Jesus Declares he Hates Economics

Well, it took me months, but I finally got around to reading The Shack: Where Tragedy Confronts Eternity by William Paul Young. I found it moving at some points and problematic at other points. Any book that puts words in the mouth of God is running a dangerous line. Overall, I wasn't that enthralled with the book.

But my intention here is not to give a full-blown review. Rather, I want to focus on one passage that gave me a "phonograph needle across the record moment." The following statement was made to Mack, the lead character in the story, by Jesus:

"Marriage is not an institution. It's a relationship." Jesus paused, his voice steady and patient. "Like I said, I don't care much for institutions; that's an occupation for those who want to play God. So no, I'm not too big on religion," Jesus said a little sarcastically, "and not very fond of politics or economics either." Jesus' visage darkened noticeably. "And why should I be? They are the man-created trinity of terrors that ravages the earth and deceives those I care about. What mental turmoil and anxiety does any human face that is not related to one of these three?" (179)

This is about the most inane commentary I've read in a while… and it's placed in Jesus' mouth. It is sadly a widely shared sentiment among many in more emergent forms of Christianity.

The Christian tradition understands that the mandate to multiply and fill the earth would lead to large communities. The need to coordinate human action in terms of community priorities and economic activity would entail the development of human institutions. Thus, the development of these traditions and institutions is part of the creation mandate. 

Because of sinful human nature, every aspect of human existence, individual or corporate, is corrupted. Therefore, every institution has a measure of corruption. Sinful human nature has to be factored into how these institutions function. These institutions need Christ's transforming work. But to suggest that institutions are intrinsically evil is patently absurd.

As revealed in the book, Young's image of heaven appears to be a "back to Eden" model where we all live in bucolic bliss as we skip stones on the lake and play in the garden. The biblical image of the New Creation is not Eden. It is a garden city, the New Jerusalem. To the ancients, the city symbolized the epitome of human culture with all its institutions related to governance, economics, religion, learning, and the arts. These are incorporated into God's new creation. Furthermore, the early chapters of Genesis reveal that, ontologically, God's image bearers were destined for dominion and co-creative stewardship over the earth with God, not endless unproductive play. Apparently, the city's institutions are a piece of how that dominion is exercised.

I think Young does some good in addressing the problem of evil, but I found his rustic paradise free of human cooperative arrangements a major detraction.

Comments

[Peter+]

"This is about the most inane piece of commentary I’ve read in awhile."

I couldn't agree more.

[Travis Greene]

"It is sadly a widely shared sentiment among many in more emergent forms of Christianity."

I'm not sure if that's an accurate assessment. There is probably a move toward considering other economic systems or forms that could be better than our current system, but that's hardly the same as chucking economics, as a discipline and category, out the window to play in the flowers.

Otherwise, I think you're spot-on here. God's kingdom will judge, transform, and redeem politics & economics & such, not destroy them.

[Michael W. Kruse]

All I know, Travis, is that whether at the Ooze, at Emergent gatherings, and some blogs, there are many who use the term "institutional church" like a swear word. :-)

I get similar vibes economic activity that is about anything other than micro-economic activity. "Corporation" is another swear word. :-)

I see lots of philosophical reflection about macro-society but little practical reflection on the nuts and bolts of how society might function.

[Peggy]

As with some of the "theology" in the book, the "economics" that are slipped in here and there aren't "the point" either. I am sorry for the "jabs" the author took ... but that doesn't diminish the importance of the main thrust.

We're waiting for you to write the engaging narrative about the garden in the city, where redeemed human creativity and cooperation show us how to do it....get with it, dude! ;^)

[Gruntled]

Not to mention the opening slam on marriage. This whole attack on institutions is way low-church. Not just non-Catholic, but against the stewardship end of Protestantism, too - most especially Presbyterians.

I had been urged to read this book, but I don't think I will.

[Alan Wilkerson]

Personally I liked the book, then again the author is a local, I remember the passage you quoted and sort of just wrote it off as a "gimme" for the author and his feelings about things.

I can see your point and agree that cities, politics, and any economy, macro, micro, international or organic has to exist. I don't know if what you wrote about emergent is true with respect to economics but I would harbor a guess they are very much in favor of publishing houses and copy write laws.

I will say that I too have heard "institutional" church used as a way to downplay anything that doesn't fit their model. I particularly love it when it comes from a pastor meeting with over a thousand on Sunday morning... LOL

Alan
thanks for the words

[Michael W. Kruse]

Peggy.

I'm workin' on it. :-)

Gruntled

I thought it was worth the read. I does is helpful in wrestling with the issue of why evil things happen and many people resonate with it. It is an interesting sociological phenom that so many are attracted to it.

Alan

Thanks