Andrew Mark Henry with a timely video for Holy Week: What Would Jesus Drink?
Educating in the Era of COVID-19: Day 13
These days feel longer and longer. I’m not saying that in a particularly negative way. Sometimes the days of summer break feel this way because there’s less happening. But that’s not quite the case now, is it? There’s a lot happening. I haven’t measured my days but it does seem to take longer to do my job this way than it did before the pandemic.
Yesterday I checked in with my students via Google Meets. Most of them are doing well. The feedback I’ve received indicates that most of my students (not all) are comfortable with the workload for my class, are finding the instructions clear, and are generally OK with everything. Still, I can’t help but feeling that they’re not learning all that I want them to learn.
But what they are learning is what they’ll need for college, and graduate school if they attend, and that is the necessity of time-management, of planning your day, or evaluating your workload on your own, and of setting an alarm clock to get up before 1 PM. School provides this for them. Their families provide this for them. But someday, they’ll have to provide it for themselves.
Why did they execute Jesus?
Last week I asked my students to explain why Jesus was executed. I had them read Matthew 21.12-17 (cf. Mark 11.15-19; Luke 19.45-48) as well as John 11.17-45. The first reference, and it’s parallels across the Synoptics, is what’s been called the ‘cleansing’ or ‘purification’ of the Temple (or my personal favorite: Jesus’ ‘Temple-Tantrum’). The second reference is the narrative where Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead. These two stories function as the gateway in both narratives to Jesus’ eventual demise. I wanted my students to read the excerpts from Matthew and John, summarize them for me, and then explain how each one tells us why Jesus was executed.
They understood how both of these stories functioned. Regarding the Temple-Tantrum, they observed that Jesus’ actions would’ve been threatening to the priesthood and the Temple-system. Notably though, I haven’t seen anyone comment on how Rome’s shadow may have contributed to the urgency to get rid of Jesus.
For historians, the Synoptic rationale is easy to understand and even embrace as a plausible historical explanation for why Jesus was executed. The raising of Lazarus from the dead evokes a supernatural explanation which historians using a traditional methodology tend to avoid. Literarily though, the answer has been clear for most of my students: anyone who can do that is dangerous.
Of course, the irony of the Fourth Gospel is that if Jesus can overcome death—if he is the Resurrection and the Life—then how does killing him stop him? The Evangelist winks at us. Silly enemies of Jesus, thinking death is a weapon.
Educating in the Era of COVID-19: Day 12
Yesterday was a fun day, relatively speaking. Obviously, this whole social-isolation-in-mass isn’t fun but I did have fun interviewing a couple more people yesterday. I need to make a habit of this even after we return to our new normal.
If you missed it, on Monday I interviewed Dr. Joseph P, Laycock about Satanism. Yesterday, I talked with Fr. Kevin Daugherty about the Convergence Movement (a sort of liturgical Pentecostalism) and Dr. James McGrath about the Christian doctrine of the Ascension. If you have time, I hope you’ll take the time to watch because each interview is insightful.
Today’s Wednesday which means I check-in with my classes via Google Meet. Also, I need to do some grading. Ok, I need to do a lot of grading.
Interview: discussing the doctrine of the Ascension with Dr. James F. McGrath
In this interview with Prof. James McGrath, the Clarence L. Goodwin Chair in New Testament Language and Literature at Butler University, we talked about the Christian doctrine of the Ascension, how it has been understood, how it should be understood, how it connects to the Parousia, and why any of this matters at all. I hope you enjoy!
Here are the questions I asked Prof. McGrath:
- Explain to my students why I’m talking to you about this subject. In other words, what’s the focus of your research and academic career?
- This week my students will be reading the Resurrection Narratives in the (canonical) Gospels. They’ll notice that only the Gospel of Luke mentions Jesus’ ascension directly (though there’s a sense that Jesus will be departing soon in the others). Why is this?
- If I were living in the first century, and I was told that the Messiah had gone to be with the Father but would return, and that when he had gone to be with the Father he ascended into the sky, how would I have understood this? Would I have thought he went into the sky, literally? Would I have understood this to be a metaphor?
- What purpose did the doctrine of the Ascension serve for early Christians and their proclamation of the Gospel? In other words, what’ the point of the doctrine?
- As modern people, our cosmology is different from that of the ancients. In your opinion, how should modern Christians understand the doctrine of the Ascension? Does it have worth today?
- The Ascension seems to be connected closely to another doctrine that my students will encounter soon: the Parousia or ‘Second Coming/Appearing’ of Jesus. What’s the connection between the Ascension and the Parousia?
- While many of my students identify as Christian, many others don’t. In your opinion, why is studying ancient texts like the Gospels of the Book of Acts, and thinking about Christian doctrines like the Ascension, valuable exercises? Are they valuable for Christians only or is there a reason that non-Christians should have at least an academic interest in these topics?
Interview: discussing the Convergence Movement with Fr. Kevin Daugherty
I’m excited to share my second interview with you. This morning I spoke with Fr. Kevin Daugherty. He’s a Priest within the Convergence Movement (specifically the Convergent Christian Communion). Fr. Daugherty talks about how the Convergence Christian Communion brings together aspects of Christianity that are rarely found in a single expression of the religion: (1) being open and affirming; (2) being charismatic; (3) being evangelical; (4) being sacramental. For those who are familiar with the writings of Dr. Robert Webber or Dr. Thomas Oden, this movement embraces much of what they imagined Christianity might be. (FYI, in the interview, Fr. Daugherty mentions a charismatic Episcopal service on YouTube. Here’s the video: Charismatic Episcopal Church in Paris.)
Here are the questions I asked during this interview:
- Please tell everyone why I’m talking with you about this topic. What’s your relationship with the Convergence Movement?
- What is the Convergence Movement and where did it come from, and when did it come into existence?
- We’re doing this interview because (1) I teach at an Episcopal School, so my students are familiar with Episcopal liturgy (experientially) and (2) my students just spent some time studying Pentecostalism. Can you explain how Anglican/Episcopal and Pentecostal spirituality intersect in the Convergence Movement?
- One critique many people have of Christianity, in general, is that it seems to birth new denominations daily. Why the Convergence Christian Communion (CCC)? What not being a charismatic Episcopalian or a liturgical Pentecostal assembly?
- On the CCC website there are four main points listed in the section on your ‘identity’: (1) We are open and affirming; (2) We are charismatic; (3) We are evangelical; (4) We are sacramental. Can you explain what each of these means to the CCC and why they’re important?
- This interview is being recorded primarily for my class ‘Religion in the United States’. What does the American context have to do with the formation of the Convergence Christian Movement and its particular emphasis on the aforementioned points?
- Finally, what’s the best thing about being in the Convergence Christian Movement? What do you like most about your tradition?
Educating in the Era of COVID-19: Day 11
This week will be the most unique one since we went to online learning. I’ve asked several scholars and/or religious practitioners if they’d be willing to do interviews with me on topics they research/religions they practice. (This is the beginning of something I hope to do with some frequency, even when we ‘return’ to our ‘new normal’ after this pandemic.) My first interview was great. I talked with Dr. Joseph P. Laycock, assistant professor of religious studies at Texas State University, and the author of Speak of the Devil: How the Satanic Temple is Changing the Way We Talk About Religion, about Satanism in the United States and the two predominant groups: The Church of Satan and The Satanic Temple. My students in my ‘Religion in the United States’ class will learn about Satanism next week, so I’m excited to share this interview with them.
Today, I’m interviewing Fr. Kevin R. Daugherty, regarding the Convergence Movement, which brings together aspects of what might be consider Pentecostal spirituality with the liturgical practices found in traditions like Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism. Then I’ll talk with James F. McGrath, the Clarence L. Goodwin Chair in New Testament Language and Literature from Butler University, about the Christian doctrine of the Ascension.
Otherwise, the routine is taking shape. I upload assignments, meet with students using Google Meet, grade assignments, and do it again. We didn’t try synchronous learning as a response to the pandemic but it does appear likely that my summer school class, ‘The Hebrew Scriptures’, will be online and synchronous in June. So, I’m brainstorming ways to make that a great class in spite of the unfortunate circumstances.
Interview: discussing The Satanic Temple with Dr. Joseph P. Laycock
In an effort to make the most out of the move to online education, I’ve begun reaching out to scholars and/or religious practitioners to see if they’d be willing to be interviewed about their research and/or beliefs. Since my ‘Religion in the United States’ students are learning about the Scientologist this week and Satanist next week—both being groups that challenge conventional definitions of religion—I thought I’d reach out to Dr. Joseph P. Laycock of Texas State University. Laycock is an assistant professor of religious studies who focuses on new religious movements and American religious history. His newest book, Speak of the Devil: How The Satanic Temple is Changing the Way We Talk About Religion, is excellent. I wanted my students to be able to hear directly from a scholar and I was thrilled that Laycock agreed to participate.
My students will watch this interview as part of their homework next week. But I want to share it now for those who might be interested. As a preview, here are the seven questions I asked him:
- Please tell everyone why I’m talking with you about this topic. What do you research and how did Satanism become one of your interests?
- One of the first things I tell my students about Satanism—and it’s something that find somewhat surprising—is that most Satanist don’t actually believe that Satan is a real, metaphysical being. Instead, he’s more of a symbol. Can you explain what Satan symbolizes for most Satanists?
- I’m from the San Francisco Bay Area, so I’ve known the name ‘Anton LaVey‘ and I’ve known of the Church of Satan (CoS) for years. Can you explain why LaVey and his CoS is important to understanding Satanism in the United States?
- In your excellent book, Speak of the Devil: How the Satanic Temple i Changing the Way We Talk about Religion, you focus on a new group of Satanists: The Satanic Temple (TST). Can you explain what TST is and what’s their mission and purpose is?
- Last year when I taught my class on American religion, I showed my students the graphic that can be found on TST’s website that juxtaposes their identity with that of the CoS. What would you say is the most important difference or differences between these two groups?
- In Chapter 6, ‘Satanic Bake Sales’, you wrote about a fascinating concept. You walk about how Satanists wrestle with the best way to appropriate ‘the inverted order’ or ‘the discourse of evil’. What does this mean and why are these concepts important for understanding TST (or even Satanism in general)?
- Some people dismiss TST, and even COS, as ‘fake’ religion or a mockery of religion. My students have read J.Z Smith’s article ‘Religion, Religions, Religious’, so they get the gist of why the word ‘religion’ can be tricky but can you explain why it’s problematic to dismiss TST or COS as a ‘fake’ or ‘mock’ religion?
You can watch the (unedited…because I haven’t developed that skill set yet) interview here:
Palm Sunday 2020
This morning I googled icons of Jesus’ triumphal entry. The one posted above, by the Ukrainian artist Oleksandr Antonyuk, stood out to me not just because of it’s unique visually—the proportions of Jesus’ head and the shape donkey’s body stand out the most—but because it’s lonely. Palm Sunday 2020 will be a lonely one. We won’t be gathered together. We’ll be at home, maybe with family, maybe live-streaming a service, but not together as we’re accustom.
There’s something odd yet fitting about celebrating Palm Sunday during a pandemic. I’ve often told my students that the Gospels are probably easier to embrace for those who see the world through the lens of disorder and brokenness. If life’s going well for you it’s hard to resonate with the desperation of narratives that climax with execution by crucifixion.
But then a pandemic breaks us. Even the most comfortable are uncomfortable. And those who already were suffering, sadly, are even more vulnerable to the harshness of our world. It’s one of those rare moments where we’re all sharing in some form of struggle even if it’s not being felt evenly. But it’s being felt and that opens us up to stories we’ve heard already but needed to hear in a new way.
Palm Sunday does exalt Jesus as King but it also highlights the reality of shattered expectations. Jesus isn’t that kind of King. Jesus will not experience that kind of enthronement. The paradox of the Gospels is that Jesus is the kind of King who rides a humble donkey, whose enthronement is a Roman cross, who in the Johannine tradition has a Kingdom that’s not from this earth. His disciples don’t understand this. His adoring crowds don’t know this. In just a few days their worldview will be shattered.
Many may be asking ‘why?’ this pandemic is happening just as Jesus and his disciples will ask (in a few days, liturgically) how Palm Sunday could morph into ‘Good’ Friday. As regards the pandemic, we can talk about humanity’s responsibility another time because in this situation there’s a lot of it. But for a moment I want to think about divine responsibility as relates to expectations. One reason I enjoy teaching the Book of Job, and why it’s the last part of the Hebrew Bible I cover when I do, is because it undermines all the theodicy of Books like Proverbs and Deuteronomy. It’s (IMO) an absurdist response to the idea we could comprehend the divine mind even if the divine plan was explained to us. I don’t like this for theological reasons, per se (I’m not linking with many Fundamentalists who rebuke us for questioning God), but for literary, human reasons: I don’t think we can understand our suffering and our world in ways that satisfy us when we’re experiencing that suffering. All we can understand is we had expectations about how the world should work, or God should act, and those expectations were wrong.
Like Job, we feel alone when this happens. We feel like we’re the only one being targeted by God. Did Jesus feel this during the Holy Week we’re about to remember? It seems like he did. He asks, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’ He asks this less than a week after he rides into Jerusalem as the King, as the Messiah.
But Job isn’t alone. He represents all of us, even if in the extreme. And Jesus wasn’t alone, he represents all of us, even if in the extreme. And now, during this pandemic, we’re not alone. We may feel alone, or at least lonely, but this is a microcosm of the human condition. Our expectations are high, they’re broken, and we’re left wondering why things are the way they are. This pandemic has magnified this reality. And all we can do is let it color this particular Palm Sunday for us so that we read these stories afresh.
Holy Week exists, liturgically, to be experienced. Usually, this is sacramental in nature. Now, it’s in the midst of a world shattering pandemic. We have no choice but to go through this Palm Sunday alone, like Job, and like Jesus, and allow it to speak to us about our expectations. But I don’t say this is to encourage reflecting on Palm Sunday isolating from the rest of Holy Week. For today, yes, let it sink into your soul a bit. But this isn’t the last day. We have six more to go.
Educating in the Era of COVID-19: Week 2
Another week in the books. Another day sitting at home. Another opportunity to worry less about whether we’ll resume this school year and to worry more about whether next school year will be delayed. I’m handling the anxiety of the pandemic well but I worry for those who aren’t. I worry about my students who can easily fall through the cracks if we don’t keep up with them day-to-day. I worry about the financial stability of my government, employer, family-members, friends. But overall, all things considered, I’m doing good.
Next week should be a good one. I’m interviewing several scholars and practitioners about their work including Joseph Laycock (Satanism), Kevin R. Daugherty (the ‘Convergence’ Movement, i.e, liturgical Pentecostals), and James McGrath (the doctrine of the ascension). A few others are being lined up or have been lined up for the weeks ahead. I’ll share my interviews here will permission.
The blog of Brian LePort 