lord. May your hearts live forever!

These phrases anticipate the banqueting table of God to which Jesus often refers. Remember that Christ’s invitation included the poor, the lame, the blind—those sold on street corners or huddled behind hedges. He tells his disciples to compel them to attend and be filled—those hungry (body, soul and spirit) will be satisfied with good things (Luke 1:53).

All the Families and Nations Included

 But not only the poor! God’s heart is to include:

• Those who seek him (26)
• All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn to him (27)
• All the families of the nations shall worship him (27)
• All who sleep in the earth / go down to the dust will bow to him (29)
• Posterity / future generations will hear and serve him (30)
• And will proclaim deliverance to those not yet born (31)
• “Saying that he has done it” (31)

“Done it.” Done what? God in Christ has secured their deliverance, prepared a banquet, and satisfied ALL families in ALL nations—whether dead, alive, or yet to live—with the bottomless cup of salvation!

Isaiah 53

Similarly, I have frequently visited Isaiah 53 (since Stricken by God? 2007) to demonstrate that it was mankind who “despised and rejected” Christ (vs. 3) and we who mistakenly considered Christ “punished by God, stricken by him and afflicted,” (vs. 4), but in fact it was our sins, wrath, and punishment he endured (vs. 5). The Lord does not “lay on him the iniquities of us all” (vs. 6) as a punishment he needs to inflict to satisfy his honor, justice, or wrath. Rather, by bearing (enduring) and forgiving our sin rather than condemning us, the Lamb slain intercedes for the transgressors (Isa. 53:12) and reconciles the world to God, not counting our sins against us (2 Cor. 5:19). In that sense, Christ’s life becomes “an offering for sin” (Isa 53:10)—a grace-gift of radically-forgiving, self-giving love rather than some retributive mechanism to meet a forensic requirement in God. I’ve also elsewhere addressed the translation disparity in Isaiah 53:10 between the Masoretic Text (“It pleased the Lord to crush him”) and the Septuagint (“It pleased the Lord to cleanse/heal him”). But now let’s pick up on the satisfaction theme once again.

Christ is Satisfied by the Offspring of His Labor

When, by grace, the Lord “poured out his life, bore the sin of many, and made intercession for us,” he effectively transfigured humanity’s heinous murder into a love-offering. Having done that,

^10b he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand. ¹¹ After he has suffered, he will see the light of life and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities.

The pronouns here are tricky. Is “he” Yahweh or the Suffering Servant? YES. As God was in Christ, Yahweh is the One pierced in the Servant (Zech. 12:10). In fact, let’s deliberately refrain from disambiguation on this point. Instead, we’ll focus on satisfaction. Earlier, I denied that anything is ever lacking or diminished in God’s eternal nature, whether by our sin or any other factor. Otherwise, God’s nature (i.e., infinite love) would be subject to external powers. God would be rendered less than God. No satisfaction is necessary to restore what can’t be lacking in God.

However, God’s good creation is still unfurling toward its telos in Christ, when at the telos, God will be all and in all (1 Cor. 15:28). That mission will only be satisfied with the retrieval of every last lost coin, the rescue of every last sheep, and the homecoming of every last son and daughter. The thing lacking, in other words, is us. Only when the full number of the elect (ALL humanity) has been summed up in Christ (Eph 1:8-10) will the end of the ages come to its fulness.

With that in mind, Isaiah 53 reads the Cross from its telos (the End). At the Cross (again, death and resurrection are indivisible), Jesus Christ “sees his offspring”—the “joy set before him” (Heb. 12:2)—he will “see the light of life, and be satisfied.” Some translations include a note to say, “He will see the fruit of his suffering and will be satisfied.”

So, is God somehow satisfied in the work of the Cross? Yes. What satisfies him? By the fruit of his suffering. By seeing, in advance, the offspring (children of the Son). And this by virtue of the Father empowering the Son by the Spirit to see from the Cross the End when the fullness of his love for the world is satisfied.

OUTRO

So, do I believe satisfaction is a theme relevant to our preaching of the Cross? Absolutely, but the history of satisfaction theories requires extra care, lest we slip back into retributive models of appeasement where the Cross is insufficient for sin apart from some expression of divine punishment.

I think sometimes the issue of satisfaction resides in our fallen imaginations. We see the evil in our world and cannot imagine solutions that truly rectify human atrocities or take them seriously without some retribution. I understand that. I want that. But I'm now convinced that the part of me that demands payback, payoff, or pay-down has yet to be crucified with Christ. What I need are the eyes to see "There's wonderworking power in the precious blood of Christ" that IS the restitution for every sin and reparation for every harm... where the Almighty power is Love.

I'm now convinced there is NOTHING his blood can't wash. From the lyrics of 2nd Chapter of Acts (“Which way the wind blows”), God in Christ “TOOK the sins of sinning,” and he ain't paying them back.  So, if we’re to take up satisfaction, let it be in the mission of Christ to accomplish to the uttermost the restoration of the cosmos according to the almighty Love of God, to whom I bow for the Last Word:

“I declare the END from the beginning, and ancient times from what is still to come. I say, ‘My purpose WILL stand, and ALL My good pleasure I WILL accomplish” (Isaiah 46:10).

 

Notes
[1] For details on these distinctions, with examples, see Bradley Jersak, A More Christlike God: A More Beautiful Gospel (2015).

Malice or Chalice, Jesus or Abaddon - Bradley Jersak

'Queen Mary Apocalypse’ London 14th century.

"Their king is the angel from the bottomless pit; his name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek, Apollyon—the Destroyer."(Revelation 9:11). 

I'm grieving Ukraine again today. After the latest news of escalating atrocities, two stubborn facts are feeling increasingly obvious:

• Putin can't be negotiated with. He can only be beaten. And only by massive escalation of death-dealing means. Probably nuclear war. And not one iota of that is for me to decide. My opinion on that is moot. And thank God, so are my disordered impulses. 

• Our instinct to say we MUST to use a military solution, however we justify it, did not in fact work in Bucha, at all. If military interventions are about harm reduction, it's evident that they've failed in this case. Even if the eventual outcome removes Russia from Ukraine and removes Putin from the Kremlin, military 'solutions' have already completely failed to bring anything but escalating trauma, death and destruction of lives that won't ever come back and families that will never recover. In Jesus's words, "satan cannot drive out satan" (Matthew 12:26). He doesn't say, "shouldn't." He says "cannot." Jesus knew. 

So I'm back to the "we" in "what should we do." I am not a head of state or a military commander and have no power to do anything related to foreign policy, militarization, or negotiations. That is not a "we" I am part of. The war is now a fact that proceeds without any reference to me whatsoever. Nor is it for me to say what Ukraine should do, or what President Zelensky should do. For my part, I can only speak to the Jesus-following we of who I am a part. 

 

"We" can be part of the Jesus Way movement he called "blessed peacemakers, called children of God." We are not powerless. My brother Rodney has seen this, bought a plane ticket, and his friends have funded his way to Moldova, where he is now working in refugee camps to support and heal survivors of war. My friends inside the Ukraine are alleviating suffering as best they can using only peacebuilding means that will not create a single death, widow, or orphan, despite the hell that's been unleashed around them. 

 

What can we do? As peacemakers, we continue to do the inner work of expunging malice and violence from our own troubled passions. And we can use our voices to remind Christians that killing has never been the Jesus Way. He forbade it from his followers. Death-dealing is both demonic and an observably ineffective path to lasting peace. If the Church (East and West) could hear and obey Jesus, it would begin by repenting of entangling itself with the beast and serving as its prophet of death. 

 

I can't prove this, but from his speeches, I'm now convinced Patriarch Kirill is not merely Putin's sidekick. He is actually forming, informing, and fuelling Putin's authoritarian delusions with doctrines of death in the name of "Christian" nationalism. What "we" can do is be a minority report of prophetic voices in our corner of the Church that resists adding Christian justifications to the naivety of violence among our own people. 

 

To those who say, "We need to..." followed by any appeal to be agents of Abaddon (Rev. 9:11), we can say this: We can follow Jesus or we can follow the destroyer. We can't put a Jesus patch on Abaddon's uniforms and claim to be children of God. Or so says Jesus. Pascha is coming (is it ever!). It's malice or the chalice--beware of partaking of the Eucharist with Judas' kiss. 

 

 

"How Will You Show Up?" Response to Valarie Kaur's "See No Stranger" - by Bradley Jersak

How Will You Show Up?

“Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and don’t do what I say?” (Luke 6:46).
- Jesus of Nazareth 

It’s disconcerting when our discovery of God’s everywhere-present grace leads us to inaction in that grace, rather than motivating and mobilizing us to be instruments of grace in our world. "Revolutionary Love" activist Valarie Kaur calls us to find our way to “showing up.” Kaur relates what it is to "show up" through stories and lessons in her profound must-read book, See No Stranger: A Memoir and Manifesto of Revolutionary Love. It expands on the teachings she conveys on her site and in her talks. She summarizes the call to "show up" as follows:      

The only way we will survive as a people is if we show up… I believe that you are the midwives in this time of great transition, tasked with birthing a new future for all of us.

So I’ve come to ask you, how will you show up? How will you let bravery lead you? And how will you show up with love?... the greatest social reformers in history have built and sustained entire non-violent movements to change the world that were rooted, that were grounded in love; love as a wellspring for courage, not love as a rush of feeling, but love as sweet labor, fierce and demanding and imperfect and life-giving, love as a choice that we make over and over again.

Revolutionary love is the choice to enter into labor, for others, for our opponents, and for ourselves. The first practice: See no stranger. All the great wisdom traditions of the world carry a vision of oneness; the idea that we are interconnected and interdependent, that we can look upon the face of anyone or anything and say as a spiritual declaration and a biological fact, “You are a part of me I do not yet know.ⁱ

Valarie is an American Sikh who champions the transforming power of love in the traditions of Jesus, Guru Nanak, Gandhi, and MLK. I share the bare bones of her vision here because when it comes time to reconstructing or reorientating our lives, our faith, and our practice toward the Light of Love, her voice and her mission draw me deep into the heart of the Jesus Way. 

Christians and ex-Christians alike would do well to sit at her feet for a season. Kaur’s learning hubⁱⁱ guides readers and educators into the practice of “revolutionary love.” Here she develops a three-fold strategy for “showing up” around the words (1) wonder, (2) grieve, and (3) fight.

To wonder is to cultivate a sense of awe and openness to others’ thoughts and experiences, their pain, their wants and needs. It is to look upon the face of anyone or anything and say: You are a part of me I do not yet know. Wonder is an orientation to humility: recognizing that others are as complex and infinite to themselves as we are to ourselves. Wondering about a person gives us information for how to love them. You can practice wonder for all others – animals, trees, living beings, and the earth. Wonder gives you information for how to care for them. Wonder is the wellspring of love.

To grieve with others is to share their pain, without trying to minimize or erase it. Grieving with others requires a willingness to be transformed by their experiences, especially those who have suffered trauma and violence. Grieving collectively and in community gives us the information to build solidarity, to fight for justice, and even to share in one another’s joy.

To fight is to choose to protect those in harm’s way. To fight with revolutionary love is to fight against injustice alongside those most impacted by harm, in a way that preserves our opponents’ humanity as well as our own. When we fight for those outside our immediate circle, our love becomes revolutionary.

If the fog deconstruction has left you feeling lost and vulnerable, I commend Kaur’s story, life, and training as a compass for the disoriented. As a teaser, I've embedded one of her inspiring talks here:     

i. Valarie Kaur, Keynote talk: “Valarie Kaur: Breath! Push! The Labor of Revolutionary Love,” Bioneers (Nov. 13, 2019). <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIrl_Ob0jvg>.

ii. https://valariekaur.com/learninghub/

“Retribution” in Isaac the Syrian

“Retribution” in Isaac the Syrian

I also maintain that those who are punished in Gehenna are scourged by the scourge of love. Nay, what is so bitter and vehement as the torment of love? I mean that those who have become conscious that they have sinned against love suffer greater torment from this than from any fear of punishment. For the sorrow caused in the heart by sin against love is more poignant than any torment. It would be improper for a man to think that sinners in Gehenna are deprived of the love of God. Love . . .  is given to all. But the power of love works in two ways: it torments sinners, even as happens here when a friend suffers from a friend; but it becomes a source of joy for those who have observed its duties. Thus, I say that this is the torment of Gehenna: bitter regret. But love inebriates the souls of the sons of heaven by its delectability.

[The Ascetical Homilies of Saint Isaac the Syrian, I/28 (1984)]

Sin is the fruit of free will. There was a time when sin did not exist, and there will be a time when it will not exist. Gehenna is the fruit of sin. At some point in time, it had a beginning, but its end is not known. Death, however, is a dispensation of the wisdom of the creator. I will rule only a short time over nature; then it will be totally abolished. Satan’s¹ name derives from voluntary turning aside from the truth; it is not an indication that he exists as such naturally.

[The Ascetical Homilies of Saint Isaac the Syrian, I/27 (1984)]

To suppose the retribution for evil acts is to be found in him is abominable. By implying that he makes use of such a great and difficult thing out of retribution, we are attributing a weakness to the Divine Nature. We cannot even believe such a thing can be found in those human beings who live a virtuous and upright life and whose thoughts are entirely in accord with the divine will – let alone believe of God that he has done something out of retribution for anticipated evil acts in connection with those whose nature he has brought into being with honour and great love. Knowing them and all their conduct, the flow of his grace did not dry up from them: not even after they started living amid many evil deeds did he withhold his care for them, even for a moment.

[ The Ascetical Homilies of Saint Isaac the Syrian, I/28 (1984)]

If someone says that [God] has put up with them here on earth in order that his patience may be known – with the idea that he would later punish them mercilessly – such a person thinks in an unspeakable blasphemous way about god because of his infantile way of thinking: he is removing form God his kindness, goodness, and compassion: all the things because of which he truly bears with inners and wicked men. Such a person is attributing to God enslavement to passions, imagining that he has not consented to their being chastised here with a view to a much greater misfortune he has prepared for them, in exchange for a short-lived patience. Not only does such a person fail to attribute something praiseworthy to God, but he also calumniates him.

[Isaac of Nineveh, “The Second Part’, Chapters IV-XLI, Sebastian Brock (1995): 39, 2]

 

[1] This is the Syriac etymology given to the word ‘Satan’ (from sta, ‘to turn aside’).

CREATURE CHRONICLE Exhibition & Symposium - with Betty Spackman

 

 

 For full details and hours: 

www.bettyspackman.com

“This exhibition, which points to the complex connections between the Arts, Sciences, and Faith is an excellent tool to facilitate discussions about the future of creation in the context of posthumanism.”

John Franklin, Executive Director, IMAGO Arts

This complex new work by Betty Spackman, MFA is a 15 panel, double-sided, circular installation, approx. 24 feet in diameter and 8 feet high. The mixed media images taken from a multitude of art, science, and faith references are meant to provoke contemplation and conversation about the difficult questions of what it is to be human. From the stories of genesis to the still-being-written stories of contemporary bioscience, layers of concern and celebration are woven together around our complex philosophical debates about creation in the context of developing technologies.

Spackman is an installation artist and painter with a background in animation and visual storytelling. Her interest in narrative informs this new work that combines the stories of both science and religion, using well known art works as mediators and commentators. It presents itself as a non-linear, multi-layered storyboard to be walked around and sat inside, with visual stories to be ‘read’ or discovered, contemplated and discussed. 

This work, shown outside of formal institutional agendas, provides a safe place of meeting for diverse cultural communities to consider together our evolving ways of defining ourselves. Spackman believes all of life to be interconnected and that love, as an intellectual, spiritual and behavioural choice, in our defining narratives, belief systems and lifestyles, is the one chance of sustainability, equity and future hope for all life forms.

But ‘A CREATURE CHRONICLE’ is not only an art exhibition. It is a multi-layered community event with an accompanying symposium with over 30 guest scholars, musicians, storytellers, actors, artists, poets, and more that Spackman has invited to be part of the month-long series of talks and concerts. Some are local to British Columbia and others are coming from England, the US, Alberta, the North West Territories and Ontario.

‘A CREATURE CHRONICLE’ is part of the ‘Swallowfield Arts Series 2022’ hosted by Dennis and Jenny DeGroot of Swallowfield Farm, who use their award-winning barn for hay in the winter, and cultural events the rest of the year. The show and symposium are non-profit with all events by donation. Seating is limited - so you will need to book a seat to Panel Talks and Concerts: ccregister@shaw.ca

*** Selected Panel Talks will be livestreamed on YouTube: www.bettyspackman.com *** 

FULL 

Download CC PRESS RELEASE 2022