SCARY JESUS: TERRIFYING theology of Cross

Some weeks ago this sculpture of Christ was removed from St. John’s Church (West Sussex). Made from coal and resin and installed in the 60’s, it should now be hanging from a large wall in a local museum. The sculpture was not only unsettling for the children of the church: it was also “off-putting to people outside of the church!" The church wanted an image that will communicate the “hope and joy” of the Christian faith.

The removal of the sculpture, as a result of the apparent terror it caused to children and the negative imaging to the public ,got me thinking about some of the theological implications as to the inherited ways we image the Christian faith. I was intrigued enough to want to know the following: what actually informed and motivated sculptor? Where did he draw his imagery from? What sort of theology informed his construction of such a representation? It is a fact that most of the “founding theological fathers” (and they were mostly men) of modern day Protestantism have bestowed their ecclesial traditions with a diet of fear and terror of the Divine that such ingraining becomes tough going for those wishing to go against the grain.

I further wonder if this act of dissent and its wider implications have been carefully reflected upon by the vicar and his congregants. Did this exercise cause the whole church to look again at its liturgies, hymns, and theology from the perspective of the theology of the cross and the crucifixion motif and cross theories that play into such imaging as the above? Or is that with the removal of the sculpture and the newly commissioned paintings of joy and hope, everything will revert back to business as usual? For what needs to be reflected upon is the less acknowledged source of the flaws and the conceptual problems which the sculpture both poses and represents.

Imaging Jesus is always going to be tricky business, if our theological perspectives are not interrogated, deconstructed and reconstructed and if we operate on the premise that Jesus was a white European. I wonder if an African Jesus, Middle Eastern Jesus or Che looking Jesus (as the series “The Christ we Share“attempted to do) will scare these children as well. These images certainly got some of the adults upset and in the process encouraged healthy and necessary discussions.

Perhaps, the act of handing the sculpture over to the museum is a more profoundly symbolic act that we may wish to imagine and want to reckon with. It may be too close to the truth in the way it reminds us of what becomes of faiths and religious practices that lack self-criticality and self-interrogation. At best they become museum pieces of outdated images and dogmas of a bygone era and at worst that which we would prefer not to remember. This is not about denying the nastiness of human crucifixions!

It is not too late to ask where and how in all our imaging and representing of Jesus we have in many instances misrepresented Jesus. This, I suppose, will be a tough, but necessary exercise. Herein, lies the coordinates for an immensely important theological debate.

© copyright Jagessar January30, 2009

NAMING and RACISM

What's in a name or in the representation of someone or a group? Too much to be taken lightly! Should I be surprised at the remarks of a very privileged young man – a Prince who refers to a friend as "paki" and a colleague as a "raghead"? What do I make of all the comments and excuses from various voices, that his use of “paki” was well-meant, given that he was addressing a friend? Should we not forget about this, as the Prince has apologised for his behaviour. This, of course, is not the first time that he has had to apologise for displaying racism.

Most wrongs tend to be done by us humans with the best of intentions, especially those who operate on the premise that they know what is best for "others" and how they like to be represented. However one wants to defend the Prince, "Paki" is derogatory term no matter how much he and his apologists/pundits try to re-define the term and make a case about good intentions. Privilege, whether we like or not, carries with it a responsibility that will judge the privileged harsher than those on the lower rungs of the class/social ladder. Privileged position, however, is no guarantee against prejudices and racist behaviours that tend run quite deep in the blood-streams of whiteness. In fact, racist attitudes run across the whole of our social and economic ladders.

We are told by "pillars of society" (non-racists I presume) that we should not blow this out of proportion, as one of the comments was made to and of a friend. What has friendship become? What kind of a friend and friendship would employ derogatory terms to address a person one counts as friend? Unless friendship has been radically revamped (meaning that I am now a museum piece) a friend would desire and wish for the best in and about me rather than publicly putting me down. And I would hope that at least a friend would have my interest at heart and would be the last person to represent me and my tribe with derogatory representations.

I presume that it will be difficult for people who have not been at the receiving end of prejudices and derogatory representations, which over years of habitual use have become ingrained in institutions and behaviours (in every conceivable dimension of their lives), to understand how those being ‘labelled’ really feel. As one of my colleagues puts it, "the one that feels it knows it". As parents, should our children (whatever their age) utter prejudiced, derogatory or racist terms - then it is time for a serious family conversation and no room for excuses.

That conversation, however, will only be effective if parents are able to challenge racism within their own lives. Therein, is a road to the moral authority that parents need for any such a conversation. If parents have not dealt with their own prejudices and racist tendencies, should society expect any better from their progeny? And why should they listen to us? The hypocrisies and contradictions of parents will only serve to undo all their good intentions! And when all of this gets institutionalised, we have a host of "jumbies" or "duppies" in our midst badly in need of exorcism.

A good start (and hope) is the ability and opportunity to be able to say (in this case publicly:) “I am sorry" and to mean and live it. This is critical, otherwise, racism will continue to plague us as one of the most dehumanising and urgent problems of the 21st century! It is time to kick the habit!


© copyright michael jagessar January 15, 2009

‘Positive Vibrations’: In need of Visionaries

2009 is here, yet much in the news and around us look and sound like 2008. I am now tired, almost worn out from the negative vibrations and events (both as listener and participant) that seem to characterise much of today’s world. Only a few hours ago, I heard one of our government politicians being interviewed. I am still waiting for her honest answers to the questions she was asked. I am sure that there are many who yearn for honest leadership in all spheres of society. Will 2009 bring out of us more honesty and integrity so that together we can rise above our present quagmire?

Not all stories of 2008, however, have generated negative vibes. Among those that were positive and remind us that there is still much human goodness around, is the story of a Sheffield man who lent a penniless Australian tourist £5 to pay for a ferry trip in 1969, but only received his repayment 40 years later. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/7791427.stm]

Such a story should have made the headline news for the whole week so that it is etched in our minds. The lender was not in, when a card with £200 was delivered at his house. Touching indeed was the attached note: “To Jim Webb, a good man. From Gary Fenton, a tardy payer of debts”. Mr. Fenton not only repaid his £5, but he added that amount for each year he missed out in repaying a debt he promised to pay but was unable to do so as he had lost the lender’s address. One is not surprised that Mr Webb was “over the moon” with this gesture. As he rightly noted: “In this day and age promises are made and promises are broken and you lose your faith in human nature”.

A sure sign that things are not going well is when we start to lose faith in human nature, in each other, and in all the qualities that make for a society with heart and conscience. The reality is that there are many positive stories (as this one) all around us in our communities. These need to be told and the experiences need to be shared so that more lives are touched and transformed. In this regard it is my hope that 2009 will stir up among us more visionaries – that is, ordinary people who can see and grasp the present moment (not necessarily the future).

And in event you need to read the stories of such people, try these two books: Bill Mosher, Visionaries (Orbis Books, 1995) and Jonathan Kozol, Ordinary Resurrections (Crown Publishers, 2000). These, however, should not displace those stories that are alive in our local communities.

© copyright Jagessar January 2, 2009