The Practicing Progressive

Issue 13
March 5, 2007

Our Evangelical President must have been more than a little surprised this past week when he heard Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez call Jesus “a guiding light” for his self-styled socialist revolution. After all, not too many years ago Mr. Bush boldly claimed that same Jesus as his “favorite philosopher”. With apologies to The Bard…“There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Georgeio, than are dreamt of in your philosophies.”

How could two so different politicians claim the same inspiration for their opposing religious and political views? The best answer, I believe, can come out of Progressive Christianity and its understanding of two decidedly different approaches to understanding Jesus.

The first approach is often described as the “Pre-Easter Jesus”. It is centered on the life and teachings of Jesus as described in the synoptic gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark and Luke and elucidated by a growing number of scholars who along with Biblical study have immersed themselves in the disciplines of anthropology, archaeology, and other social and physical sciences.

The second approach, the “Post-Easter Christ”, finds paramount meaning not in the life and teachings of Jesus but in his death and resurrection. St. Paul, rather than the gospel writers, is the primary source for this view. His letters in the Christian Bible offer virtually no information on the life of Jesus and very little regarding Jesus’ teachings. Instead, Paul focuses his attention on the development of a mythos that has Jesus acting as an agent of atonement for the sins of humanity who is revealed as divine at his resurrection. It is this understanding that captures the imagination of the emerging Christian movement in Paul’s time and remains the primary focus of orthodox Christianity.

In essence, one understanding deals with the teachings of Jesus and the other with teachings about Jesus.

Neither understanding necessarily precludes the other but the differing emphases can help clarify the Bush/Chavez conundrum. Where President Chavez discovers inspiration in the Pre-Easter Jesus’ radical approach to social problems: abandonment of the class system, elevation of the poor, uncompromising criticism of the rich and powerful, President Bush finds similar inspiration in the Post-Easter Christ whose claimants propose an ideology of religious imperialism that is less concerned with issues of social injustice and more with matters of eternity. Again, these positions are not clearly oppositional but do offer insight as to the wide disparity of understanding among those who claim to be Christian.

Another contemporary example of this dissimilarity was as recent as last night’s Discovery TV program on “The Lost Tomb of Jesus.” The contention that newly discovered ossuaries once contained the bones of Jesus and his family, including a wife and child, has made headlines of late and caused considerable consternation among some Christians. One can understand the cause of concern for folk committed to a Post-Easter Christ, a savior who rose bodily from the grave and ascended into the heavens. The discovery of evidence that would indicate a more mundane existence as well as a very ordinary death could make for theological trouble for these believers. The most credible reports indicate little supporting scientific evidence for the program’s claim but one can be assured that other similar hypotheses will be explored… especially when one considers the enormous popularity of Dan Brown’s “ The DaVinci Code” which posited a similar intriguing albeit heretical proposition.

For those of us who find ourselves drawn to the Pre-Easter Jesus, such theological ruminations hold a certain intellectual interest but not much spiritual significance. We find meaning and purpose for our lives under the tutelage and model of Jesus’ life. His mythological ascendancy is understandable to be sure but ultimately irrelevant for our own spiritual journeys. We also recognize that such a confession is disconcerting for some Christians who have yet to comprehend the distinctly different ways of understanding Jesus.

As for Presidents Bush and Chavez…I can’t say I’m all that impressed with how either gentleman has appropriated either the teachings of Jesus or the teachings about Jesus.