Fence patrol
I wrote about walls recently and mentioned the Secure Fence Act. This legislation was introduced in 2006 to protect us from Mexican and Canadian terrorists. Now I have been informed that we can join the effort to keep the U.S. secure. This website provides visual monitoring that you can observe and report infractions from the convenience of the living room, beach, library, Star Bucks, or pretty much anywhere that internet access is available. Now you can see how easy it is to watch others. How does this shape our culture? Some would suggest that encouraging and facilitating voluntary fence patrol participation will increase our safety. I think we are sacrificing a culture that values trust for one that values suspicion. The further we move down this path, the more likely we’ll all start to become preoccupied with this question: Who’s watching you?
Let’s fight about pistou Christou
Somehow I ended up here this morning. Several people that often capture my interest are central to this thread: Piper, N.T. Wright, Richard B. Hayes. Somewhere in the heat I found this. I’ve been reading Harink’s book 1 (sad to say I’m stuck in the third section only because I have a lot of other reading that needs attention right now) and have really enjoyed the read. In Guretzki’s summary, he quotes Harrink: “According to Harink, Barth, along with John Howard Yoder and Stanley Hauerwas, is significant because he understood the notion of pistou Christou in Paul to referring to “the faith of Christ” rather than as has been long preached from evangelical pulpits, “faith in Christ,” the standard translation of the phrase ever since Luther. Beyond this, Harink sees Barth’s commentary on Romans as being essentially apocalyptic in tone, such that “God’s faithfulness is revealed in the faithfulness of Jesus Christ; specifically, in the faithfulness of his standing ‘among sinners as a sinner,’ placing himself under God’s judgment.” 2 I’ve read a bit of Sanders and Dunn and once wrote a paper on Romans 3:21-26 where I engaged pistou Christou, so this discussion always gets my attention. I get interested to see if 1. anything is being said that I haven’t thought about, and 2. how much heat can be generated over this issue. Admittedly, the second point of interest is more for amusement, while with the first, I actually hope to learn something. My amusement is sort of turning more to sadness as I reflect on the hostility that arises in these discussions. For those of us who want badly to be right, we can put out a lot of heat and often look for a fight. This touches on something that I’ve been meditating on. Is God a fighter? The O.T. witness certainly portrays him that way. In some circles, God is described as Christus Victor. This comes from a view of the atonement that emphasizes divine conflict and victory over the hostile powers that hold humanity in subjection. Another important image is the cross as being an instrument of subjection to hostile powers that somehow overcomes them by refusing to resist but takes on all the evil and subsumes it in such a way that it is made impotent, overcome, perhaps even annihilated in some mysterious cosmic way. There’s something to be said for both views. I find it interesting that the view that you hold most dear seems to shape how you are likely to engage discussion and life. So let’s get on with it and fight. Choose your weapon: sword or cross. Maybe you need both.
- Douglas Harink, Paul among the Postliberals (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2003). ↩
- Douglas Karel Harink, “Two Ways in Theology: A Critical Analysis of the Central Aspects of Karl Barth’s Critique of Friedrich Schleiermacher’s Theology.” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of St. Michael’s College, 1988, 49. ↩
