Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Jesus Creed

Home
Evangelical
Brueggemann’s Economics: Relational

Brueggemann’s Economics: Relational

Last updated on: November 1, 2016 at 12:06 am by Scot McKnight

Brueggemann’s Economics: Relational 2016-10-29T20:31:11-05:00 Scot McKnight

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

By Michael Thompson

Walter Brueggemann. God, Neighbor, Empire: The Excess of Divine Fidelity and the Command of Common Good. Waco: Baylor University Press, 2016.

Image

A recent publication by well-known Old Testament scholar, Walter Brueggemann, has caught my attention. Drawn from a lecture series presented at Fuller Seminary in 2015, this brief work explores the connections between justice, mercy, and the public good, especially in the life and law of ancient Israel. Unsurprisingly, these same connections are in desperate need of examination for our modern world as well. What Brueggemann has given to us here is a solid contextual exegesis that serves well in a foundational capacity for current dialogue coming from the church.

The book is arranged around four chapters: “The Nature and Mission of God,” “Justice,” “Grace,” “Law,” and this series of posts will take each in turn. The themes that are explored and developed by Brueggemann center around the contrast of covenant and empire: “The God attested in the Exodus narrative, the covenantal tradition of Deuteronomy, and the prophetic corpus stands over against the ideology of empire” (3).

Chapter One: The Nature and Mission of God: Irreducibly, Inscrutably Relational (9–38)

This first chapter begins with Hosea 2:14–15, a text that reflects a divorce suit (2:2–13) and the future remarriage between Yhwh and Israel (2:14–23). The reasons for this are due to Israel’s unfaithfulness to the covenant, and after the consequences of judgment have occurred, it is God who promises restoration. It is from this passage that Brueggemann draws out the primary language for his overall project.

mispat and sedeqah, “justice and righteousness”

hesed, “steadfast love”

raham, “mercy”

amunah, “faithfulness”

These are the words that demonstrate Yhwh’s abiding love and faithfulness for Israel, and it suddenly and unexpectedly breaks into the story at a point where the reader/listener would be expecting the finality of judgment and destruction (14). Yet this is the powerful portrait of Israel’s God in that he will remain faithful in his relationship with his people regardless of their unfaithfulness.

(Brueggemann will use the term fidelity throughout this book, which is a term that might cause the ‘average’ or ‘typical’ reader a slight bump, for it is not a term readers of scripture will encounter as much as, say, faithfulness. So, not only does this choice convey a certain nuance of his thought, it also helps force the reader to think more about the attributes of God that are coming to light.)

The language of renewal abounds in this chapter, and numerous texts are presented from Israel’s story that demonstrate the promise that Yhwh is working to establish a world of justice and righteousness (found in the repetition of the five terms, in various combination, throughout the Old Testament text). And such is the promise to which Israel clings, even in moments of distress: “Israel may despair; but it refuses amnesia” (17).

At the core of these characteristics of God’s promise to Israel is the presentation of relationship, the open dynamic between Yhwh and his people. For this part Brueggemann takes four representative texts (Hosea 2:2–23; Exodus 34:6–7; Lamentations 3:20–22; Psalm 85:10-13) for seven thesis-type deductions:

“Life is all about interactive relationships” (21).

Brueggemann believes that this commitment to relationality makes the Old Testament text “peculiar” in its approach to theology, now carried over into the church. The biblical understanding is that being relational is irreducible – humanity is summoned to genuine relationship, first to the Creator and also to one another.

Such relationality is also inscrutable, for “it defies all of our categories of explanation” (22). The means by which God shows his love to the world goes beyond the limitation of human thought, often running contrary to human expectation (as in Hosea 2). What is more, this inscrutability is also found in human-to-human relationships, whenever God’s love is working through the individual.

“The parties to this relationally – God, self, and the neighbor – are variously called to fidelity in our irreducible inscrutable relationality” (23)

This fidelity is a face-to-face experience that makes its promise known, and then follows through with that commitment. Further, this fidelity is for the common good of all parties, coming “under the banner of shalom” (24–25). The five words of fidelity are the expression of shalom, a life that blesses the whole neighborhood in facilitating God’s holiness. And it is a “rugged commitment” that offers many second chances (cf. also McKnight, A Fellowship of Differents).

“Relationships require divine agency” (28)

These types of relationships must originate from the divine presence within the individual. As for the society of ancient Israel this originates in the boundaries and instructions of Torah, and the constant reminders to live by this law. (More will be said about the nature of Torah in Chapter 4.)

“Now I think that divine agency is hard enough. For our purposes, however, what is even harder is human agency” (31)

The biblical text shows that “human agents, like the divine agent, have a capacity for transformative action” (32). This begins when we make ourselves available to others, being present and connected in situations where we might share this fidelity.

“Relationality means to look to the interests of others” (32)

“The God of the Bible is primarily preoccupied not with God’s own well-being but with an interaction that evokes the well-being of the other and yields for God unending doxology” (33). Interestingly, this perspective is briefly balanced with the notion that this self-giving does not come at the expense of the giver, but may at times be tempered with the preservation of the giver – an overall view of healthy relationships, I suppose.

“Derivatively, the summons to God’s chosen people is to reach toward the other” (33)

Here is included the widow, the orphan, and the immigrant. But also there is a movement in the Old Testament picture that even for those who are excluded on the basis of purity – the eunuch and the foreigner are named – the future promise is for “a house of prayer for all peoples” (Isaiah 56:7). By way of summary, Israel’s status as chosen is for the benefit of all creation, which is connected to this idea of relationality and fidelity.

“In Hosea 2:21–23, the new vows of fidelity by the wounded, indignant lover lead, in the final verses, to an expectation about the fruitfulness of creation that in turn concerns the renewal of covenant between Yhwh and Israel” (36)

“The culmination of both Hosea 2:21–23 and Psalm 85:12–13 is restored, renewed, fruitful, flourishing creation” (37).

This opening chapter emphasizes both relationship and fidelity as two marks of the covenant community. The people of God are defined by this relationship, and God’s character is revealed even in times of Israel’s unfaithfulness. Brueggemann sees this also as giving shape to the narrative; it is through this understanding of relationship that Yhwh and Israel move forward together. “And because we are given, in the text, relationality that concerns the one who lingers in faithfulness, this means there is no final reading, no final solution, no grand theory, no master explanation. What we are given, rather, is a field of negotiation and adjudication” (37). It may well be that life before this God is more dynamic and relational that we have often realized.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

October 31, 2016

America's Third Party?

Next Post

November 1, 2016 God, Satan, Job and the Rest (RJS)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Acts of the Apostles Adam Advent Anabaptism Angels Anglican Apologetics Atonement Baptism BCP Prayers Bible Biblical Studies Birds Blogging Bloglossary Bonhoeffer Books Calvinism Christianity Church Church History Coffee Colossians Commentary Recs Conversion Creation Creeds Culture Death Ecclesiastes Economics Education Embracing Grace Emergent Emerging Movement Eschatology Essays Ethics Eucharist Evangelicalism Family Fasting Fathers Fellowship of Differents Footsteps Tour Fun and Whimsical Gospel Grace Happiness Heaven Hell Holy Spirit Irenaeus James Jesus Jesus Creed Job Justification Kingdom of God Law Lectures Lent Liberalism Love and Marriage Mabanteneni Manhood Mary Miracles Missio Alliance MissioLife Missional Missional Jesus Movies and Film New Perspective Northern Seminary OneLife Origins Project Orthodox Parables Pastor's Spouse Pastoring and Leading Pastoring and Preaching Patristics Paul Paul-John Tour Pharisees Pietism Political Theology Prayer and Formation Preaching Problems for Faith Psalm 119 Psalms Public Issues Purgatory Religions Resurrection Revelation Romans Rule of JCreed Science and Faith Sermon on the Mount Sports Ten Commandments Theology Third Way Top Ten Lists Translations Uncategorized Universalism University Ministry Way Out Weekly Meanderings Wisdom Women and Ministry Work Worship Writing & Blogging Youth Ministry

Select a Month July 2021 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 0000

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

I am twelve stones taken from a riverbed and set up as a memorial to a miraculous crossing. What am I?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Bethel The memorial stones The Stones of remembrance Altar stones