God and the Just Society

Marcus Borg writes on why justice is important to Christians. (For the link see Marcus Borg in Songs section to the left.)

In the article "God and the Just Society" he writes,

“The story of the exodus from Egypt is her (Israel’s) "primal" narrative in two senses of the word: her story of origins, and her most important story.

The Egypt of Moses' time was a classic example of a "domination system," the most common form of ancient society. In these societies, religion and politics were intertwined.

They were oppressive, ruled by elites. Ordinary people had no voice. Economically, they were exploitative. The elites (1% to 2% of the population) managed to acquire half to two-thirds of their society's annual production of wealth, most of it produced by peasants. The consequences for peasant life were devastating.

Religion's role in the ancient domination system was legitimization. According to the theology of the elites, the king was God's representative on earth. He was often spoken of as "Son of God," "Lord," and even as divine. Thus, for royal theology, the social order reflected the will of God.”

While what I am about to say certainly is not his point, I feel his words pack a familiar ring to them. One of the things I find striking is the parallel found in legitimizing success in certain circles of Christianity. “Religion’s role in the ancient domination system was legitimization…according to the elites.”

According to the religious elites today the legitimized “divines” are the largest churches, the biggest ministries, the largest platforms, and the most popular preachers…and the tool for legitimization is controlled by the ones who support them. To speak against them, in the shadow of their controlling metanarrative, seems futile. Any person that does feels somewhat conflicted. Are what we are saying born out of envy? Is what we are doing to confront the system motivated by petty jealousy or the like?

So dissenters are effectually silenced by the voices within and without . Or perhaps their voice is ignored or absorbed by the larger systems.

History has taught metasystems to tolerate dissenting voices so as not to give rise to the stirring of the people by an overt reaction to them. Rome's reaction to Jesus only fueled the flame, rulers reaction to the civil rights movement buoyed by the media, a useful tool for protest, only fueled the flame. So the monitoring at a distant position became the model, emphasizing tolerance, provided no one on the outside said anything that would alter the vessel.

Perhaps this all has to do with the point of metanarrative and the domination system(s) that are inevitably employed through them.  Hang with me here. According to Merold Westphal;  

“Metanarratives are said to legitimate any individual, enterprise, society or nation and are thus understood to underwrite self-interest, they are labeled oppressive and triumphalist. A metanarrative gains useful acceptance not because it is true but because it succeeds, through power or violence, in silencing all other metanarratives…“Metanarratives are minimally “master” narratives of the way things are. But, more specifically according to the definition often used today, a metanarrative is something that is used to legitimate a nation, society, or individual’s behavior or use of power and control.

One of the challenges facing controlling metanarrative systems now is the control of information. The filters of media and political pressure have been removed by the internet and information can be had by anyone at the touch of a few keys. What was tasted by having the Vietnam war in the living rooms of America in the 60's was simply the tip of the iceberg and will be at full throttle soon. The body of the iceberg beneath is huge and will only grow larger at an accelerated rate.

All things are shifting now. Ideas can no longer be "controlled". The best alternative for these systems is to not "fight or feed" voices they would like to silence in hopes that they will fizzle or fade or be absorbed into the white noise of informational highways. Often they will have their day, or not, and fade into the abyss. But in some mysterious way these voices have crept into the consciousness of the masses and reappear in different attire again and again.

The voice(s) which say,“if it works then don’t fix it” wins in the American success driven story. It is also the voice that dominates in American pop versions of Christianity. I believe that we inadvertently participate in legitimizing the “right” way to do things by supporting these systems irrespective of their theological accuracy. It is time to change that.

I do want to be careful in my comments. I don't want to be like the monster. "He who fights monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. When staring deep into the abyss,the abyss stares deep into you" --Friedrich Nietszche