Table Of Content

THE ABSENT CHRIST AND THE INUNDATED COMMUNITY: CONSTRUCTING A PROCESS-ANABAPTIST MICROMETAPHYSICS A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of Claremont School of Theology In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by Justin Heinzekehr May 2015 ©2015 Justin Heinzekehr ALL RIGHTS RESERVED J88S This dissertation completed by Justin Heinzekehr has been presented to and accepted by the faculty of Claremont School of Theology in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Doctor of Philosophy Faculty Committee Roland Faber, Chairperson Monica A. Coleman J. Denny Weaver Dean of the Faculty Sheryl A. Kujawa-Holbrook May 2015 ABSTRACT THE ABSENT CHRIST AND THE INUNDATED COMMUNITY: CONSTRUCTING A PROCESS-ANABAPTIST MICROMETAPHYSICS Justin Heinzekehr This dissertation will argue that the distinctive contribution of Anabaptists to Christian theology has been muted by a lack of metaphysics consistent with its ethical and ecclesiological commitments. Anabaptists have engaged in one of the longest, most consistent experiments in nonviolence in history, and therefore have evolved styles of thought that run in sometimes surprising directions in relation to mainstream Christianity. Yet it has also been a temptation for Anabaptists to allow the idea of nonviolence to stagnate, in part because there has been no accompanying metaphysics that pushes for a constant renegotiation of peace. In fact it is this very commitment to nonviolence that makes Anabaptists rightly suspicious of claims to universal metaphysics, systems that attempt to justify themselves incontrovertibly to any reasonable person. Most contemporary Mennonite theologians recognize that Anabaptist theology must avoid a foundationalist methodology in order to be consistent with a message of nonviolence. The imposition of universal metaphysics would be itself a form of coercion, since it seeks to make resistance to its worldview impossible. The solution, however, is not to reject the medium of metaphysics completely. This too tends to undermine the vibrancy of Anabaptist thought, in this case by masking implicit metaphysical positions and consequently making one less open to criticism and modification. I propose a constructive metaphysics that is consistent with the basic distinctives of Anabaptist thought, but uses a nonfoundational methodology. This would constitute a worldview that seeks to interpret all of reality based on a community’s interpretation of local, particular experience. In a way this mirrors the twentieth-century turn toward microhistory, or the narration of history through the lens of a particular event, community or object rather than pretending to a universal viewpoint. So metaphysics based on local experience and interpretation can be termed “micrometaphysics,” which avoids the violent implications of traditional, foundational metaphysics. Micrometaphysics differs from traditional metaphysics in that it represents itself as one possible lens through which to view reality given a certain set of experiences, but does not expect to supplant other views that arise from other possible sets. I argue that, given the assumptions of Anabaptism, process thought is one of the most natural conversation partners in the construction of a consistent Anabaptist micrometaphysics. Process thought has the advantage of extended, explicit metaphysical reflection which can help clarify many Anabaptist intuitions. In particular, a process-Anabaptist metaphysics will emphasize the relational basis of the universe, the mutual influence of God and the world, the location of the universal in the particular, and the rejection of any ultimate dualism of conflicting elements in favor of creative, nonviolent transformation. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS One might say, in good Whiteheadian fashion, that “dissertation is robbery.” A project like this is impossible without the donation of time and energy from many innocent parties. My dissertation committee, Roland Faber, Monica Coleman and J. Denny Weaver, spent many hours helping to sharpen my ideas and my writing. Many of the seeds of this dissertation come from conversations with other faculty and students at Claremont, in and out of the classroom. This includes especially Philip Clayton, Grace Kao, Richard Amesbury, Santiago Slabodsky, Najeeba Syeed, Drew Baker, Timothy Murphy and Hannah Heinzekehr. I am also grateful to Duane Friesen, who allowed me to test my ideas with a group of professors, pastors and lay leaders in Newton, Kansas. Most of all I thank my wife Hannah, who read and commented on each chapter, and my children Ellie and Conrad, who were too young to understand why I had to spend quite so much time in the library, but never seemed to hold it against me. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction: The Danger and Necessity of Anabaptist Metaphysics 1 SECTION I THE (PUTATIVE) ANABAPTIST REJECTION OF METAPHYSICS 1 Anti-clericalism in Sixteenth-Century Anabaptism 12 2 Anti-foundationalism in the Twentieth- and Twenty-First- Century Mennonite Church 34 3 The Implied Metaphysics of Anabaptism 62 SECTION II THE POTENTIAL OF PROCESS METAPHYSICS FOR ANABAPTISM 4 The Metaphysical Task 83 5 The God/World Relationship 101 6 Jesus as Metaphysical Datum 123 7 Whitehead and Mennonite Pacifism 148 SECTION III ANABAPTISM UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF PROCESS 8 Following the Trace of Christ 180 9 The Liberation of Process-Anabaptist Micrometaphysics 206 10 Adventures in Nonviolence 232 Bibliography 245 DEDICATION To Hannah, Ellie and Conrad Introduction: The Danger and Necessity of Anabaptist Metaphysics The suspicion of metaphysics is certainly not unique to the Anabaptist tradition. Philosophers have been announcing the end of metaphysics since Nietzsche, and the problematic nature of metanarratives is now about as widespread an assumption as you can find in Western society. In theology, too, it is not rare to encounter post-metaphysical views, such as John Caputo’s theology of the event or Stanley Hauerwas’ narrative theology. Anabaptist theology is, however, somewhat unique in that it traces its anti-metaphysical stance all the way back to its origins in the sixteenth century, in a more or less unbroken lineage. Specifically, Anabaptists might claim to be among the first Christian groups to intuit the link between formal intellectual thought and violence, largely due to their position as an outlawed and persecuted religion in sixteenth-century Europe. Even if they would not have articulated these insights in the same form, early Anabaptists might have agreed with Derrida or Foucault that abstract metaphysical reflection tends to both uphold and mask systems of domination. At least since John Howard Yoder, Mennonite theologians have drawn on this history to advocate for nonfoundational types of theology; that is, theology that does not pretend to be indisputable. Rather than attempting to ground theology in a priori rational arguments or by appeal to the universal structure of human experience, Mennonites have preferred to base their reflection on a communal experience of the concrete, historical person of Jesus. The Mennonite experience of Jesus is mediated through the early Christian records in the New Testament, but also through the church’s ever-changing context which shapes its interpretation of this record. Anabaptism is therefore a biblical tradition, but not (when it functions well) a fundamentalist one. That is, scripture is not simply a straightforward account of truth, but becomes a medium for truth as it is interpreted in a community. For this reason, many Mennonite theologians are more 1 comfortable with the concept of narrative rather than metaphysics as a vehicle for truth.1 Narrative implies a shared interpretation that is passed along as a community retells its own history. Metaphysics implies a system of abstractions that could be constructed by an individual scholar in an ivory tower apart from any relation to his or her community. Nonfoundational theological method goes hand-in-hand with the Mennonite commitment to nonviolence; a theology that is always contingent or disputable cannot be imposed by force. And in fact, Mennonites have for the most part avoided the militant evangelism that has characterized many other forms of Christianity throughout history. Mennonite mission efforts, though they have had their own ambiguities, have at least tended to emphasize service and cultural sensitivity over conversion.2 And as Mennonites have branched out into international peace work, their stance of humility and openness has served them well. In Northern Ireland, for instance, Mennonite peace workers have earned a good reputation by entering a conflict with a listening ear rather than a pre-made solution.3 It is right, therefore, that Mennonites should be proud of the nonfoundationalism that developed out of a history of persecution and grounded a long history of nonviolent practices. The vindication of this way of thinking in the postmodern age makes it unlikely that Anabaptists could let go of their heritage of nonfoundationalism even if they wanted to. 1 Though most of these scholars would not want to settle on narrative as the only possible framework for theology. See Chris K. Huebner, A Precarious Peace: Yoderian Explorations on Theology, Knowledge, and Identity (Waterloo, Ont.: Herald Press, 2006), 49-68. 2 In discussing some of these very ambiguities, Marc Gopin writes, “Mennonite self-doubt serves as a strength, however, in peacemaking. It leads to an extraordinary level of cross-cultural sensitivity and also leads to a deep commitment to listening and receptivity, which have prominent and longstanding places in Mennonite Central Committee methods of peacemaking.” Marc Gopin, Between Eden and Armageddon: The Future of World Religions, Violence, and Peacemaking (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), 152. This is the ideal picture; of course, there are many cases in which Mennonite missions have failed to live up to this ideal. For an example of the ambiguity of Mennonite missions in the United States, see Felipe Hinojosa, Latino Mennonites: Civil Rights, Faith, and Evangelical Culture (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014). 3 As related to the author by Joe Liechty, professor of Peace, Justice and Conflict Studies at Goshen College and former peace worker in Northern Ireland. 2