Part 2, A Conversation: The Difference Between Being Prophetic and an Ass

Ok, so I want to make sure I encourage prophets as well as differentiate between what it means to be a prophet and an ass.  I want to reiterate.  Prophets are regularly accused of being asses.  They push on what we might call "civilized" recognizing that what some people call "civilization" is actually violence institutionalized.   So they end up being the "troublers of Israel", the makers of necessary conflict, and the disrupters of normalized injustice.  

I also experience prophets as people who have a little twinkle in their eye about trouble-making.  It's not that they necessarily enjoy the discomfort or disruption they cause; it is more that they are once again amused that the principalities and powers react so predictably.  Prophets know that the weird and broad expanse love of God is often befuddling to the Domination System.  

Sometimes, however, it is not about the love and justice of God.  It's about winning and leaving "your opponent" licking their wounds in the dust.  Intentional shaming is done for one reason and one reason alone:  to show a certain superiority.  Prophets know it is important to win, but victories where the poor are not protected, the vulnerable are not saved, and justice and peace are not established are hollow.  

That is why "wins" can leave the ass jubilant and the prophet depressed.  For the ass is not necessarily in it for the long haul, and the prophet knows that a momentary victory that does not bring about transformation can lead to incredible suffering and death.  The Domination System is snubbed or shamed by some person or movement that revels in a temporary win.  The Domination System shows up with greater numbers, with greater force, and with greater violence to make it clear who is in charge.  The prophet takes evil very seriously.

Based on conjecture by some Jesus scholars, I think that may be the very reason for Jesus turning to non-violence.   Time after time, Jewish people rebelled or thumbed their nose at Rome.  Time after time, Rome showed up with greater numbers, greater force, and employed greater violence.  Just before Jesus' birth, Herod the

Great died and in the power vacuum created, Jewish rebellion broke out in Galilee.  Coming from the north, the Roman general Quinctilius Varus moved in with three Roman legions to squash Jewish resistance.  Roman legions raped and pillaged, pillaged and raped.  Roman legions obliterated two Jewish resistance cities, Emmaus and Sepphoris.  Sepphoris was within eyesight of a small, rural village that was certainly raped and pillaged as well--Nazareth.  

Non-violent movements and resistance pre-dating Jesus actually gained traction without such bloodletting.  Certainly being told what happened to Sepphoris and Emmaus and also being witness to the results of Jewish non-violent actions, Jesus had to know that temporary military victories accomplished far less than non-violent actions.  Or, at least, he may have hoped that non-violent confrontation held open the possibility for transformation.

I do not want you to think I am naive.  Certainly, the Civil Rights Struggle was and is filled with moments when non-violent actions led to the same response from the Domination System.  Non-violent confrontation holds open the possibility for transformation in a way that violence, particularly violent victories, do not.  Non-violent confrontation is the ultimate prophetic action done to hold open the possibility for transformation.  

I am going to brag a bit.  My youngest son often talks about how impractical it is to win an argument if it does not result in transformation.  "What purpose does it serve?" he will ask.  This comes from a young man who gloated quite a bit in high school about the verbal sparring he would do with his classmates.  He would come home and gloat quite a bit about having left someone in the dust with his verbal skill (He was very accomplished in the Extemporaneous Speaker category on Speech Team.).  

There was one day, however, when he recognized that he would be sacrificing a friendship and perhaps a friend if he simply "won" an argument.  He was strongly debating with a Catholic female friend on the abortion issue.  His friend is strongly pro-life.  He is strongly pro-choice.  For some reason, he became aware that his friend might need grace and love if she were ever in the predicament of deciding for an abortion in the near future.  It is not that it changed his view.  It changed how he expressed his view to his friend.  In that moment, I think my youngest son began developing his skills as a prophet and leaving behind his gloating behavior as an "ass." 

Ok, so I'm a proud dad, but will fully admit that he and I both have those "ass" skills flowing within us.  Some of it is that I think prophets have a default "snark" mode within them.  It goes with that twinkle in the eye.  Snark and twinkle are often a part of non-violent confrontation against the Domination System.  They unseat the Domination System with satire.  And the "ass"/satire line is one that is permeable, one of those Celtic thin places.

That is the second difference between what it means to be a prophet and an ass.  2.  The ass is in it to win it.  The prophet is in it for transformation.