The "Nothing More Lovely" paper is now finished and I plan to move on to the NIME paper next week, but the comments on justice from several of you on earlier posts led me to reflect on the Christology and Ethics project...
I'm thinking of sticking with the title "The Problem of Good(s)" and using the story of the rich young man in the synoptics as a kind of narrative guide for reflection on these issues. I want to emphasize the importance of the philosophical and theological shift toward attending to difference or "the other" for both disciplines, so perhaps the subtitle "Christology, Ethics and Alterity."
Introduction
Why and how the concepts of good, goodness and goods are relevant for both disciplines. Rationale for using rich young man story to organize reflections (focus on Markan version).
What Must I Do?
Contrary to the early modern tendency to separate Christology (including atonement theory) from ethics (a critique leveled by feminists, womanists and liberation theologians inter alia), this story is not afraid of the link between salvation and doing. In other words, it encourages us or provides conceptual space for us to integrate atonement theory and questions of justice in community.
No One is Good
This astonishing comment by Jesus is swept aside by many biblical commentators, who appeal in Nestorian fashion to the idea that this is his "humanity" speaking. Beginning with a holistic anthropology and Christology, I want to explore the implications of taking this comments seriously... what does it imply for the "difference" between God and Jesus, God and us, us and others?
Looking Around
The Markan text uses the language of "looking" quite extensively, not only in this story but in the previous story about children coming to Jesus, and in the following interactions between Jesus and the disciples. Jesus looks at the "others" in various ways, inviting them into the arriving reign of divine peace. He invites the rich man to "look" at others at not simply his own agency in relation to the commandments.
How Hard It Is
Why is it especially hard (or impossible) for rich people to enter the kingdom, while small children are lifted up as a model for such entering? It has to do with the way in which we hold onto the lovables of the world, the material and social commodities that structure our life together. Participating in eternal life now clearly has something to do with distributive justice... which is painful to the haves, who define themselves in opposition to and in dependence on the alterity of the have-nots.
Who Can be Saved?
Here I will return to the doctrine of atonement, pointing to the problems with separating it from the doctrine of the incarnation and the whole ministry of Christ. Salvation is not just something that has to do with a single event of the cross, but with the whole passion of the whole Christ into which we are invited, a way of being in relation to the "other" and the "Other."
The Last Will Be First
This whole passion of the whole Christ includes the resurrection and the presence of the life-giving Spirit, the "eschatos," that is now breaking in and transforming the way in which we order the goods of our lives together as the "body" of Christ. I will conclude with comments on the implications for the integration of Christology and ethics in concrete, communal, late modern globalized life.
________________________
I'm not sure if using the narrative as an organizing scheme, rather than a conceptual framework, will work, but I'm leaning toward trying it.
1. Any comments on the methodological approach (or vision for the book)?
2. Any comments or questions on the material issues (e.g., interpretation as the rich young man story , relation of justice to salvation, philosophical turn to alterity)?