Since there has been a great deal of talk about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict in recent times due to Secretary of State John Kerry's role in peace talks, it is important that Christian theologians, religious leaders, and lay individuals to become aware of the controversies surrounding this issue.
In Genesis, God creates order from chaos, and the essence of right living and stewardship of creation and people reflects peace. In the Genesis text God also creates all of humanity in God’s image. This image is extended not only to Abrahamic faiths, but it is extended to all people regardless of creed. The Palestinian/Israeli Conflict has plagued the Holy Land for centuries. This conflict has become increasingly violent since the institution of the state of Israel in 1948. The conflict between Israel and Palestine does not only affect the people living in the surrounding area, this conflict affects the entire Christian community and its relationship to society. This conflict affects the entire world, because it is a continuation of centuries old strife over “the promised land.” But not only that, it draws attention to the ways in which Jews have been wrongly victimized by their neighbors throughout the world, the dangers of nationalism, and the particularly Western practice of internment and anti-Islamic sentiment manifesting itself in the Holy Land.
“Now Sarai, Abram's wife, bore him no children. She had an Egyptian slave-girl whose name was Hagar” (Gen 16:1 NRSV). And thus the present day conflict between the indigenous Muslim population of Palestine and the people of Israel was born. War has been raging in the cradle of civilization for thousands of years, a chaotic, seemingly endless war. In Genesis, God creates order from chaos, and the essence of right living and stewardship of creation and people reflects peace. In the Genesis text God also creates all of humanity in God’s image. This image is extended not only to Abrahamic faiths, but it is extended to all people regardless of creed. The Palestinian/Israeli Conflict has become increasingly violent since the institution of the state of Israel in 1948. The conflict between Israel and Palestine does not only affect the people living in the surrounding area, but rather this conflict not only affects but afflicts the entire Christian community and its relationship with other bodies of faith and political institutions.
It is necessary to define peace and to briefly discuss the attributes of peace. In the beginning God organized the chaos that plagued the earth. God moved over the waters and took the תהו ובהו that the earth was and created order. In Genesis 3 sin breaks into the perfect world and forever humanity is plagued by sin and death’s sting. God preserved humanity with God’s faithful witness and covenant with God’s chosen Israel. Through Jesus Christ, God’s son, God fulfills God’s promise to remain in relationship, save, and protect God’s people. Peace is rooted in the relationship between God and God’s people. This is represented in God’s identity and communicated to humanity through God’s reflection in humanity. It is the responsibility of the Church universal to work toward peace, justice, and an appropriate quality of life for all people regardless of race, nationality, sexual identity or orientation, creed (or any other defining attributes). As Christians, we wait for eternal peace to come to earth with the second coming of Christ, but this is not to say that we sit back and allow injustice and chaos to occur in our world. As Christian, we work toward peace and healing in our broken society. It is necessary to define peace and to briefly discuss the attributes of peace. In the beginning God organized the chaos that plagued the earth. God moved over the waters and took the תהו ובהו that the earth was and created order. In Genesis 3 sin breaks into the perfect world and forever humanity is plagued by sin and death’s sting. God preserved humanity with God’s faithful witness and covenant with God’s chosen Israel. Through Jesus Christ, God’s son, God fulfills God’s promise to remain in relationship, save, and protect God’s people. Peace is rooted in the relationship between God and God’s people. This is represented in God’s identity and communicated to humanity through God’s reflection in humanity. It is the responsibility of the Church universal to work toward peace, justice, and an appropriate quality of life for all people regardless of race, nationality, sexual identity or orientation, creed (or any other defining attributes). As Christians, we wait for eternal peace to come to earth with the second coming of Christ, but this is not to say that we sit back and allow injustice and chaos to occur in our world. As Christian, we work toward peace and healing in our broken society.
Scriptural References:
The Scriptures inform the faith of Christians, Jews, and Muslims and allow humanity to find guidance. The Greek New Testament, Torah, and Qur’an are littered with references to peace. There are numerous references to peace throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, especially the Psalms. One example of peace in the psalms comes at Psalm 29:11 where the psalmist writes, “May the Lord give strength to the Lord’s people! May the Lord bless the Lord’s people with peace!” It becomes clear that God wants peace for God’s people. In the Book of Isaiah, like the Psalms, there are a plethora of references to peace. Arguably the most important reference to peace (for Christians) comes in Isaiah 9:6, “For a child has been born for us a son given to us; authority rests upon his shoulders; and he is named Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” This is only relevant to Christians involved in the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, but this passage speaks volumes about the relationship of Jesus Christ to peace.
In the Greek New Testament, there are three important references to peace in the gospels. The first comes at Matthew 11:28-30 where Jesus says, “Come to me, all you that are weary and are carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” This passage does not explicitly mention peace, but Jesus is talking about peace. This is a peace that comes from laying down the things that weigh down the spirits of humanity and giving these issues to Jesus. Jesus can take care of all these things that burden, which ultimately leads to internal peace. The notion of internal peace is necessary for there to be external peace in families, communities, nations, and the greater world.
In John’s gospel there are two references to peace that are relevant to this discussion. In John 14:27 Jesus exclaims, “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled, and do not let them be afraid.” Peace is something that runs deeper than a feeling. Peace is a state of being and further a way of life. Peace comes from God because God cares about comforting God’s people. In John 16:33 the reality of the depth of peace is found in Jesus words, “I have said this to you, so that in me you may have peace. In the world you face persecution. But take courage; I have conquered the world!” This peace is only possible through God, and the rejection of God is a disruption of peace. This is supported by Paul’s letter to the Romans where Paul writes, “For the kingdom of God is not food and drink but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. The one who thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and has human approval. Let us then pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.” If we serve God first then peace will come because God’s identity is grounded in peace. In Paul’s letter to the church in Corinth Paul nails God’s identity in peace saying, “For God is a God not of disorder but of peace.” God, above all, seeks to bring internal and external peace to every person in every nation.
The internal and external attempt to gain peace reflects the Islamic notion of jihad. This is an internal and external struggle with elements that oppose God. The Qur’an is often mistaken for a fundamentalist book against peace in individuals who are opposed to Allah. On the contrary, similar to the Christian Bible, there are many reference to peace in the Qur’an. The Qur’an makes reference to the word peace 76 times. There are three helpful verses (among many) that will aid in this discussion. The Prophet writes, “Allah is He, than Whom there is no other god; the Sovereign, the Holy One, the Source of Peace (and Perfection).” It becomes clear that all three Abrahamic faiths see their God as encompassing peace and holiness. In 5:16 the Prophet writes, “Where with Allah guiding all who seek His good pleasure to ways of peace and safety, and leading them out of darkness, by His will, unto the light,- guiding them to a path that is straight.” Here God is represented as leading individuals toward justice and peace because God is interest in peace. God seeks peace not trouble because God wants Gods people to experience good times. The third verse that is particularly important in this discussion comes in 8:61 where the prophet writes, “But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace.” Everyone should be working toward peace, even enemies, because it is not good to be at war with one’s neighbor. These Scriptural foundations are the vertebrae of this discussion.
There is one particular story found in scripture that binds together all three Abrahamic faiths. The story of Hagar and Sarah is the one to which, historically, all of the Abrahamic faiths reference in terms of how Jews, Christians, and Muslims have related to one another and as a guide to how these three sister faiths might relate in the present and future. Feminist theologians and liberation theologians have long turned to this story to highlight the oppression of women by a male-dominated society and the subjugation of people of color. The Jews traditionally consider Sarah and Isaac the true wife and son of Abraham. However, Muslims consider Hagar and Ishmael the true wife and son of Abraham, viewing the line of Ishmael as the inheritors of God’s promise. This discrepancy is concerned with who the true heir of Abraham is because God’s covenant runs through that son. The story of Hagar and Sarah is especially pertinent for the conflict in Palestine and Israel because one can easily see the continuation of the conflict regarding the “rightful” heir of God’s promise continuing throughout recorded human history in this particular geographic region. In the story of Hagar and Sarah, Hagar and Ishmael are sent away when Sarah provides Abraham with an heir. But Hagar is faithful to Abraham and Sarah, and to God, and thus it is unclear if one woman is more righteous than the other. Traditionally, Hagar is one of the most revered women in Islam, and a matriarch of the line through which the prophet Muhammad would come. Sarah is revered as a matriarch in the Jewish and Christian faiths, while Hagar is an indication of those who will not inherit the freedom found in God’s promise. Out of this story is birthed the conflict between the Palestinians and Israelis, but condensing the issue to the single story does not do this conflict justice as earlier stated in this paper.
Theological References:
Theology is based on faith in the God to whom the doctrines of different faiths point. The most influential theological thought on this issue is birthed by liberation theology. Liberation theology seeks to take the teachings of Christ and apply them to the injustices in society. Liberation theology looks for the source of suffering and returns again and again to sin. Most often, these sins are sins part of a bigger system. At the heart of liberation theology lies the fundamental relationship between theology and social activism and awareness. The liberation theology movement in the Holy Land began with The Rev. Dr. Naim Ateek, who created a committee of ten clergy and lay people to understand the plight of Palestinian Christians in the Holy Land. This committee became Sabeel, an organization that seeks to educate Palestinian Christians at the grassroots about liberation theology. The official website for Sabeel states, “Sabeel strives to develop a spirituality based on love, justice, peace, nonviolence, liberation and reconciliation for the different national and faith communities. The word "Sabeel" is Arabic for ‘the way‘ and also a ‘channel‘ or ‘spring‘ of life-giving water.”
The most important work that Sabeel does concerns international awareness. Sabeel seeks to bring accurate awareness to the international community, so that individuals get a better understanding of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The international opinion of the conflict is driven by both theology and politics. In the United States there is a great movement to support Israel by conservative Evangelical Christians because they believe that there is cosmological and eschatological reward in rebuilding the Temple. These evangelical read the Bible through this lens, which causes an interesting exegesis. David Grafton writes,
An important precursor to the return of Christ and his thousand-year reign on earth (based upon a literal interpretation of Rev 20:1-3) is the “return of the Jews to Zion” (Zech 1:16; 14:1-3). Millennialists understand this passage as referring to the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 and the possession of the temple mount in 1973. This biblical hermeneutic leads to a political activism that supports the State of Israel, known as Christian Zionism. Supporting Israel and its possession of the Holy Land is necessary for Christ’s return.
This support for Israel does not consider the needs and rights of Muslim and Christian individuals living in Palestine. There is also Islamic support for Palestinian that seek to give land to the Palestinians that does not consider the rights of Israelis and their beliefs about the land. This is where the discrepancy over land becomes particularly difficult. Sabeel, though the organization is not free from biases, seeks to establish lasting peace. Their website proclaims,
Only by working for a just and durable peace can we provide a sense of security and create ample opportunities for growth and prosperity in an atmosphere void of violence and strife. Although remaining political and organizational obstacles hinder the full implementation of programs, Sabeel continues to develop creative means to surmount these challenges. We seek both to be a refuge for dialogue and to pursue ways of finding answers to ongoing theological questions about the sanctity of life, justice, and peace.
Dialogue is essential in truly understanding each side’s beliefs, opinions, preconceived notions, and goals. Peace is not something that can be accomplished overnight it must be continually worked on.
Ethical References:
Ethical relativism is at play in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict because each side sees their violence and unrest merited. This ethical relativism makes deciding what the ethical actions are difficult to discern. There is also a strong cultural relativism that is difficult for Americans to understand fully because Americans (and other Westerners) cannot truly understand the emotivism behind the dilemma. The most practical way to deliberate this ethical conundrum is by consulting Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative. The first formulation of the categorical imperative refers to one not taking any action that the one committing the action would not will universally. This is to say that one should never act unless one would want every other person committing the same action. The second formulation of the categorical imperative refers to never treating humans as a means to an end because humans are ends in themselves. Finally, the third formulation of the categorical imperative refers to a combination of formulation one and two with the addition of autonomy. In formulation three, the actions must be free on the part of the person committing the action and s/he must know what s/he is doing.
In terms of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, both sides of the conflict use the other as a means to an end. Each side attempts to accomplish their individual goals without consideration of the other. The difficulty emerges when one considers the first formulation. If one considers this imperative fully it become impossible to consider in this realm of reality. This becomes a cosmic question that ends only in the destruction of the world and the return of God to earth. One might ultimately will everyone to kill the other because that is the only way for God’s will to be expressed. This idea of cosmic warfare is one that is not alien to this specific conflict.
The Church’s role becomes nearly impossible to discern on the grounds of ethics. The ethical position in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) is built on Jesus command in Mark 12:31. The ELCA’s social statement on peace states,
For the welfare of our neighbors, we in company with others must press for what is right and good within the limits and possibilities of the actual situation. Leaders and citizens make decisions among many competing goods and interests when not all can be realized. In the uncertain task of calculating the probable outcomes of these decisions and choosing the best alternative, we must view the desired ends of action in light of the means and resources available.
This statement is influenced by different forms of ethics, especially divine command theory. Jesus commands the love of one’s neighbor, which should lead Christians to treat one another with compassion, integrity, and honor. Unfortunately, the issue of sin in society does not allow humanity to fully love one another unconditionally. This love becomes conditional according to one’s self interest.
There are numerous ethicists that could be consulted to determine the ethical dilemmas surrounding the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. It is due to the ethical relativism that this is nearly impossible to sort out. The ethical conclusion here is that neither side of this dispute is blameless, and each side has made unethical choices.
Liturgical Themes/Perspectives:
What happens in the liturgy affects what happens when one leaves the liturgical space. One’s experience in the liturgy, the words used, the themes of worship, and the action that these words and themes cause are interrelated. It would not be fair for the authors of this paper to consider the liturgies of Jews and Muslims because that is not the tradition of the authors. This section will examine Christian liturgies and how they affect or should affect the life of the Christian.
The liturgy brings people together from different place for a common purpose. The Christian assembly, specifically Lutherans, gather around the Word and sacrament to proclaim the gospel. The Word and sacraments promote forgiveness that allows individuals to feel internal and external peace. This gospel message is centered around the Kingdom of God drawing nearer to humanity. In the gathered community the congregation is reminded of the injustices of the world, which promotes works of justice outside of the liturgical space.
The liturgy includes many mentions of peace. In the Kyrie the leader begins, “In peace let us pray to the Lord” and concludes the prayer saying “For the peace of the whole world, for the well-being of the Church of God, and for the unity of all let us pray to the Lord.” The presider and the congregation speak explicitly about unifying all people together. This inclusion does not leave anyone out, not even Israelis and Palestinians. In the proclamation of the Word this concept of peace is placed in a new light. This peace is a peace that passes all understanding and only faith can create this peace. The proclamation of the Word through reading of the Holy Scripture and preaching is followed by prayers and the passing of the peace. Often in the prayers of intercession, the presider focuses on peace in creation, in communities, between nations, among others. Through the prayers and the peace the gathered assembly reaffirms the peace of the risen Christ as the answer to all prayers, and the gift of Christ that God gave humanity. The passing of the peace builds a bridge between the service of the Word and the celebration of Holy Communion. The Great Thanksgiving is an essential celebration within the Sunday assembly. In the prayers of this section of worship, the presider recalls the mighty acts of God, recalls God bringing order to chaos, and God maintaining order through all of the events we recall in the anamnesis (including God’s work through Christ). Through the Eucharist we, as humanity, are transformed! The Eucharist draws us together, fills us with Christ, and sends us into the world to live and set individuals free from bondage.
The Sunday assembly begins with a gathering and ends with sending out into the world. What happens in the assembly is not to remain in the assembly. The assembly should empower the people in attendance to go out into the world and love everyone regardless of creed. God is actively at work in the worship space and outside the worship space in all places!
Responses to the Challenge:
Theology matters because theology is interwoven throughout this issue, the lives of the people involved in this issue, and the very beginnings of the cultures in question. Liberation theology, Sabeel and otherwise, allows individuals to look at situations and respond to them differently. If individuals and groups can recognize the plight of the oppressed on both sides of the issue people will begin to relate to them. Aside from liberation theology, Craig Nessan’s work on the Shalom Church could be effective in transforming individuals involved in this conflict.
Nessan’s work with developing the guidelines for the Shalom Church as the body of Christ in a ministering community is helpful in understanding how the church can take action in this situation. Nissan highlights what he calls “two spiritual maladies” that are infecting the church and affecting the way the church responds to conflict. These two maladies include rampant individualism in Western society and the identity of the individual churches built out of what the church opposed not what the church supports. This work leads to conclusions about what the universal church should look like in order to promote progress and above all peace.
There are twenty virtues that are attributes and characteristics of the Shalom Church and can be broken down into smaller groups. First, the church must be committed to inclusivity, love for one’s enemies, and the church must be ready to forgive. Second, The church must repent of violence, act with nonviolent resistance, and stand in solidarity with the oppressed. Third, the church must offer hospitality to strangers, care for the physical needs of all, and offer special concern for the weak. Fourth, The church must act justly in economics, act as good stewards for the earth, and affirm all of humanity as created by God. Above all of these the Shalom Church is called to care for the marginalized, defend all basic human rights, and care for every person regardless of defining characteristics. All of these characteristics, if followed, would lead to peace in the Holy Land, but it is not that simple because humanity is broken. Humans find it difficult to love their friends, which makes loving enemies seem nearly impossible.
The Shalom Church has the potential to empower individuals and to lead them to begin thinking in new ways. The Shalom Church prays for peace and always interprets the actions of others in the kindest way. This is particularly helpful in this conflict because both sides often believe the other’s actions to have the worst intention. In utilizing this framework, individuals and larger bodies can work together to establish peace in cultures, communities, and the world.
There's no way I could look at all of this in one post or one book...
-LB
Let’s celebrate this moment when the arc has bent a bit more, but at the same time, let’s remember that our celebration is in Christ—the one in whom divisions are no more and barriers no longer matter. Let’s remember those around us, known and unknown, who can’t celebrate. Let's pray that they can still sense a welcoming presence reflective of God’s love within the body that is Christ. And lastly, let’s not lord it over those who can’t share in our joy and pray for unity and harmony in the church and in the world—because we’re all God’s children loved and cherished beyond conceivable measure.
This book has merits and demerits. That much could be said about any book, but this particular book makes the difference between these two extremes vast. What is good is superb; what is not so good is grating.
The book begins in familiar theological territory by examining the traditional doctrine of sin vis-à-vis the Augustinian model. Cheng insists that this way of understanding sin is important to understanding the new model he proposes.* In some ways, he seems his attempt at objectivity, however, is thwarted by what appears to be an outright disdain for the traditional model. He writes: “The traditional crime-based model of sin and grace has developed into a sadistic paradigm in which our first parents fell from a state of perfection into eternal damnation, and all subsequent human beings have suffered the consequences of their crime”—hardly the verbiage of an objective excursus.
Cheng is right to point out the shortcomings of the crime-based Augustinian approach to understanding sin. He also sets the development of this harmatology—i.e. the study of sin—within its historical context in an effort to elucidate why in fact Augustine proposed such radical depravity for all humanity. Without this foray into history, however, the criticisms would appear to just hang their on their own without any real reason why they matter.
In light of his subject area, Cheng points out how the crime-based model of sin has led people to read the bible, theology, and church history through a lens that condemns LGBT folks as malefactors against God. Insofar he is right; but the danger here is throwing the baby out with the bath water. Sin is not one-dimensional reality, and it can’t be reduced to our crime against God anymore than it can be reduced to “spiritual immaturity,” as Cheng would propose as a more appropriate alternative to the crime-based model. All people—whether straight, black, atheist, wealthy, poor, Christian, white, gay, etc.—have sinned against God and neighbor in the traditional Augustinian sense. To propose a model of sin that doesn’t account for human failing, conniving, and scheming is to remain silent about a very real part of the human experience. It’s foolhardy and myopic at best, and damning and murderous to souls at worst.
The Christ-centered model of sin and grace, however, that Cheng proposes has promise. Understanding our sin in relation to Christ’s sinlessness provides us good ground to go forward. Likewise, the list of new “seven deadly sins,” as well its corresponding “seven amazing graces,” offers fruitful food for thought as theologians struggle to speak of sin within the 21st-century postmodern reality. His lists, while focused primarily on the LGBT experience, are broad enough to address the realities of people who might not number themselves among the queer community. This reconceptualization of sin and its application within the contemporary context is the book’s most promising feature.
In addressing each of the seven sins and their corresponding amazing graces, Cheng systematically delineates seven different models for Christ for LGBT folks and others to consider when seeking to live faithfully to God and to themselves. In these models, he is routinely critical of the longstanding traditional modes of speaking of sin in a sweeping fashion. There seems to be no consideration for circumstance that might preclude particular individuals from living into the amazing graces he proposes (cf. the sins of “conformity” or “the closet”), and his amazing graces are offered up as unequivocal in and of themselves (cf. the amazing graces of “activism” or “coming out”). A bit more nuanced view—one that isn’t so categorically anti-tradition or so wholeheartedly pro-novelty—would be more reflective of the realities people find themselves in.
Take for instance his first Christological model: the Erotic Christ. Here Cheng makes the erotic about more than mere sexuality. It is about meaningful interaction with others and all creation in a way that touches—not merely metaphorically, but also directly and physically—the rest of the cosmos. In this model, Cheng proposes sin as exploitation—where we fail to recognize the unique humanity of others or the exquisite vitality of creation and seek only to bend “it” to our own will for own benefit. His proposed amazing grace in this model is mutuality—where we look others around us and see “thou” instead of “it.”
This is all well and good, but especially as it comes to bear on his understanding of sin as exploitation and again on his understanding of grace as mutuality, the model seems to fall short because of its extremity. He makes sweeping pronouncements about the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church as an example of the sin of exploitation at work, and goes on to extol the grace of “the Erotic Christ during an anonymous sexual encounter in a Hong Kong sauna with another gay Asian man.”
