Friday, June 17, 2011
That's about right
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Lucero is Mexican
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
An Elseworld Jesus for a Failed Fundamentalist
(adapted from a Bible & Pop Culture journal response)
“Upon seeing ‘J’ walking down the aisle in cutoffs and a tuxedo T-shirt, God leans over to Pope and wryly notes, ‘Damn. I’ll never be able to retire.’” (C&W, 50).
It's okay. I laughed, too.
As I was reading the C&W article on the representations of Jesus – both for devotional purposes and in Elseworlds – I realized that I am much more drawn to the representations of Jesus in the Elseworlds. I like to engage the cultural presentations, the “cultural preoccupation[s] with Jesus and [the] playful willingness to engage in ahistoric aesthetic experiments in order to ask, ‘What Would Jesus Do?’ if he were dropped into weird environments” (49). That seems like much more fun and much more applicable to the world today than trying to re-create a Jesus in antiquity…definitely much more interesting.
I worry though, I guess, about that degenerating into mockery. I do not want to mock Jesus. I think that I like the Elseworld Jesus because it satirizes religion, and religion can be stuffy and ridiculous sometimes and we need (I want) to laugh at it for its ridiculousness. It's like the YouTube videos by Vintage 21 that satirize old school Jesus videos. They are hysterical and point out the silliness of the devotional type Jesus films ("There's that, and there's that"). I really never have been a fan of force-fed religion and the Elseworld representations of Jesus allow me to consider what I really think and give me the space to draw my own conclusions and to imagine (and throw out, if I desire) different aspects of Jesus’ character. I want to confront my fears and the limitations of my faith and figure it out; I realize, though, that sentiment does not apply to the majority of Christians or human beings in general. That is why I am at seminary, and at a seminary that encourages me to come to my own conclusions. I like the space to imagine Jesus, to laugh and to consider, being confronted with different ideas about him and Christianity within the checks and balances provided by a community of people doing the same thing.
And yet, my biggest fear is going from pointing out the inconsistencies and silliness of religion to mocking Jesus the actual person. I take Jesus seriously because I have wrestled – and continue to wrestle – with what I think about him and God. I love and respect Jesus the human because he stood up for what he believed despite his being “just another Jew in the ditch” (Howard Thurman, Jesus and the Disinherited). I do not understand how exactly Jesus the human is Jesus the divine representation of God, but I do believe it and respect the mystery. Process theism says it is because Jesus the man most fully responded to call of God upon his life (it's just so funny).
Then I consider that perhaps the Devotional Jesus side of things can become mockery, too, just on the other side of the coin. Sam Harris says that moderates are failed fundamentalists, unable or unwilling to pick a spot and park it. Atheists and fundies bookend the conversation because both have chosen sides. So, asking as a failed fundamentalist, can we have both? Can we poke fun at Christianity and not Christ? Can we re-imagine Christ and Christianity in positive, progressive ways and caricature that which we find absurd? Can we ask, can we trust, mainstream audiences (although, what is mainstream? and can we apply that label to those people drawn to this genre of popular culture?) to responsibly and maturely (whatever that means) view and reflect on this Elseworld Jesus? Are the majority of people only able to handle Devotional Jesus because Elseworld Jesus is too out there, too controversial, too threatening? How can we Elseworld folks be responsible about that, too?
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Insert catchy phrase here.
Bitterness, however, is not generally a desirable trait. In all their definitions, MW (that's Merriam-Webster) indicates that "bitter" implies intensity or severity, whether in taste or emotion or pain, and is always negative. No one is bitterly ecstatic or bitterly hopeful. I really don't think I like being bitter. My internal pendulum eventually swings toward hope and joy (confession: I'm an optimist). The high school reflection I found in the archives of my computer, however, chronicles one moment in a period of real resentment and pain. I blamed God because, well, Jeremiah 29:11 told me to. And though my writing dripped with teenage angst, I think it accurately captured the exhaustion and pissed hopelessness I was feeling.
In that aforementioned piece, I was upset about a boy (I know, original. But I was in high school). The title is from that theologically and philosophically profound gem of a television show, Designing Women. Julia Sugarbaker's eccentric customer, Bernice, was getting older and the women were trying to get her to relinquish her car keys. Bernice uttered that infamous line one day after returning from a short drive in which another driver flicked her off. Classic.
Bitterness made another appearance in my life, this time in college when a friend and I formed a club called the Lying Bitter People Club (the LBPC). We were bitter...and we lied about it. We formed this club one night after lamenting the sorry state of things, and though the group never grew beyond the two of us (misery loves company, but three's a crowd), it was somewhat cathartic if for no other reason than we had each other. The resolution was the dissolution of the club when I graduated and she got a boyfriend.
Now, I am utterly reticent to do any sort of me-and-the-Bible stuff, but I recently wrote my capstone paper so I have this feeling that I should include some sort of exegetical section. I think the Hebrew word for bitter is marah, or meribah. Or both (who knows? I don't remember Hebrew - all those little dots and dashes). If this were capstone, I would take you through a story of bitterness in the Bible and tie it nicely into my case study...oh wait, I think I might actually do that (and I looked it up. It's marah):
The term marah pops up in Exodus 15 as the name of a place the Israelites stop after a miraculous water show at the Jordan River. The water here, though, is bitter (hence the name) and they cannot drink it. In typical Exodus fashion, they grumble and Moses has to ask God for a hand. On order from God, Moses throws a stick in the water and slam-bam-thank-you-ma'am, the water is drinkable. Marah.
But the story of marah that causes me to pause is dear Naomi in the book of Ruth. Naomi means sweetness or pleasantness. Naomi has lost husband and sons, most likely to famine. She has two daughters-in-law, Orpah and Ruth, and one of them leaves her, too. Husbandless, childless, hungry, hopeless, Naomi changes her name to Mara "because the Almighty has made my life very bitter. I went away full, but the Lord has brought me back empty. Why call me Naomi?" (1:20). I heard a sermon once, not too long ago, where the (male) pastor used Ruth as a dating example and riled Naomi for her name change. He called her a bitter hag. This man apparently experiences the Lord's divine favor upon his life at all points and has never lost anyone or anything he loves.
Because if I'm going to be honest, Naomi and I have much more in common in those few little verses than I often admit. I was raised on a faith system that allowed for questioning of God as long as you didn't really question God. If you were feeling less than full, it was either your fault or for a reason (or both), and you better damn well figure out what you're supposed to learn from it. Naomi, though, is a little more honest about her situation. She's done, the kind of done that comes from the pain of repeatedly being hit while you're down. The kind of done when you know there isn't a reason. She says it out loud. She calls God out. And she changes her mother loving name.
Resolution in Naomi's story comes in the following 3 bizarre chapters (feet are involved...but they don't really mean tus pies). It is not recorded whether she unchanges her name or her stance on God and bitterness. It's not recorded if anyone actually ever calls her Mara. But Naomi and Ruth form their own club and, fortunately, Ruth gets married to the Big Man in Town (read: social security for Naomi). I don't remember the resolution of the issue for Bernice and her car or me in my adolescent ranting. My little Word document ends fairly abruptly. All I can think is that, for me at least, the pendulum swung and I just kept moving...
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Malakalekemaka...or however you spell that
One year in the not-too-distant past, Christmas day fell on a Sunday. I boycotted Christmas that year because the day we celebrate Christ's birth had the audacity to fall on a day in which I had to get up and go to church, instead of on a day when it should have fallen: any other day in which I did not have to get up and go to church. Priorities, anyone?

