RSS
More Feeds

Looking for new books, music, etc.? Purchases made through this search box benefit Sojourners' ministry:














Culture Watch

A Conversation with Robert Jensen

by Becky Garrison 08-05-2009

allmybonesshakeRobert Jensen is an associate professor at the University of Texas at Austin School of Journalism and author of the personal memoir All My Bones Shake: Seeking a Progressive Path to the Prophetic Voice, a compelling memoir that highlights the religious debate currently raging in the United States. I had the chance to contact Dr. Jensen to discuss some of the themes he raised in his book.

What prompted you to write All My Bones Shake: Seeking a Progressive Path to the Prophetic Voice?

After many years of working in secular left/feminist political movements, during which I had always avoided religion, I met a radical minister in Austin, Jim Rigby, and started talking with him about progressive approaches to Christianity and religion. The more we talked, and the more we organized political events at the church, the more I started thinking about religion in new ways. I realized that my distaste for a religion had led me to ignore approaches to theology that would resonate with me. Those experiences led me to write the book, on the assumption that others are searching in similar ways.

How did your interest in politics motivate you to join St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church?

My initial interest was primarily political, part of a more general search for spaces in which people could come together to think about radical politics in a world structured by such profound inequality. I found St. Andrew’s hospitable to that project, but I also realized that it was more than a place to organize political events.

When people call you a “Christian” how do you respond?

A lot of people want to know whether I’m a “real” Christian or not. By that, they want to know whether I hold supernatural beliefs (believing in the idea that God is an actual being, entity, or force; and believing that the resurrection of Christ was an actual historical event). Since I don’t hold supernatural beliefs, and I approach Christianity as a belief system that makes use of myth, symbolism, and poetry, there’s sometimes a lively discussion about whether I should call myself a Christian. For me, the point is not so much to answer the question as to start a discussion about what people believe and the consequences of belief for action in the world.

What draws you to keep coming back to church?

St. Andrew’s remains a place where I work politically, but it’s also become much more. The text and tradition are a rich source of wisdom, and I find church to be a place where I learn a lot, from Rev. Rigby and from other members of the congregation. Instead of a place where I come only to influence others, it’s a place I come to be educated. I also find it a comforting space, both in the ways I am part of a community and I can be alone. For me, church is both a place to connect to others and to find solitude.

In your book All My Bones Shake, you stated “These are end times, of a sort. I am not talking about rapture and tribulation, but about rupture and triangulation.” Can you elaborate what you meant by this statement?

I think more and more people recognize that we live in an unsustainable system in ecological terms. We can’t continue to draw down the ecological capital of the planet indefinitely — we have created a rupture with the larger living world. That’s not an apocalyptic vision, a claim about the rapture, but a recognition of reality. To make sense of it we have to triangulate, to ponder the problems from many perspectives, rather than sink into a narrow interpretation of one tradition. If religion is to be of value in helping us deal with these multiple crises, we have to overcome the fear-driven interpretations so common in conservative/fundamentalist Christianity. But I think we should recognize that we live in a crazy system, and a fear of what’s ahead is real and reasonable.

Can you unpack what you mean by the statement, “[O]ur only hope is that there is no God, and more than ever we need to serve the One True Gods?”

As a tribal species, we humans are rooted in community, a relatively small group. That’s most of our history as a species. At the same time we now recognize ourselves as one human family on the planet. To me, those are our “gods” in a sense — the commitment to people we love up close, and the commitment to universal values that apply to every single person on the planet. Yet in this world, we are pushed to declare loyalty to the nation and the corporation, which in these terms are false gods. We have to develop a theology and politics that allow us to reject the false gods and nurture our commitment to those one true Gods.

How do you feel Christians can be a prophetic voice in the public sphere?

In my understanding, the call to speak in the prophetic voice is the call to critical self-reflection and honesty. We have an obligation to look critically at ourselves and the systems in which we live, and then speak honestly, even when there are risks. To do that, we need not speak with arrogance or in narrow sectarian terms. We can speak of the universal values that animate all moral and theological systems and hold ourselves and our society accountable.

portrait-becky-garrisonBecky Garrison is featured in the documentaries The Ordinary Radicals and Nailin’ it to the Church.

Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • mjeinpenn
    bycal -- Now I am confused. First, I said nothing about pragmatism, my argument is with pietism. Second, I do not accept much of the orthodoxy of the Christian church, but am suggesting that orthodox Christians (those professing belief in a Triune God in the manner you profess -- which I respect and am fine with, for you) need to be more accepting of those who may not share their absolutist beliefs. Thus, as I said above, I am surprised at the level of hostility expressed toward Professor Jensen in many of these comments. I want to excommunicate no one -- just want to avoid being excommunicated myself, simply because I have a broader and less literal view of the Gospels. Peace/shalom.
  • bycal
    Mjeinpenn, I hate to break it to you, but pragmatism is every bit the belief system that Christianity is. It has its own orthodoxy, and those professing it, such as yourself, appear ready to excommunicate those of us who don't buy it. St. James said that faith without works is dead; he definitely did not say that faith doesn't matter as long as you do good works.

    The late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus said that, where orthodoxy is optional, it will eventually be proscribed, -- something that has been demonstrated time and again in so many church bodies. The god of pragmatism is a jealous god, and dressing it up in the language of progressive Christianity does nothing to mitigate this reality. By contrast, the church has always confessed that the Triune God deserves worship because of who he is, namely, God, and because of who we are, namely, his image-bearers.

    I am the first to recognize and urge that Christianity has profound social and political implications. I too would call myself a "progressive Christian" (although I am exceedingly reluctant to accept all of what the larger society labels progress). But let's put first things first. The love of neighbor flows out of the love of God; it's not a substitute for it.
  • mjeinpenn
    bycal -- Jesus is alive only if we make it so through words, deeds, and actions. A pietistic faith that proudly proclaims a belief in the Nicene Creed, declaring that all who fall short of an Orthodox belief system cannot really call themselves Christian, misses the point of what Jesus was really all about. I know I am not in the mainstream, but I am taken aback at the level of hostility expressed to Professor Jensen and all others who do not share the pietistic, conventional point of view. I do believe some re-thinking needs to occur, because while it may be true that a Christianity that doesn't recognize "that Jesus is indeed alive today . . . however 'progressive' it may claim to be, is not worth bothering with," the same is true in reverse. A Christianity focused on nothing more than "I believe, therefore I am saved" is, as you stated, "not worth bothering with," if it results in bigotry, intolerance, and injustice (something which has afflicted many, many so-called Christians over the centuries). So, personally, I prefer a progressive Christianity that struggles with doctrine but strives for a just world over a theologically certain, one-size-fits-all version that allows no doubters or dissenters.
  • bycal
    mjeinpenn: "There has to be room for thinkers and doubters in the Christian faith, otherwise Christianity will eventually fade away into irrelevancy."

    There certainly is room for thinkers and doubters within the Christian fold. All of us entertain doubts at one time or another. Yet it is quite another thing to ascribe normative status to these doubts. The mere fact that we have difficulty understanding the resurrection of Jesus does not mean it didn't happen. As Christians we bow before the Word of God and humbly accept his revelation of himself to us, always seeking to find our own place within the biblical narrative. "I do believe. Help my unbelief!"

    As I read him, Jensen is doing much more than to confess his doubts in humility. He is rather asserting that he simply does not believe the cardinal tenets of the faith, yet he goes to church anyway, apparently for social and political reasons. I am glad he attends church. We properly welcome those who come to church even if their motives are wrong. I hope and pray that, through habitual attendance, he will indeed meet, believe and find joy in the risen Christ and yield his life to him in all its fullness.

    mjeinpenn again: "The beauty of progressive Christianity, despite its doctrinal ambiguity, is the emphasis on creating and working for a more just, loving society -- the type of society that Jesus would work for if he were alive today."

    The church has the joyful privilege of announcing that Jesus is indeed alive today. A Christianity that doesn't recognize this, however "progressive" it may claim to be, is not worth bothering with.
  • Hey, thanks for the post, i liked this conversation, you are really doing a great job bu sharing such quality posts.

    Rob
  • mjeinpenn
    Do I have to accept your or Hannity2's definition of a Christian to call myself a Christian? If, as a rational, thinking person of the 21st century, I have some doubts as to whether the resurrection actually occurred, yet I believe that the essence of Christianity is to try to emulate the life and teachings of Jesus, to spread love and forgiveness, justice and peace, in an inclusive, profoundly understanding manner, am I to be completely dismissed because I don't believe the bible is to be read or understood literally? There has to be room for thinkers and doubters in the Christian faith, otherwise Christianity will eventually fade away into irrelevancy. The beauty of progressive Christianity, despite its doctrinal ambiguity, is the emphasis on creating and working for a more just, loving society -- the type of society that Jesus would work for if he were alive today. If you separate the strive for justice and peace, love and forgiveness from Christianity and focus only on a literal belief in the resurrection, or the virgin birth, or the exclusive Truth of doctrinal Christianity (which has nothing to do with Jesus, a living, practicing Jew until the day he died), then you have, in my opinion, lost sight of what Jesus's life and teachings were all about.
  • bgcurtis
    Even though Professor Jensen speaks well of a "commitment to universal values that apply to every single person on the planet," unless there is an abiding source for such values, they can hardly be described as universal. They remain mere preferences, to be swept away by the next form of political correctness or by the next Ubermensch.

    Justice is rooted in the utter goodness of God, the God whom the New Testament describes as "the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."

    Regarding Jensen's stay-dead Jesus, "The Jesus of the New Testament has at least one advantage over the Jesus of modern reconstruction—he is real." —J. Gresham Machen, _Christianity and Liberalism_ (1923; 2009 edition, p. 98).

    A truly "prophetic voice" (Jensen's phrase) begins with devotion to the real Jesus.
  • popmomdieter
    I think the confusion of when to use the term"Christian" comes from those who either consider the term one of belief or those who consider it a term of action. In other words, is it more important what you think or what you do with your life? We call people "hypocrites" who profess a belief but act contrary to that belief. For those who believe and act to perpetuate the teachings of Jesus, but do not believe in his divinity, the traditional idea of "God" or the resurrection, Christianity can be a good or bad thing, depending on its definition. Where you make "Christian actions" practical is political. Those who judge and condemn will interpret Christianity as a judgmental religion, sending the sheep or the goats to hell. Those who see Christianity as advocating for the needy, ill, elderly, disabled or homeless will elect progressive politicians who promise to use tax money and file bills to help them. Judgmental (conservative) politicians will file bills to create ever newer "offenses" and more and greater "penalties" to punish them. You can check out the captions of these aforementioned bills on the state website. Most religious leaders refuse to address these political realities from the pulpit, fearing the loss of parishioners or their tax-exempt status. Robert Jensen does not. In that sense, he is a true Christian. Religion IS politics.
  • Ngchen
    No, the interviewee is not a Christian. That being said, and in response to another comment about whether it's possible to be a political progressive and theological conservative, I would say yes. In fact, to my knowledge Sojo has tried to hold itself out as just such an organization.

    To be theologically conservative and politically progressive, one simply has to realize that (1) we're lost w/o God, (2) Jesus is the way to God, and (3) there are items that a just society should have and be. No contradictions there. Where problems arise is when people try to either (1) impose God using some sort of "just" societal force, or (2) ignore God's calls for a just society. Loving one's neighbor, with neighbor being read broadly, would include pushing for a more just and fair society.
  • letjusticerolldown
    Thanks for advancing conversation!

    I think Sojo has led the way. I tend to think it be all too simple. Evangelicals who chose to LIVE in a place and a way that confronted them with issues of money/poverty and power/justice--in the course of their lives and relationships.

    Very simplistically I believe conservatives have the right answers and progressives have the right questions. I don't totally believe that--but in regards to why the two can't get along--I think it largely true.

    Right answers are meaningless if one is locked into the wrong questions. Engaging important questions while decimating the foundational basis of any meaningful answers is also quite meaningless.

    How to solve it. Relationships marked by love and a mutual submission to our Lord in which we live out the questions and answers.
  • bexgee
  • MouseHouse
    Thank you for this article Becky-- the conversation does much to illuminate how progressive Christians frame their understanding of the Christian faith. I think the term "Christianity" can no longer contain the many diverse relationships different groups have with Jesus/God/the Bible-- "Christianities" is more appropriate, I guess. Robert Jensen defines Christianity differently than I do-- from my definition of what a Christian is, he has a different faith from mine-- but I respect his faith and belief system just as I would any other religion.
    Going sort of O/T, Becky (and indeed any other regular Sojo contributors) if you are reading this I would be interested to know what you think-- as Jesse3 has pondered-- is it possible to be politically progressive but theologically conservative? Or rather, how? I agree with jesse3 that unfortunately there are very few models for theologically conservative Christians to follow in terms of being politically progressive. It's easy for theologically liberal Christians to be politically progressive because their belief system does not come into conflict with their politics. For the theologically moderate or conservative, we have more to work out and consider before coming to the same conclusions. Those who are theologically conservative have been branded and ignorant and unthinking when in fact, when trying to engage in progressive politics it requires so much more effort, struggle and prayer on their part. I appreciate Sojo's work in highlighting all these issues and presenting a different kind of Christianity that creates change in the here and now, but I would also be interested in Sojo leading the way in showing the theologically conservative that progressive politics need not come in conflict with their belief system; taking their belief systems into consideration rather than just presenting a laundry list of what theological conservatives should not do.
  • jesse3
    Is it possible to be politically progressive but theologically conservative (or what most would consider to be "evangelical")? I see little evidence of this on this website. Why is that the case? Why does Sojo consider itself to be an evangelical organization? In what way are they evangelical? What does evangelical mean?
  • Hannity2
    Thank you for your reply. The belief in the resurrection of Jesus is necessary for one to be a true follower of Jesus. You can't follow a dead man. The Apostle Paul himself said in I Corinthians

    " If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied"

    I Peter 1:21 "Through Christ you have come to trust in God. And you have placed your faith and hope in God because he raised Christ from the dead and gave him great glory."

    We have nothing without the resurrection. We are lost without it.
  • letjusticerolldown
    First--thank you for responding to the question so as to contribute to a stronger discussion.

    I have never understood why liberal Christianity has any interest in the Jesus story. Why attempt to find great meaning and wisdom in what one considers meaningless? Why call it Christianity (e.g. "We are keepers of a rich religion we have designed on the back of a crazy orthodoxy.")
    Why confuse the spirituality of a progressive religion with a primitive tribal myth?

    Why do people find a little/invisible Jesus to be so interesting? I find a big Jesus quite able to handle a progressive politics and a conservative one. Somehow, the Word Become Flesh seems to me to dwarf the mind of religion and politics and pursue us in love. Do we know Him?
  • smokem
    So he doesn't believe that God is a "actual being, entity, or force"; neither does he believe in the resurrection of Christ.

    Sorry, he's not a Christian. Period.
  • bexgee
    My hope is to spark a discussion about what it means to be a "Christian" as Dr. Jensen is by no means the only one who shares these views. What role does one's beliefs and actions play in defining who we are as followers of Jesus?

    Becky G.
  • Hannity2
    Why would a "Christian" blogsite have this interview with a man who does not believe in the resurrection of Christ?
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertise here
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008