Amish Prodigal Sons and Daughters

Luke 15:11-32

Then He said: “A certain man had two sons. And the younger of them said to his father, ‘Father, give me the portion of goods that falls to me.’ So he divided to them his livelihood. And not many days after, the younger son gathered all together, journeyed to a far country, and there wasted his possessions with prodigal living. But when he had spent all, there arose a severe famine in that land, and he began to be in want. Then he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country, and he sent him into his fields to feed swine. And he would gladly have filled his stomach with the pods that the swine ate, and no one gave him anything. But when he came to himself, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired servants have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger! I will arise and go to my father, and will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you, and I am no longer worthy to be called your son. Make me like one of your hired servants...”’

In the mid-1970's Timm Rautert travelled from Germany to photograph one of America's most peculiar communities. This search brought him to Lancaster, PA but he wasn't looking to document the whole town but rather a community within the community. This community was actually a Church, but it was unlike any other of churches communities in Lancaster. This church was different because it had constructed its own culture. This community/church/culture was that of the Amish. Often times we classify the Amish and their Anabaptist brethren (including the Mennonites and Hutterites) as Protestants. That may be okay in our simplistic Western polarizing description of Christian differences, where everything is either Catholic or Protestant (leaving no room for the Eastern Orthodox), but it is not historically accurate. The roots of Protestantism are found in Timm Rautert's native Germany, when Martin Luther's critical call for systemic repairs in the Roman Catholic Church inspired a generation of religious revolutionaries that we call the Reformation. In response to the growing influence of the reformers (such as Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, etc.) the Catholic hierarchy convened a movement called the Counter-Reformation. This was generally seen as a doubling down on Catholic identity and evangelistic zeal as the Church sought to define itself in light of perceived heresy. However, these two weren't the only shows in town. Counter to both the Counter-Reformation and the Reformation itself was the Radical Reformation. This smaller movement was essentially started by the students of the Reformers who thought that the religious revolution was not going far enough. Granted the Radical Reformation was initially a mixed bag of those with both good and bad ideas (some of them even being violent), but by the time thinkers like Menno Simons came onboard the movement had developed into a countercultural collection of pacifistic, simple folks who thought that being the Church started and stopped in the imitation of Jesus. That being the case they rethought many Christian traditions such as church hierarchy/organization, baptism (eschewing infant baptism in favor of adult of "believer's baptism), militarism and even nationalism. This countercultural genesis is where the Amish find their roots. But that is not to say that the Amish are against traditions: on the contrary they are known by their traditions. Their customs of barn-raising, simple dress and abstinence from electricity/technology are what attracted Timm Rautert to attempt to photograph this religious group (that  ironically sees photographs and all image-making as breaking the second Commandment). Yet their is another Amish tradition that I would like to document today: one that perfectly captures the image of the Prodigal Son parable. It is a tradition in which the famously counterculture Amish free their children to experience the surrounding culture outside of their community, culture and church. Then at the end of this period of both freedom and trial their sons and daughters decide whether they will return home or remain prodigal.    

The Son and Rumspringa

“...And he arose and came to his father. But when he was still a great way off, his father saw him and had compassion, and ran and fell on his neck and kissed him. And the son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight, and am no longer worthy to be called your son.’ But the father said to his servants, ‘Bring out the best robe and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet. And bring the fatted calf here and kill it, and let us eat and be merry; for this my son was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ And they began to be merry..."

The name of this distinctively Amish tradition is Rumspringa. According to Wikipedia "Rumspringa is a Pennsylvania German noun meaning running around. It is derived from the verb rumspringen. It is closely related to the Standard German verb(he)rumspringen meaning "to jump around or about." This period occurs between ages 14-16 where the normally stringent rules governing all Amish are relaxed a bit while the young decide if the path of the Church is the road that they will continue to travel on. The youth are permitted to examine the non-Amish world around them replete with all of the vices that it offers. If the youth decide to rejoin the Amish community after this period then they are also choosing to officially join the Church and are initiated through the rite of baptism (hence the term "believer's baptism"). The reader can probably see a strong parallel between the practice of Rumspringa and the parable of the Prodigal Son. The wayward child has tested the temptations of the world and after repenting of his folly he returns to a forgiving father. This makes for easy sermons that end with you crying while walking down an aisle, praying "the sinner's prayer" and shaking Billy Graham's hand. End scene and roll the credits, right? Wrong. Even though we usually hear the parable end at this point in sermons it is not where Jesus ends it. Actually it doesn't even include the focal point and overall theme of the story. It appears that Rumspringa has ramifications.

The Brother and Self-Righteousness

“...Now his older son was in the field. And as he came and drew near to the house, he heard music and dancing. So he called one of the servants and asked what these things meant. And he said to him, ‘Your brother has come, and because he has received him safe and sound, your father has killed the fatted calf.’ But he was angry and would not go in. Therefore his father came out and pleaded with him. So he answered and said to his father, ‘Lo, these many years I have been serving you; I never transgressed your commandment at any time; and yet you never gave me a young goat, that I might make merry with my friends. But as soon as this son of yours came, who has devoured your livelihood with harlots, you killed the fatted calf for him...’

I have heretofore presented the Amish and there traditions in a fairly glowing light. You might even be wondering if I am Amish who has mysteriously gotten his hands on a laptop and Internet connection (albeit a wooden one powered by a frantic hamster). Although I do reserve a warm place in my heart for Anabaptists in general, I am not Amish. I am also aware that the Amish are also known for having a few ugly traditions. Whether these be an overly wooden literalism when it comes to images and iconoclasm, shunning sinners/avoiding outsiders or resisting the potential of good in technology all of these maladies have one mutual diagnosis: legalism. By "legalism" I mean the refusal to accept the simplicity of God's Grace due to complicating it with the tradition's of men. Now I am not using this as a point of departure to start railing off a Protestant works versus grace attack on Catholics because the Catholic Church of today is quite different than the one that the Reformer's faced. In spite of other differences most in both camps stand on the same Augustinian foundation theologically.  I mention legalism because it is what Christ was arguing against in the character of the Prodigal Son's brother. This character was the reason for the parable because it was a symbolic of the Pharisees. Remember that Jesus' parable starts out by telling us that the Forgiving Father had two sons. The one that was not prodigal was older, just like the traditions that the Pharisees followed. These legalistic traditions of men led the Pharisees ugly customs such into an overly wooden literalism, shunning sinners/avoiding outsiders and resisting seeing the potential for good in their brothers (also like the Amish they also had no Internet access). Like the older brother their self-righteous pursuit of justifying themselves through meticulous rule following caused them to miss the move of God in mercy. Like the Forgiving Father, God has two types of children: one who knows his Father's mercy through repentance and the other who never knows repentance and therefore never knows the mercy of his Father. The return from Rumspringa is the choosing of your family.

The Father and Repentance/Salvation

“...And he said to him, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that I have is yours. It was right that we should make merry and be glad, for your brother was dead and is alive again, and was lost and is found.’”

Rumspringa may be a tradition that is particular to the Amish but all Christian communities have their own equivalent to the post-Rumspringa process. Those churches who (like the Amish) exclusively practice adult baptism as the norm require a profession of faith and repentance before baptism into Christ and his community. Those churches who hold infant baptism (or paedo-baptism) as normative start with baptizing the child into Christ and then after catechism the much older child (closer to the age of Rumspringa) is afforded the opportunity to fully join Christ's community through Confirmation. All of these are wonderful traditions to have as they through ritual and rite remember the life of Christ in the life of the Church and the lives of individual believers. I have no qualms with this. What I am arguing is that if we capture the fullness of Jesus' parable then we will expand from only onetime individual acts to signify repentance to a collective Church-wide paradigm shift that signifies a lifestyle of continual forgiveness. The reason of the Prodigal Son parable may have been to highlight the theological problems of the self-righteous brother/Pharisees but the message is bigger than that. The story is that some may be like the Prodigal Son (seeking mercy) while others are like the Self-Righteous Brother (seeking to justify themselves) but both should emulate the Forgiving Father. Because of course the Forgiving Father is God. That was Jesus' consistent message, "be perfect, just as your Father in Heaven is perfect." Herein lies the key to this godly perfection: taking the sins that others commit against you from and returning mercy. The full context of this command being, "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect." Jesus reveals the fullness of God that has been there from Creation: that of a Forgiving Father calling out to Mankind "Where are you, Adam?", as He waits for His son to return to Him. Waiting for Mankind to return from Rumspringa.

Whether it was images of the rural farms of the Amish, de facto segregation in big cities or the banal art world of Andy Warhol, Timm Rautert was the German that showed America to the Americans. The power of good photography is that it invites you into the visual experiences of the photographer. The strength of this phenomenon is doubled when the eyes of the beholder that you view through points the lens at your own culture and gives you an outsiders perspective. It shows you things that you never saw and things that you saw but never noticed. The Radical Reformation forefathers that the Amish tradition is heir was inspired to look at their own culture through the filtered lens of Jesus' life and teachings. It led them to form a counterculture that the evils of nationalism, violence and religious superfluidity that plagued both houses of the Western Christendom of their time. It would do us well to consider the priceless insights of these simple people in every corner and generation of the Church. It is presently very popular to think of Christianity as a countercultural agent but we must also stay vigilant that we not turn counterculture Christianity into its own idol. There is nothing salvific about just being different. Besides, the truth of the Prodigal Son (and all of Jesus' ministry) is not that we should necessarily be counterculture. Sometimes we can work with and through culture to redeem culture (you know like making an Art blog that is also a Bible blog. #patsselfontheback). The truth that Christ commits to us is to be counterintuitive. Because Grace is counterintuitive. It shows you things that you never saw and things that you saw but never noticed. Grace is the lens of a camera showing us a God who has been waiting with a feast for our return. It is the image of a Father whose genes of forgiveness and mercy are our inheritance. It is a picture that is counterintuitive to anything we thought before but it all makes sense if we just look through Jesus' eyes. 

So come back home.

The Architecture of Mercy

Chartres Street at Night, New Orleans French Quarter 

Luke 10:25-37

"And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested Him, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” He said to him, “What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?” So he answered and said, “ ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,’^[a] and ‘your neighbor as yourself.’” And He said to him, “You have answered rightly; do this and you will live.” But he, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?..." 

Since it has been ten years after I evacuated my home in New Orleans due to Hurricane Katrina I guess that it is fitting that I discuss what I remember.

Shotgun house next to 712 Barracks Street in French Quarter. New Orleans, Louisiana,

"Then Jesus answered and said: “ A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, who stripped him of his clothing, wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead..."

I remember that after my federal government failed to respond following the biggest national tragedy in a generation the Mexican government sent troops with aid across the southern border. I remember Mexican immigrants (both documented and undocumented) coming to rebuild my city. I remember afterwards when many of them were cheated out of their due payment and were reminded that they were not welcome.

HOLY NAME OF JESUS CATHOLIC CHURCH (On the campus of Loyola University in New Orleans) 6367 St. Charles Ave

"Now by chance a certain priest came down that road. And when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite, when he arrived at the place, came and looked, and passed by on the other side..." 

I remember seeing televangelists of my own Evangelical faith on television and falsely asserting that this city of Roman Catholics, Southern Baptists and Full Gospel Baptists was being judged for practicing Voodoo. I remember when the Islamic Kingdom of Qatar donated millions to rebuild our Catholic colleges.  

Courtyard Hotel Downtown New Orleans

"But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was. And when he saw him, he had compassion. So he went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; and he set him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. On the next day, when he departed,^[c] he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said to him, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I come again, I will repay you.’..."

I remember having to move 2,000 miles away to Rochester, Minnesota where few of the residents looked like me and even fewer voted like me but they took me in and freely gave to me like I was their own.

New Orleans Historic Wrought Iron in French Quarter

"So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?” And he said, “He who showed mercy on him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”

The greatness of New Orleans' past lies in it's nearly 300 year old blend of French, Spanish, Afro-Caribbean and American aesthetics and culture, but the greatness of its present is embedded in the architecture of Marcy. The promise of this city's future is even a possibility because the citizens of the global village willed it to be so. So when the clamor of the politics of division based on nationalism, religion and race drowns out the voices of brotherhood and mercy I just remember the lessons of Hurricane Katrina. Most of all I remember life teaching me that the meaning of the Good Samaritan parable was that often the help that God sends your way is in the form of someone that is nothing like you. This is the foundation that New Orleans was rebuilt upon: one that will withstand though the rain descends, the floods come, and the winds blow. 

Of Penance and the Penitentiary

Trent Bell, "Brandon"

Matthew 25:31-46

“When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me..."
Trent Bell is a commercial architectural photographer. If you visit his website trentbell.com you will be greeted with a slick site featuring sharp images of newly constructed glass and steel office buildings, museums, condos and other urban spaces of New England. But in 2013 Trent focused his lens on another Atlantic Coast public space: the State Prison in Warren, Maine. It wasn't the building's architectural exterior that interested him but rather the inmates emotional interior. An article on the DailyMail.co.uk shares that this artistic change of genre started when Trent discovered that "a friend, who was a father and respected professional, had been sentenced to 36 years behind bars." So in true Shawshank Redemption form, Trent went into the Main correctional system to peer into the lives and regrets of the convicted. He photographed portraits of the prison inmates and superimposed the text of letters they had written to their younger selves in the background. And that is where Trent Bell first met Jesus... Or rather Brandon, a guy who looks like Jesus. But maybe that is only the influence of Western Art making me see the image of Jesus reflected in a thirty-something, bearded White guy with long hair. Jesus himself believed that he looked like another (African American) inmate named Jamie. And he also thought that he favored Ben, a post-middle aged, husky, gray bearded White inmate who looks something like a Maine lobster fisherman turned librarian. Jesus actually believed that his resemblance could be seen in all of the prisoners... also in the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger/foreigner, the naked/destitute and the sick. Matter of fact, Jesus taught that our salvation depended upon us seeing him in the faces of those who suffer around us. But he doesn't use the word "saved." We are fortunate that he doesn't because we have prepackaged that term into being a loaded image that always reads as "going to Heaven." Not that I am against Heaven or reward in the afterlife but I believe that Jesus is speaking about something a little larger here. He uses the phrase "Inherit the kingdom" to speak of reward laid up for those sheep who recognize their shepherd disguised as the needy if this world. In the era of the "Black Lives Matter" movement where we increasingly highlight those (like Sandra Bland) who die in state custody (like Anne Frank, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Polycarp, St. Paul and yes, Jesus) it is important to recognize that Jesus' list of requirements for "inheriting the kingdom" end with going to those in prison. Jesus doesn't specify that they be innocent, guilty, reformed or unrepentant. The burden here isn't on the prisoner converting but the disciple serving. Inhering the kingdom isn't contingent on success but rather faithfulness.

Trent Bell, "Jamie"

“...Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me...’"


It must be noted that when the Law was given to Moses it never called for jail, prison or a correctional system at all. Though it provided for the office of judges, many of the punishments of the Law were based on a system of just vengeance. An example would be that a murderer himself would be killed by a close relative (the kinsman redeemer/avenger of blood) of the victim. Jesus knows the Law and never doubts that it came from the lips of God, however, he doesn't use this parable to object to the institution of prison as against God's original intention. Nor does Jesus ever encourage the death penalty for lawbreakers (like the woman caught in adultery) who according to the Law were deserving of death. On the contrary, Jesus worked against the death penalty's use. Why is this? Did Jesus not value the Law? Did Jesus not esteem it as God's Word? Jesus not only believed in God's Word, he actually is the Word of God. Where the Law was Moses' glimpse of the backside of God, Jesus (and his teachings) is the fullness if the Godhead bodily. To believe this about Jesus is to believe that God engages mankind in Progressive Revelation. That is to say that Scripture is the record of God revealing more about Himself over time in history. We then can agree with the writer of Hebrews that "God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son." If the final revelation of God comes in the man Jesus, then it would prove advantageous for us to take his words, acts and methods seriously. If Jesus rethought how we treat those we punish then shouldn't we? If Jesus said that we should visit those in prison then shouldn't we? That was the idea behind much of the Social Gospel and public reform movements of the  nineteenth century. The conclusions of the Gospel were applied on a societal level. The ideas of Progressive Revelation and Progressive Social policy must be intertwined: the more we know about God the more it must cause us to rethink how we treat each other. This kind of thinking led many Quakers and other socially conscious Christians to be involved in the reform of the prison system. According to Wikipedia they not only viewed prisons as houses of punishment but as a place of "rehabilitation or moral reform, was based on religious ideas that equated crime with sin, and saw prisons as a place to instruct prisoners in Christian morality, obedience and proper behavior. These later reformers believed that prisons could be constructed as humane institutions of moral instruction, and that prisoners' behavior could be 'corrected' so that when they were released, they would be model members of society." Hence they birthed the idea of the "penitentiary" as a place of "penance." It was a reimagining of prison as a place where one could think long and hard about their sins against society. Contemporary prison may seem hard to us, however, it is just the latest step on our continually evolving approach to how we treat each other. It is a reform from the days of execution for most crimes, dungeons and being a galley slave. Yet even the well meaning intentions of the progressives of the past must be rethought in light of our present predicament. This cannot be achieved if we, Christ's contemporary disciples, are not aware of the conditions of those who suffer in the penitentiary. This cannot happen until we follow Jesus' call to go to those in prison. This cannot happen until we see the face of Christ in every inmate. We will not inherit the kingdom until this happens. 

“...Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me...’"

At the heart of both this parable and the marriage of progressive revelation and progressive social policy Is seeing Jesus in others. Yet the inability to see Christ in the face of the needy is exactly what leads to the judgment of the "goats" in Jesus' parable. I believe that the inclusion of prisoners in Jesus' list of those in need is critical here. For most can see Jesus in the hungry and thirsty because they can remember the sorties of Jesus feeding the multitudes. Many can see Jesus in the naked, the stranger and the sick because they can recall his story of the Good Samaritan. Yet finding Jesus' facial features in the faces of felons takes spiritual creativity that most of us don't possess. This is because as "upstanding" Christians we Pharisaically pride ourselves as keepers of the Ten Commandments as opposed to the sinners who find themselves locked up in prison. We support campaigns to keep monuments to the Ten Commandments in American courts to remind law breakers that their offenses are repugnant to a holy God.   And if we do donate to prison ministries (such as Chuck Colson's Prison Fellowship) it is often with a heart of helping those who don't resemble Christ or us. It is at this point where we forget the premise of substitutionary atonement. For it is not by our good works that we gave been saved but because when God looks down upon sinners like us He sees the face of Christ. God Himself follows the commands of Christ's parable and sees the image of His dear Son in the face of the suffering and has mercy on them. Since we live as the recipients of such great mercy, we then should ourselves be merciful. We start by following the popular rephrasing of Jesus' golden rule in Matthew 7:12, "Do unto others as you would have then do unto you." The actual text reads, "Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets." The last part of that verse leads us to realize that the golden rule isn't just a social campaign to increase considerateness but rather the fulfillment of our religion. It is not only doing unto others as you would have them do unto you but also doing unto others as you would do unto Jesus. That is gist of our religion and the purest form of worship to God. That us the selfless ethic that Christ calls us to. That is how we inherit the kingdom. 

“...Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me'...”

When meditating upon Scripture I find it helpful to imagine the parables as dramatic or cinematic productions.  Most of them are not that long so they are more similar to a 60 second commercial than a Tolkien trilogy. Most commercials (or at least the funny ones) surround one key point of impact... a punch line of sorts. It is the place where the full intention of the piece is wrapped up in a digestible sound bite. The parables are no different. The punch line of this specific parable is "inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me." The justification of Jesus' judgment on the "goats" is understood in one line. Yet one remaining subtlety that may elude the reader us the identity of the goats. The parable says that the sheep and the goats together are the nations of the earth, with the ones (on the right) receiving reward being sheep and the ones (on the left) receiving punishment being goats. One would assume that this division would be between the good and the bad or the believers and the unbelievers, however, things are not always so simple. For the goats "answer Him, saying, ‘Lord'." We must also give notice to Jesus' choice of imagery. The division is not between sheep and wolves (an image that Christ had used before) or sheep and swine (which any Kosher Jew would understand) but sheep and goats. Both sheep and goats are farm animals that are Kosher to eat, yet one group is preferable to the other. One is known for its humility while the other is known for its stubbornness. It is not a division between opposites but rather sheep and almost-sheep. It is a division between those who follow and those who rebel. Both may contain believers who recognize Jesus as Lord but Christ was never looking only for believers. Christ desires both believers and doers. Christ desires those who both believe in his sovereignty and also submit to his sovereign will to show mercy to those in need. This is what separates sheep from goats. This is what divides the obedient follower from the stubborn rebel. This is what inherits the kingdom.

"...And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

So my request today is that all Christians be more like Trent Bell. We must go into the prisons and places if suffering and find the face of Jesus in people like Brandon, Jamie, Ben and Sandra Bland. Some of them may not look like us but they do look like Jesus. Until we we adopt the mindset of Christ that sees God in others then our criminal justice system will continue to suffer from cover ups and lack of citizen oversight. Until we adopt the mindset of Christ the less fortunate among us will continue to suffer and perish in silence and anonymity. Until we adopt the mindset of Christ we will remain afar off from inheriting the kingdom. For inheriting the kingdom is not only about gaining admission to the kingdom or the riches of the kingdom but the work of the kingdom. Inheriting the kingdom is taking up the family business of divine mercy distribution. Inheriting the kingdom is about taking up Christ's spiritual mantle of acting prophetically in accordance to progressive revelation and in opposition to an unjust world-system. Most of all, inheriting the kingdom is following Jesus: the God whose face can only be seen after we have looked into the faces of our unseen brothers.

Trent Bell, "Ben"

The Artist's Signature: What's In A Name?

It is said that after the Middle Ages a new component started to be included in paintings. This ingredient distinguished the age artisan from the age of the artist... and turned the artist into the Artist (with a capital "A"). Individual artists were now more than just craftsmen but potential geniuses worthy of collection and stardom. This one specific part of every painting was the artist's signature. There are several artist's who may share a style, subject matter and approach to creating, so the signature exists as the final way to distinguish the identity of the creator. The artist's signature is the way that one distinguishes Caravaggio from just another caravaggisti. Now that we've established the significance of the artist's signature let us ask another question: How does the artist select what his/her signature should be? If your answer is that they just write down their name, then I have a big surprise for you. Many of the most famous artists of history aren't known by their "real" names at all (or only their names). The name that is used as a signature is a carefully considered thing that is chosen to reveal the desired image of the creator. So the question begs: What is in a name? We focus a lot on first names because our contemporary culture bestows great clout on individuality being a paramount aspect of identity. However it is the surname, the family name (or the Last name in the English speaking tradition), that tells the most of the individual's narrative. It is this name that tells the story of the long line of individuals who came together in love (hopefully) to create life. Both of these approaches were utilized in the naming process taken up by the being that we call God. Unlike any other living being, He was not preceded by any other life-form that could name him. This being the case, the Creator had to decide what name to reveal himself as to creation. In this act of progressive revelation, God (the creative Creator) chose to illuminate His identity through the story of his relationships with the long line of individuals who came together with Him in love to create life.

The Family Name 

Exodus 3:1-6

"Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian. And he led the flock to the back of the desert, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. And the Angel of the Lordappeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. Then Moses said, “I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn.” So when the Lord saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.” Then He said, “Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.” Moreover He said, “I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God."

Pablo Picasso is considered the most famous and influential twentieth century artist. According to Wikipedia "Picasso was baptized Pablo Diego José Francisco de Paula Juan Nepomuceno María de los Remedios Cipriano de la Santísima Trinidad Ruiz y Picasso, a series of names honoring various saints and relatives. Ruiz y Picasso were included for his father and mother, respectively, as per Spanish law." In spite of Spanish law, artistic custom would have been for Pablo to have chosen his father's name (especially since his father was also an artist). However he consciously chose to identify himself to the world as Pablo Picasso not Pablo Ruiz. He decided to publicly bear the name if his mother and with it reveal his identity in his relationship to his mother. I don't believe it was meant as a slight against his father but society takes note when you name yourself by unconventional means. The world notices when you chose to reveal yourself in the story of those that would normally be overlooked. And yet that us the way that  God first chose to reveal Himself. Documenting a succession of meaningful relationships that had God chose to be known as the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. Yet these relationships were more than associations, acquaintances  or even friendships. These relationships were the foundation of family. Indeed God would later refer to the offspring of these three patriarchs as "My son." Herein lies the greater revolutionary notion, God identifies Himself by the name of His kids. Now you may interject that God referred to them as His children metaphorically, but I would argue that the truth that the metaphor represents only makes His choice of words more powerful. Let us consider another metaphor that God often used for Israel: his wife. In the Book of Hosea, God calls the prophet Hosea to marry Gomer, a prostitute. Eventually their relationship runs into turmoil when Gomer returns to her old profession. But the sermon illustration that came out of this ordeal was apparently what God was looking for. Hosea's marital struggle with the adulterous Gomer was analogous to God's marital struggle with an idolatrous Israel. God was married to his people and would not divorce them. So when Hosea was forced to buy his wife back out of the sex trade, God too said that he would redeem (meaning buy back) His people from the sin that ensnared them. So when we hear the name "the God of Israel" we know that it is God taking upon the name of His wife. She is not a perfect or faithful wife but the one that He chose and loves. When we hear "the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" we know that it is God taking upon the name of His children. They are not perfect or obedient children but the ones that He bore and loved. The world notices when you chose to reveal yourself in the story of those that would normally be overlooked. That is the identity that God shares in His name. He is the God of those whom He loves.

The Revealed Name

Exodus 3:13-15

"Then Moses said to God, “Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they say to me, ‘What is His name?’ what shall I say to them?” And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’” Moreover God said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.’"

Pablo Picasso may have been the most famous artist of the twentieth century but the story of Art has not ended. Modern Art gave way to Post-Modern Art and the galleries and museums yielded their authority to the streets. So Banksy is now the most famous artist of the present.  Like many of his Street Art contemporaries, Banksy signs (or rather stencils) his art with a moniker. Banksy is not his real name... or maybe it is. We really don't know. Their are a few murky details about this art world version of Batman from Bristol, UK. It appears, however, that the sparse details, urban legends and mystery that surround him are exactly what allow Banksy to operate in the way that he so choses. Whether it be on walls in London, New York, Palestine, New Orleans or a warehouse in Los Angeles the allure that Banksy garners and authority that he speaks with are both entangled within his mysterious anonymity. All that we truly know of him are his public works and work history. They may not reveal his face but they indeed reveal his mind and heart. Yet the viewer is repeatedly prodded to ask, "What is your name?" Just like the story of Art doesn't end with Picasso or Banksy, the revelation of the Creator didn't end with God's first declaration to Moses. Like Banksy's viewers Moses is lead to ask, "What is your name?" when confronted with Deity Himself. The answer that Moses receives from God is a simultaneous answer and non answer. God tells Moses that His name is "I am" or YHWH (from here on out we will refer to that Tetragrammaton as "Yahweh". I will not be spelling it out as "Jehovah" because that is a historical misspelling that you can read more about here). "I am" is a non-answer in that it is literally Divine comedy, being a play on words. God answers "I am who I am" in true Popeye fashion. And commands Moses to tell the people of Israel that "I am" sent him. Yet it is an answer in that it reveals the very nature of the Eternal One (though clouded in the mystery of a riddle). Where the reader takes Yahweh to mean "I am" or "I will be" it speaks of the perpetual presence of His existence and character. It says "God is", "God will be Who He is" and "God will be God." Though He encounters Moses in the inexplicable phenomenon of a burning bush that is not fully consumed and retorts to him with a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, God is still choosing to reveal Himself. He just does so on His own terms. So after revealing Himself as the I am, Yahweh doubles down own His earlier chosen method of revelation. He restates that He is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob's narrative, but then He prophetically reveals the God that He will be to Moses and the Children of Israel. Just as God was the sovereign hand of Providence to the Patriarchs, He would be the strong arm of Justice to the Israelites and Judgment against their Egyptian slave masters. At Moses' point in the story of Progressive Revelation All that we truly know of Him are his public works and work history. They may not reveal His face but they indeed reveal His mind and heart. He is the God who acts (in history) out of love. 

The Personal Name

Luke 1:30-33

"Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.”

Some of the most famous names in Art are not necessarily known by their names but rather named by their location. It may not surprise you to find out that Judy Chicago was not born "Judy Chicago." She was born Judith Sylvia Cohen in the city of Chicago, Illinois (big surprise). And Caravaggio was not Caravaggio at all. Caravaggio was the name of the little town outside of Milan that where he was raised. His real name was Michelangelo Merisi. But maybe those two artists don't matter much to you. How about this one: Da Vinci was not really da Vinci. That is why the art-types only refer to him as Leonardo instead of Leonardo da Vinci (one of the many problems with "The Da Vinci Code"). He indeed was named "Leonardo" but "da Vinci" was less of a surname and more of a designator of where he was from (Vinci, a little suburb of Florence). If none of those name inaccuracies impress you then how about this one: Jesus' name wash;t actually Jesus of Nazareth. Just like Judy Chicago, Caravaggio and Leonardo da Vinci, the second name (Nazareth) attached to Jesus' name speaks of his hometown (hence the "of"). It was to distinguish him from any other "Jesus" walking around at that time. But except for a handful of cases we don't know of that many Palestinian Jews named Jesus during Christ's lifetime, yet the Gospel writers consistantly add disincentives to his name as if Jesus alone was a fairly common name. Why is that? It is because Jesus' actual name wasn't "Jesus" per se but another more common name. It is usually believed to have been the Hebrew name ישוע‎ (Yeshua), a shortening of יהושע‎ (Yehoshua). But there shouldn't be any controversy to this at all; great historical figures like Confucius (from the Chinese 孔夫子 Kǒng Fūzǐ) and Moses (from the Hebrew Moshe) all get their names Latinized before translating them into English. The difference with Jesus' case is that his name "Yeshua" is normally translated into English as "Joshua." Most likely Jesus Christ was not translated as Joshua Christ because there was already a fairly prominent character in Scripture named Joshua. Keeping the Latinized name "Jesus" cuts down on confusion between the two figures.  But there is deep significance with Jesus sharing the name of an Old Testament figure. When we read the Gospel of Luke's account of the Gabriel's announcement to Mary then we see that it is pointed out that Christ shares several similarities with multiple Biblical characters...and that's the entire point. Whether it was Joshua, David and Jacob or even Moses and Elijah, the evangelists and consistently highlighting the parallels between Jesus and those that God worked with in the past. All of them were Shadows and types of Christ. In truth all of Scripture past gives us a prefiguring of Christ. That is why he is called the Word of God just like Scripture is called the Word of God. Jesus is God's Word and the fleshly embodiment of God's mind and heart. The Gospel of Matthew's account of the angel's message to Joseph gives us a more detailed insight:

Matthew 1:21

"And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.”

Whenever you see a person being named (or renamed) in Scripture it is usually followed by a clause that explains the name choice by featuring the name's definition. The reason for Jesus' name has to deal with "sav(ing) His people from their sins" because Yeshua/Joshua/Jesus literally means "Yahweh is salvation." Within Jesus' name lies his revelation as God's agent of Salvation. The God who acted in the sacrificial love of Jesus.

The Universal Name

1 John 4:7-11

"Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another."

Whether the artist be Picasso, Banksy or Leonardo, the signature is not only significant as a display of the creator's identity and brand, but because the same brushstrokes are evident in the signature that were utilized in the creation of his masterpiece (or in Banksy's case stencil spray). Both the artwork and the name of the artisan display reveal the hand of the creator. Our Creator is no different. It is most evident in the most universal revelation of his name and identity. St. John informs us that God has revealed Himself to all people everywhere throughout time. However, he has not revealed Himself in the identity of the false gods of the nations but as something more primal and intimate than that. God is not revealed in their idols, religions or superstitions. God has revealed Himself as Love. Love is known and desired by all people everywhere. Indeed it is Love that people partner with in relationship with others to create life. Love is more than an emotion, force or impulse. Love is a being who uses it's emotions to emote love to creation. Love is a being who uses it's force as the power to promote love. Love is a being who endowed it's creation with the impulse to feel love. Love is the Creator. Love is the Savior. Love is beginning of the revelation and the manifested inner working of the God known as Jesus Christ.