Only by preserving a steadfast fidelity to failure, one scandalous to nations that despise a loser, can human power prove fertile and durable. It is by virtue of this impossible, stonily disenchanted realism, staring the Medusa’s head of the monstrous, traumatic, obscene Real of human crucifixion full in the face, that some king of resurrection may be possible. Only by accepting this as the very last word, seeing everything else as so much sentimentalist garbage, ideological illusion, fake utopia, false consolation, ludicrously upbeat idealism—only then might it prove not to be quite the last word after all.
Terry Eagleton Reason, Faith, and Revolution: Reflections on the God Debate
Not far into Matthew’s gospel we come face to face with what Terry Eagleton describes as “stonily disenchanted realism”. The well known heroes of faith give way to Tamar, the woman who played the whore, right there in the royal genealogy of Jesus. The author goes out of his way to mention her, to make sure we are reminded of Judah’s failure, and Tamar’s righteous deed. Rahab, who was a prostitute, is also mentioned, as is Ruth, the Moabite who conspired with her mother-in-law, Naomi, to uncover Boaz’s feet. All of this leads to the unnamed woman who strikes at the heart of political ideology. “And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah…” (Matthew 1:6) The author of Samuel does the same thing in the aftermath of Uriah’s death—referring to her only as the “wife of Uriah” (II Samuel 11:26). Doing so reminds us of what David did—and Matthew uses this same language. The grand ideology of the Davidic kingdom is unmasked; subtly, for sure, but unmasked nonetheless.
All of this sets the stage for the birth of Jesus. “Now the birth of Jesus the Messiah took place this way.” (Matthew 1:18) The realism of the genealogy gives way to the vulnerability and scandal of pregnancy. Joseph planned to “dismiss her quietly”, and only through the intervention of an angel did he marry her. The words “public disgrace” leap from the page. The entire episode exposed the family to humiliation and shame—a pregnant teenager and a bewildered husband. This is the beginning of the messianic mission, the birth of Jesus the Messiah. With this opening Matthew frames the life of Jesus in scandal—the scandal of Tamar, Uriah’s wife, and an out of wedlock pregnancy, with a public execution reserved for enemies of the state.
The New Testament is a brutal destroyer of human illusions…The stark signifier of the human condition is one who spoke up for love and justice and was done to death for his pains. (Terry Eagleton Reason, Faith, and Revolution: Reflections on the God Debate)
The angel tells Joseph that this child will save God’s people from their sins; the child is a sign of God’s presence—Emmanuel, God with us. Here we find the politics of the gospel. Not in a liberal / conservative American sense, rather as an ordering (or in this case a re-ordering) of the world. Notice how often “deportation to Babylon” appears in the text. The exile provides the backdrop. This is no utopian fantasy or otherworldly consolation, this is the in breaking of God’s kingdom into the pain and suffering of this world.
There are some who want to make Christianity about moral and/or doctrinal purity. They have mustered the troops in order to win the war and defeat the enemies of liberal theology and secularization. They want to reclaim the bible from those who advocate lukewarm dialogue. Yet, this text is one of the few places in the gospels that talks about sex. “he took her as his wife, but had no marital relations with her until she had born a son; and he named him Jesus.” (Matthew 1:24-25) Eagleton writes, “Jesus is remarkably laid back about sexuality, unlike those millions of his followers who can think of hardly anything else, and who have that much in common with the pornographers they run out of town.”
Those who use Revelation 3 against people who want discussion and dialogue fail to see the irony. Revelation 3:14-22 is not a diatribe against homosexuality but human greed. The church in Laodicea is complacent, resting in their wealth, status, and power. Jesus says to them: “I know your works; you are neither cold not hot. I wish that you were either cold or hot. So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I am about to spit you out of my mouth. For you say, ‘I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing.’ You do not realize that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. Therefore I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire so that you may be rich; and white robes to clothe you and to keep the shame of your nakedness from being seen; and slave to anoint your eyes so that you may see. I reprove and discipline those whom I love. Be earnest, therefore, and repent.” All of which is summarized by Terry Eagleton when he writes, “Money is the great breeder of unreality.”
The context for this letter is the apocalyptic vision of the lamb who has been slain; the suffering messiah who comes to strip away the ideology of power and wealth, challenging the powers that oppress and destroy. This text speaks to how Christians cooperate with the beasts and dragons of this world by sowing violence and hatred and trampling on the poor and marginalized. These beasts are the resurgence of Babylon that seek new forms of exile and alienation, and the only way to defeat them is by washing our robes in the blood of the lamb—to participate in the suffering of Christ, or what the gospels describe as “taking up our cross”. In fact, a summary of this passage, and the message of Revelation as a whole, comes once again from Terry Eagleton: “If you follow Jesus and don’t end up dead, it appears you have some explaining to do.”
The gospel calls us out from ideology and abstract ideals that have no connection to the world, sending us back into the concrete reality of our neighbor. This is how Matthew’s gospel begins. Joseph has to “wake up”, to rise from his slumber, and do “as the angel of the Lord commanded him.” The same is true today. There will always be people who use the bible to advocate for some ideal world with its ideal way of life. The difference between this and a reformational vision of the world “hinges on whether it is true that the ultimate signifier of the human condition is the tortured and murdered body of a political criminal, and what the implications of this are for living.” (Reason, Faith, and Revolution: Reflections on the God Debate)