Chapter 10: Constantine or Diaspora?

The journey from the front door of their house in Laguna Niguel to laying their towels on the sand at Victoria Street in Laguna Beach was 20 minutes. On the way, Kimberly drove the Dodge Minivan and played Simon and Garfunkel, another tradition that the boys were actually starting to like even though they wouldn’t admit it. Through the art colonies in the canyon, to the tourist attractions at Main Beach, through the rainbow flags of the gay and lesbian community to the wealthy neighborhood with McCain 2008 signs in the window, Anthony thought about his times with Ryan during the spring of their senior year in high school after their CIF championship. They would come down to the beach and throw the Frisbee and talk about girls and how they could invite more of them to their youth group and debate who sold the better breakfast burrito: A’s or Pedro’s. It delighted him that 20-years later, their conversations had become so deeply theological and, yes, philosophical.

When they got to the beach, the boys frolicked in the waves as the adults got back down to business.

RW: Anthony, we’ve got a huge election coming up in November, but it’s even bigger here in California since Proposition 8 is on the ballot. I’m sure you’ve heard of it: the proposal for a CA constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. If you were living here, how would you vote on it?
AT: I read just last week about a speech former President Clinton gave to the National Association of Governors. He reminded all these governors that the states had a tremendous advantage in our federalist system because they could be what he called ‘laboratories of democracy’—where they could be a little more risky with experimentation and innovation. As I read, I thought to myself, ‘Yes, this is exactly what Yoder would say…about churches!’ Churches are the places where we can really experiment with a ‘Christian’ form of democracy. Democracy, for Christians, isn’t simply majority rules or a system to give everyone a forum to air their views. It is a place where everyone has the right to dissent, where the minority position is cherished, not coerced or silenced or pandered to. Our church communities should be the places of experimentation, where we think and pray about more creative ways to implement God’s kingdom initiatives. We can establish ‘pilot programs’ that can influence how state and national government practice democracy by how we model them. The medium is the message of the kingdom. How we conduct business in the power of the Spirit speaks loudly to larger society. The Body of Christ is the prototype for democracy. The Christian congregation came before the town hall meeting. The ‘practical moral reasoning’ in the power of the Holy Spirit came before the congressional hearing and free speech. In Luke 22, in the upper room the night before he is crucified, Jesus tells his disciples after a post-meal feud that it is typical for the kings [and presidents] of the nations to ‘lord it over’ their subjects and to call themselves ‘benefactors,’ looking out after the best interests of society. But Jesus contrasts the way of the rulers with the way of discipleship, calling them to be servants.
RW: Let me guess: Yoder interprets this passage politically.
AT: Nothing gets past you. Yoder says that, in a democratic state like the US, the Body of Christ should focus on two things: (1) we can use our leaders’ [including the President] language against them—they are ‘benefactors’ so they must be called to account for peace and justice for everyone, even the minority; and (2) the ripple effect from the how the faith community models real democracy. These are the priorities of a community ruled by the Servant-king.
RW: All of this is quite fascinating, but you aren’t answering my question. In the cove just north of here, there are dozens of homosexuals basking in the same sun we are on an exclusively gay beach, and they can because it’s a free country. But a gay beach is different than gay marriage. But let’s be honest, according to the Bible they are living in sin. Shouldn’t Christians take a stand on this vital issue before our whole society becomes another Sodom and Gomorrah?
AT: Here’s why I’ve spent all this time analyzing these things. Christians have two choices in regards to the state. First of all, they can seek to continue the way of Constantine, to control history by dominating it with laws and leaders that mandate the majority’s convenient interpretation of Scripture. Or, we can embrace the diaspora situation that the prophet Jeremiah called exiled Israel to: to seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you’ [Jeremiah 21:9]. The Jews who were exiled to Babylon could spend their time longing for the glory days of David, or they could identify this new homeland as home, albeit in the heartland of enemy empire, and be on mission as a minority community. That’s what they did. They weren’t influencing the decisions of the empire, they, in their best of times, were seeking to be faithful to God’s way in every realm of their society. They had influence, in the way of Joseph and Esther and Daniel, with the dominators. So, obviously, I advocate for the diaspora because it is the more faithful strategy to bear witness to God’s reign.
RW: But the Jews didn’t have a choice. They had to live in diaspora. In 21st century America, we still do have a choice. Isn’t the most responsible thing to go with Constantine and legislate the truth?
AT: No, because it isn’t Christian. It’s coercive and involuntary, which is a method never advocated for by any of the New Testament writers. The way of Jesus must be voluntary. Humanity needs open space, freedom to decide to follow the way of Jesus [or not], to inhabit the story of Scripture [or not], after all the costs have been counted. Constantine doesn’t allow for that. He just says, ‘Here’s the truth. Obey it or else.’ It’s a counterfeit offer of faith.
RW: Alright, bottom line, is homosexuality a sin?
AT: At this time, I feel a lot more comfortable just being an advocate for the process of dialoguing, within each faith community, about this sensitive and emotional issue. There is a substantial gay and lesbian population in Lawrence and I’m getting to hear their experiences more and more. Yoder used the term ‘reification’ and I think it is really helpful in this conversation. Reification is when we lump a whole bunch of different things under the same label even though they have very little in common. He gives these examples for all things ‘homosexual’:

- what strong men in prisons or military camps do to weaker men;
- what strangers do with each other in public restrooms or gay bars;
- what mature men like Plato did with beautiful boys;
- what two persons of the same sex and values want to do by living in one household voluntarily;
- what the men of Sodom in Genesis 19 wanted to do with Lot's angelic visitors

These are all quite different realities and we must speak to the them separately, not simply place them under the umbrella of ‘homosexuality.’ To be honest, I would vote against Proposition 8 for two reasons: (1) because it is Constantinian—it embraces a coercive method to preserve a traditional form of Christian morality—as we sit here on the beach, a coalition of evangelicals is raising millions of dollars to buy TV ads for the Fall sweeps so that Christian marriage can be saved. But, of course, I think Christian marriage can be saved through what God is doing through our practices rooted in discipleship communities; and (2) Proposition 8 is seeking to combat a form of homosexuality—two members of the same-sex who want to commit to service, love and forgiveness for the rest of their lives—that simply is not addressed in Scripture. Sure, at every juncture in Scripture where ‘homosexuality’ is addressed—only 6 or 7 passages out of a million—it denounces it. But again, the five examples I mentioned are different realities and we can’t just put them into the same box labeled ‘homosexuality’ and store it away on the shelf labeled ‘sin.’ That’s not a fair biblical reading strategy. The denunciations of ‘homosexuality’ in the Torah and in Paul’s letters refer to sexual activity with temple prostitutes in the worship of idols, the dominating militaristic activity of rape and pillage or the use of young boys for the pleasure of older men. These are obviously destructive activities. However, there is not a biblical category for the controversy and complexity that surrounds ‘sexual orientation,’ let alone gay marriage. I happen to believe that many people, perhaps 2-4% of Americans, are either born gay or develop this sexual orientation very early in life, perhaps the first 6 months to a year. This is what a lot of scientific evidence seems to point to. On top of this, I’ve built relationships with gay and lesbian couples who are ‘Christians.’ They are disciples of Jesus and their lives bear the fruit of the Spirit. A free and democratic society should provide gays and lesbians with the choice of ‘marriage,’ giving them both the dignity of that title and the challenge of committing to one person for the rest of their lives. Christians, and other religious folks, should not have the monopoly on what constitutes ‘marriage,’ especially when their fears and concerns about how same-sex marriage will affect society are so contested.

RW: I must say, I’ve never heard a Christian talk about homosexuality like that. You’ve raised some interesting points, but I sure am not ready to buy your package. It just seems way-too-different than anything ‘Christian’ that I’ve ever heard. It’s a hard issue for us, especially having three boys growing up in this era. I could never imagine one of them bringing home a boyfriend someday. It just seems too unnatural, too perverted.

Maybe we Christians should just take a detour from this ‘political’ stuff altogether and focus on the things that really matters. I mean, didn’t Jesus say ‘render to Caesar what is Caesar and to God what is God’s?’ Wasn’t he saying that Caesar and our Presidents are in charge of the political stuff but the more important stuff is spiritual or religious? Isn’t this what Christian faith is primarily about?
AT: Your interpretation of Jesus’ conversation about ‘rendering unto Caesar’ is how most politicians and pastors would understand the passage. It is basically the way the passage is interpreted by both John McCain and, get this, Obama’s pastor Jeremiah Wright.
RW: Can you really put both of those men in the same category?
AT: It’s amazing, but true. And the category is really shaped by an Enlightenment understanding—this idea that ‘religion’ and ‘politics are two separate spheres of life. I recently read about a story of how McCain, during his 5 ½ year imprisonment as a POW in Hanoi during the Vietnam War, was the chaplain for his fellow prisoners. In McCain’s first talk as chaplain, he cautioned fellow prisoners not to pray for their release, reminding them of this New Testament episode when Jesus was asked whether it was right to pay taxes. ‘He held up the coin and said, ‘Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto God that which is God’s,’ McCain said, recalling his lecture. ‘The point of my talk was we were doing Caesar’s work when we went into combat, so we really shouldn’t ask God for release.” McCain and his fellow prisoners lived in two different realms: Caesar’s political kingdom and God’s spiritual kingdom—McCain and his fellow soldiers could faithfully participate in both, but the important thing was to be careful not to confuse them.
RW: Yeah, this seems to be pretty much how I’ve always thought of this passage. But I’m dying to hear how ‘ole Jeremiah Wright interprets it.
AT: Obviously, Wright is coming from a different theological tradition than McCain. He comes from the liberation theology of James Cone and the prophetic American black church. His critique of American domestic and foreign policy has been both colorful and controversial and, as you know, Obama and his wife made decisions recently to leave the his church, distancing him from some of these statements. Here’s what Wright said in an interview a few months ago on PBS with Bill Moyers: "I don't talk to Obama about politics. He goes out as a politician and says what he has to say as a politician. I continue to be a pastor who speaks to the people of God about the things of God. He's a politician, I'm a pastor. We speak to two different audiences. And he says what he has to say as a politician. I say what I have to say as a pastor. But they're two different worlds.”
RW: Yeah, sounds like pretty much the same thing even though they are dealing with two different issues. Pastors have more important things to worry about than Presidential policy-making. So I’m assuming that Yoder interprets this passage differently?
AT: Of course. In Luke 20:20-25, when Jesus is confronted by his opponents who are looking to trap him by flipping him a coin and asking him about taxes, it is taken for granted that Jesus renounced Roman occupation of Palestine. His interrogators are looking for an answer from Jesus to put him on the cross! If they really thought Jesus was advocating for a ‘spiritual’ kingdom to combat Roman domination, they would have laughed themselves all the way back to Rome. Jesus would, then, be a harmless circus act. Instead, Jesus’ teaching, his miracles, his healings—his whole obedient life—were all about announcing a ‘clash between two regimes’ which were competing, overlapping in the same ‘political’ arena. Jesus spoke his mind and backed it up with signs and wonders and a perfectly faithful life, representing a true rival to the Roman Empire and its values. The image on the coin was Caesar’s, but Jesus was calling God’s people back to a subversive theology about humanity: we are all ‘created in God’s image,’ even Caesar! God’s inaugurated kingdom gathered disciples around the world’s true Lord: Jesus. If Jesus is Lord, Caesar is not.
RW: Let me try to summarize: Evangelicals basically tend to go about ‘American politics’ in one of two ways: either attempt to advocate for laws and leaders who protect the Christian agenda or they refuse to participate in anything ‘political’ and instead focus on the things that last, the eternal, spiritual matters of this world. And Yoder is claiming that both of these strategies are bankrupt.
AT: Precisely. And it’s not just Evangelicals. Everyone in the West has been trained to think this way, living in a culture severely shaped by the Enlightenment. I would say that Evangelicals tend to be much more schizophrenic with politics. Sometimes, they are gung-ho campaigners and fundraisers for certain ‘Christian’ causes. Sometimes, they are adamant about staying out of the whole affair. But neither of these options represents the way that Jesus, or any other Jew living in the 1st century would have thought about God and politics. Jesus’ ‘third way’ was a radical lifestyle, coupled with a call for laws and leaders to be peaceful and just for the oppressed and marginalized in our society as well as those laboring in the Third World and beyond. Militaries and markets have historically placed unjust burdens on minorities, women and children. Shouldn’t God’s people prioritize ‘the least of these’ [Matthew 25:31-46] through their own creative action and by advocating for laws and leaders that come alongside them?