God is raging in the prophet's words.
—Abraham Heschel, The Prophets
Shortly after this summer’s murders at the Sikh Temple in Wisconsin, Sociology Professor Mark Juergensmeyer wrote a short article in which he reflected on the motivations of the perpetrator, Wade Michael Page . In his article, Juergensmeyer identified Page as a “Christian terrorist.” For most of us who seek to follow in the way of Jesus, Juergensmeyer’s turn of phrase was a shocking one. But, in spite of being shocking – or, more accurately, because they were shocking – Juergensmeyer’s words were also prophetic.
The prophets of scripture were no strangers to provocative words and actions. They often made speeches or performed symbolic acts calculated to cause big emotional reactions in their audiences: sometimes anger, sometime shock, sometimes sorrow. The goal of these women and men, in deliberately stepping on nerves, was not simply to get a rise out of people. Rather, they sought out big responses in order to precipitate a crisis of conscience in those to whom they prophesied. One of the most famous examples of provocation as prophecy comes in 2 Samuel. There we find the prophet Nathan, the King David, and a twist ending worthy of a Roald Dahl story (2 Samuel 11:26-12:13a). Nathan whips the murderous King David into an indignant rage over the criminal behavior of a wealthy man. It is only when David is vowing punishment that Nathan pulls open the trap door: “You,” he shouts at the startled King, “are the man!”
In his article, Juergensmeyer does something Nathanesque. He invites us to become indignant at the notion of a Christian terrorist, to reject it utterly. I certainly do so: the very term is an oxymoron. When a professed Christian chooses violence we know that he has either lost sight of the Gospel or spectacularly misunderstood its message. No sooner does Juergensmeyer get us righteously offended, however, than he springs his own variation on “you are the man” upon us: he quietly points out that most of us don’t even blink when we read the words “Muslim terrorist.”
I don’t know about you, but it sure stings when someone names my hypocrisy. I am embarrassed to remember how frequently, casually, and uncritically I have read of Muslim terrorism and, more recently, of “Muslim rage.” What redoubles my embarrassment is that I know better: in my Muslim friends and colleagues I witness the same faithfulness to the Divine, to community, and to creation that I find in my Christian friends and colleagues. More than that, I know that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are appalled by terrorism and reject the violent protests which occupy today’s headlines. And yet, like a man who thinks nothing of having neighbors of color and simultaneously guffawing at racist jokes, that hasn’t made me any less passive in the face Islamophobia. I’m pretty sure that I am not alone in my passivity.
Like the prophets before him, Mark Juergensmeyer shines a light on those of us who employ our privilege as a means of remaining indifferent to injustice. And, like those prophets, he leaves us with a choice. Will we continue to hear talk of “Muslim terrorists” and “Muslim rage” and say nothing in response? Or will we heed the demands of our faith and of our integrity, and denounce these labels for the lies that they are?
I respectively disagree. There are many Christians and Muslims who wholeheartedly believe violence is ok, good and warranted in the name of religion, peace or country.
I wish your words here were true:
“When a professed Christian chooses violence we know that he has either lost sight of the Gospel or spectacularly misunderstood its message.”
I’ve rarely met evangelicals who believe this. ‘Terrorist’ is a word used to describe the violence done to us by those who believe violence is ok according to their sacred or secular religion.
People of conscience will vote this Novemeber, I hope all followers of Jesus, his words and example will vote according to your quote, for the sake of peace abroad and at home.
I respectfully disagree to your respectful disagreement. The violence in the name of religion is not done because of religion, it is done for other reasons and the religion is used as a tool for justification. In the case of Muslim violence, it is done in reaction to the fall of the Ottoman Empire and modernity and their alienation from modern life, and their religion is twisted to be used as a tool for justification of their violence.
I don’t think that we actually disagree, Eric. Bear in mind, the operative word in my argument is “when” – I don’t make the case that professed Christians never choose violence but, rather, that they are behaving inconsistently with the Gospel when they do so.
I think religion lends itself to pulling out the sword in defense of____________(fill in the blank).
Jesus disarmed Peter and yet religious people have been drawing swords ever since in the name of God/Allah.
I’ve found that very few religious circles truly speak about and advocate for an understanding of faith apart from fear and violence either culturally or eternally. It’s written into our faith community narratives and out worked in our politics and policies.
My Episcopalian/Anglican “religious circle” certainly is among the few then! I respectfully suggest you worship with us, & if in Spokane do try out St. John’s Cathedral, & see if you recognize this faith community as one which doesn’t advocate fear & violence.
Karen, you speak truth, and one of the blessings I’ve recieved through my involvement in SpokaneFAVS as a writer and responder has been the introduction to many leaders and communities that walk out peace and justice. I am frequently surprised by dialogues and action that I’ve rarely seen inside evangelical circles. I’m just too conservative for progressives and too progressive for conservatives, which means I don’t get to be “in” a group but have to find friendship and partnership in the middle. It’s a lonely spot but I do admire many more people than I used too through not being forced to defend or debate for one group. I’ve been really impacted by my episcopal friends in town, I particularly love the “way” they choose to think and evolve. But I’m afraid I’d be an irritant due to my views on scripture, ecclesiology, theology and missology. But I do use TBOCP all the time. 😉