A Special "Best Student Papers" Edition Volume 60 Numbers 3-4

EDITORIAL BOARD Amy Bentley Lamborn, Senior Editor Kellyann Falkenberg Wolfe, Associate Editor Michael Doran, Business Manager

Copyright© 2007 by Umon Theological Seminary in the City of New York

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced by any process or techmque, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form, without the prior permission of Union Seminary Quarterly Review. ISSN 0362-1545

Correspondence: Send all editorial correspondence, books for review, and adver­tising and subscription inquiries to Union Seminary Quarterly Review, 3041 Broad­way, New York, NY 10027. Email: usqr@uts.columbia.edu. For submissions, please include article and 200 word abstract. Articles should use the most recent edition of the Chicago Manual of Style. Submissions cannot be returned.

Subscription: Institutions, $40.00 per year. Individuals, $21.00 per year. Canada and Mexico, $4.00 for postage. Outside North America, institutions $65.00, indi­viduals $42.00 per year. Back issues are available for $10.00 per single issue and $18.00 per double issue. Foreign orders should be made payable in dollars by in­ternational money order or checks drawn from U.S. banks only.

Union Seminary Quarterly Review is editorially independent of Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York. Views expressed in this journal are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect those held by the Editorial Board of USQR or its sponsors.

Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper.

Cover design and typeset composition by Grace Lewis.

U UNION S SEMINARY Q QUARTERLY R REVIEW

A Special "Best Student Papers" Edition

Volume 60:3-4

2007

,--$ u UNION s VOLUME60

SEMINARY Numbers3-4

Q QUARTERLY 2007

R REVIEW -

EDITORIAL STATEMENT v

"She Went to Inquire of the Lord" Independent Divination in Genesis 25:22

Erin E. Fleming 1

In the Name of the Three Headed Monster: The Contours of the Judicial Process in Servetus's Trial

Matthew J. Pereira

The Army of God and the Psyche Laura D' Angelo

Sympathy for the Devil? Origin and the End Jennifer L. Heckart

BOOK REVIEWS

Douglas John Hall. Bound and Free: A Theologian's Journey

11

35

49

Reviewer: Hannah Hofheinz 64

Margaret A. Farley. Just Love: A Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics Reviewer: Keun-joo Christine Pae 66

William M. Epstein. Psychotherapy as Religion: The Civil Divine in America Reviewer: William F. Smith 69

F. LeRon Shults and Steven J. Sandage. Transforming Spirituality: Integrating Theology and Psychology Reviewer: Pilar Jennings 71

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS 73

iv

Editorial Statement

Union's student body is a diverse and gifted community of scholars, teachers, and practitioners of ministries of spiritual care and social justice. Here, in this place of study and formation, the words of Paul in his letter to the church at Ephesus find a unique expression: "The gifts that Christ gave were that some would be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for the building up of the body of Christ. ... " (4:11-13)

This issue of the USQR is a celebration of student research and writ­ing. The four articles represent the "best papers" submitted in each of Union's academic fields: biblical, historical, theological, and arts of minis­try. Each paper explores a topic of relevance for the church and the acad­emy and makes a significant contribution to its respective discipline.

We hope you will be informed and challenged by what you read in these pages and rejoice, with us, in the many gifts which can be found in this place--gifts which bring us ever closer in the unity of faith and the knowledge of God.

V

"She Went to Inquire of the Lord" Independent Divination in Genesis 25:22

ERIN E. FLEMING

In Genesis 25:22, when Rebekah feels the twins Jacob and Esau "crushing each other in her midst," she cries out and then goes "to inquire of YHWH." Upon inquiring of the deity, she receives the famous oracle about Jacob and Esau, the "two nations in [her] womb." Rebekah seems to take a specific religious action in her inquiry, which most scholars believe involves a method of divination. Divination is a vast and complex topic, but for our purposes here, we can define it as the art or science of ascertain­ing information about the future through observation and interpretation of unpredictable events in nature or supernatural agency. Common to all ancient Near Eastern religions, divination covered a wide range of activi­ties, such as dreams, omens, necromancy, extispicy, and astrology, to name but a few. Two major categories of divination were those that required technical skill, like extispicy or astrology, and those that resulted from in­spiration, like dreams and even prophecy. However, the various methods of divination characteristically involved an intermediary, a person with some level of training or talent. Because of this, most commentators as­sume that Rebekah seeks a cultic oracle or a diviner when she "inquire[s] of the Lord." For instance, Gerhard Von Rad states, "there must have been a cultic center to which Rebekah went." 1 Likewise, John Hartley asserts that "she traveled to either a prophet, a priest, or a special shrine where she might receive a word from God," 2 and George Coats and J. P. Fok­kelman claim that the form of verse 22 is that of a formal complaint and request for an oracle.3

1. Gerhard Von Rad, Genesis, trans. John H. Marks (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961) 260. 2. John A. Hartley, Genesis (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2000) 235-36. 3. George W. Coats, Genesis, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983) 184; J.P. Fokkel­

man, Narrative Art in Genesis: Specimens of Stylistic and Structural Analysis (Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Assen, 1975) note on 88.

1

2 ERIN E FLEMING

However, a major problem with this assumption is that there is no intermediary whatsoever mentioned in the text. Moreover, the text does not mention a specific place or shrine where Rebekah "went'' to make her inquiry. Within the context of the Genesis narrative, Isaac and Rebekah are generally not linked to a particular place. Furthermore, from a liter­ary perspective, it seems odd to have an image of a woman in a fairly ad­vanced stage of pregnancy and presumably in a great deal of pain, (given the abnormal amount of fetal movement) travel any sort of distance. Thus, in these interpretations of Genesis 25:22, two elements are introduced by scholars that are not in the text itself. To be sure, commentators have no­ticed this problem, making comments such as "it is tempting to see a pro­phetic mediator even when one is not mentioned." 4 Claus Westermann argues that verse 22 is anachronistic and presupposes the institution of consulting an oracle, which only arose later in Israel's history.5 However, some scholars, such as Victor Hamilton and TJ.k.va Frymer-Kensky, assert that Rebekah acted independently and consulted YHWH directly, but nei­ther of them provides an explanation for this assertion. 6

Since divination in the ancient Near East involved a hired intermedi­ary, the general assumption that Rebekah sought a diviner or cultic oracle Genesis 25:22 seems logical; it is methodologically problematic, however, to insert characters and settings that are not mentioned in the text unless there is sound comparative basis for doing so. Given this dilemma, how should scholars interpret this text? I suggest that perhaps some assump­tions about divination should be questioned, particularly the level of de­pendence upon intermediaries in ancient Israel. Did divination necessari­ly require an intermediary or recognized cultic site, or could divination be practiced alone in the ancient world? That is, could individuals practice divination by themselves, on their own behalf?

This paper calls for a critical reevaluation of the assumption that Re­bekah relies upon an intermediary to receive the oracle about Jacob and Esau and will argue that the comparative basis for this assumption is not sound. Moreover, I will show that there is biblical and ancient Near East­ern evidence of divination without an intermediary, which I call indepen­dent divination, and I will argue that Rebekah inquires of YHWH in this

4. S. Wagner, "vm," in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, vol. 3, eds. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, trans. John T. Willis (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1977) 302

5. Oaus Westermann, Genesis 12-36, trans. John J. Scullion (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984)413.

6. See Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis: Chapters 18-50 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerd­mans, 1990) 177 and Frymer-Kensky, Reading the Women of the Bible (New York: Schocken, 2002) 16.

INDEPENDENT DIVINATION IN GENEffiS 25:22 3

direct manner. Since recent scholarship regards women as having a pas­sive or supportive role in the official Israelite cult,7 it is significant that a (most likely male) writer portrays a female figure in an active religious function or rite, with no attention given to an intermediary. Rebekah's inquiry suggests that women as well as men could have direct recourse to the deity through divination.

Genesis 25:22 and Prophetic Inquiry Texts

The assumption that Rebekah went to a cultic site to receive an oracle largely rests on the Hebrew wording of "she went to inquire of the Lord (:,,:,,-nN w,,, ,,m)" which uses the verb w,,. w,, means resort to, seek, consult, or inquire of,8 either in the general sense, as in asking about some­one or something or as a technical term for divination, as in inquiring of a deity. This is distinct from prayer or obeisance because what is at stake is determining the future rather than making a request and/ or caring for or appeasing the deity. Several narratives use w,, as an expression of pro­phetic inquiry, which is what prompts commentators to group Rebekah's inquiry into this category.9 It is also often used with verbs of motion, as it is in Genesis 25:22, which uses ,,:i, meaning go, come, or walk. The pres­ence of ,,:i in Genesis 25:22 is part of the assumption that Rebekah must have "gone" to a specific place. Other texts also use ,,:i in association with w,,, but other verbs, such as N1J (go in, enter) or,,, (go down) are also found in context of w,,. There are six narratives in Samuel and Kings that have this kind of usage of w,,, as well as several others in the narrative sections of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Chronicles in particular seems to favor w,, and uses it approximately forty times. However, because of time and space constraints and since Chronicles is a later work largely derivative of Samuel-Kings, I will focus on the examples in Samuel, Kings and the prophetic narratives. I will show that Rebekah does not fit the common narrative pattern for prophetic inquiry found in biblical texts even though similar rhetoric is used.

7. For examples, see Phyllis Bird, "The Place of Women in the Israelite Cultus," in An­cient Israelite Religion: Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross, eds. Patrick D. Miller, Jr., Paul D. Hanson, and S. Dean McBride (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987) 397-419 and Hermie Mars­man, Women in Ugarit and Israel: Their Social and Religious Position in the Context of the Ancient Near East (Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2003).

8. Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew-English Lexicon, rpt. of 1906 American edition (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson 2001) 205

9. See Westermann, 413, Wagner, 302, and G. Gerleman, "wi,," in Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament, trans. Mark E. Biddle (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1997) 348.

4 ERIN E FLEMING

The six texts in Samuel and Kings which use lziii as a term of pro-phetic inquiry can be grouped into the following categories:

1) Definition of intermediary: 1 Samuel 9:9 2) Illness of king or crown prince: 1 Kings 14:5 and 2 Kings 8:8 3) Perils of war: 1 Kings 22:5-8, (in which lziii is used three times in

the dialogue between Ahab and Jehosophat) and 2 Kings 3:11 4} Cultic abuses: 2 Kings 22:13

The narrative sections of Jeremiah and Ezekiel using !liii describe a similar pattern to that seen in Samuel-Kings, only from the prophet's per­spective.10

Each of the narratives in Samuel-Kings follows a particular pattern: having a problem or making a decision, finding or sending for the prophet, receiving the word of the Lord from the prophet, and, finally, the resolu­tion to the situation. In looking at the immediate context of Genesis 25:22, commentators who assume the involvement of an intermediary ascribe the same pattern here: Rebekah has a problem (abnormal pregnancy) and becomes concerned about her fate and the fate of her children, she goes to inquire of the Lord (assumed through a prophet or diviner), receives an oracle, and it comes to pass that she has twins and later helps the younger receive the paternal blessing that belongs to the elder.

However, upon closer inspection, Genesis 25:22 is quite distinct from the examples mentioned above. All of these examples involve male kings (or future kings, in the case of Saul), who often use messengers to speak to the prophets, and situations that concern the community at large (the institution of the monarchy, health of the king or crown prince, going into battle, and neglecting the Lord's commandments). The health of the king and crown prince are public concerns in spite of their family interest. Re­bekah is not a queen, nor someone with any kind of political power or public role, and the setting is a society without centralized authority or community beyond the household. Since this type of existence continued in parts of Israel even after the institution of the monarchy, Rebekah's type of setting would not have been unknown to the writers. Ultimately, the story has communal importance for Israel because two peoples come from her womb, but in the narrative context, Rebekah's concerns and actions are at a family level.

Also, in all of the examples using lziii, the inquiry and resulting prophetic announcement never occur at explicit cultic sites. They occur

10. Jeremiah 10:21, 21:2, 37:7; Ezekiel 14:3, 14:7, 20:1, 20:3.

INDEPENDENT DIVINATION IN GENFSJS 25:22 5

on the road (1 Sam 9:9), in the palace or another political site (1 Kgs 22) or where the prophet resides (1 Kgs 14; 2 Kgs 3, 8, 22; Jer 21:2, 37:7; Ezek 14:3, 7, 20:1, 3).11 Thus, the assumption that Rebekah went to a cultic site is inconsistent with the usage of w,, in other narrative texts, and shows the connection to be faulty. If anything, the "going" is to a person, irrespec­tive of the particular place they happen to be located. It also contributes to the possibility that Rebekah's inquiry could have taken place at her own home. Moreover, it is significant that each of these settings gives an idea of where the prophetic inquiry took place, whereas Genesis 25:22 gives no such indication.

Likewise, it is particularly important that in each of the aforemen­tioned narrative usages of w,,, the prophet is always explicitly named and described. 12 In fact, with the possible exception of Huldah in 2 Kings 22, in each of these examples the prophet is at least as important if not more important than the king to the overall story. Considering this, it is par­ticularly odd that Genesis 25:22b not only does not name the seer or inter­mediary that Rebekah consults, but that an anonymous figure is not even mentioned. This is key because the setting of Genesis is a time generally without prophets, 13 when the characters have more direct access to YHWH. In the world of Genesis, the Lord always has contact with his own people directly, without human intermediaries. Adam, Eve, Cain, Noah, Abra­ham, Sarah, Hagar, and Jacob all definitely experience direct communica­tion with YHWH without an intermediary. In fact, virtually every chapter between Genesis 2 and 35 involves some form of direct communication between YHWH and a particular human being, whether through a divine speech or dialogue, vision, dream, or theophany. Moreover, Genesis 25:22 is the only occurrence of w,, involving a deity in Genesis.14 If Genesis 25:22 is an anachronism, as Claus Westermann argues, with a writer in­serting practices of the organized religious cult in an earlier time period, he would have included some mention of an intermediary or a cultic site

11. In I Kings 14, Jeroboam's wife does go to Shiloh, a cultic center, to inquire about the fate of her ill son. However, the passage states specifically that she goes to the ''house of Ahijah." (14:4) and does not mention a temple or house of YHWH.

12. In Jeremiah and Ezekiel, the prophets are not described in these sections, but it is from the prophet's perspective, so they are obviously significant in the scenes and are de­scribed throughout the whole book ascribed to them.

13. Abraham is called a prophet in Genesis 20, but this is to heal Abimilech's family, who is not associated with YHWH.

14. The other occurrences of w,, in Genesis are 9:5, the beginning of the Noahnic cov­enant and 42:22, when Joseph sends his brothers back to Canaan to retrieve Benjamin. In both instances, w,, has the legal meaning of "require."

6 ERIN E FLEMING

to differentiate Rebekah's communication with YHWH from many of the other major figures in Genesis. 15 Granted, the writer(s) was describing a previous time in Genesis, but it is the usage of iu,, that seems anachronis­tic, not the presentation of Rebekah's actions. Thus, even though Genesis 25:22 uses the common divination term iu,,, the text does not fit the larger pattern of prophetic inquiry in these texts. The presence of w,, in Genesis 25:22 is not enough evidence to prove that an intermediary must be as­sumed in Rebekah's inquiry.

Genesis 25:22 and Examples of Independent Divination

In the section above I have tried to show that word usage is not nec­essarily a direct link between two narratives or a solid basis for assum­ing the same types of actions, particularly when the contexts are highly distinct. The wider narrative context must be taken into consideration when comparing rhetoric. In this section, I will examine literary evidence from the Bible and the ancient Near East that describe different methods of divination being performed without an intermediary. The evidence for independent divination comes from eight examples from biblical and an­cient Near Eastern sources. Three involve dream rituals, or incubation, and five concern political leaders seeking divine affirmation before going into battle.

Incubation, a practice where an individual would sleep in a sacred site and potentially receive a dream or an oracle in answer to a problem or request, fits easily into the category of independent divination. In Ugaritic literature, two texts, the Epic of Aqhat and the Epic of Keret, describe men performing dream rituals that result in the blessing of children. In the Epic of Aqhat, Danil has no children. When he sacrifices and sleeps in the sanctuary for seven days, Baal, in response, intercedes for Danil and asks El to grant him children. Danil does not actually have a dream here, but the ritual he performs results in the gods' blessing. In the Epic of Keret, the king Keret has children, but, tragically, his wife and all of his children have died. Left without any family and no heir, Keret mourns in the sanc­tuary until he falls asleep. El appears to him in a dream, teaches him how to sacrifice, and leads him into battle to win a new wife by whom he will have more children. Both of these epic tales end unhappily, with Danil' s

15. I disagree entirely with S. Wagner that since a prophet plays a major role in these prophetic inquiry passages, "one is tempted to assume that a prophet acts as mediator even when there is no specific mention" (Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 302).

INDEPENDENT DMNATION IN GENESIS 25:22 7

son Aqhat being murdered by the goddess Anat' s henchman and Keret cursing his son Yassib after he asks him to abdicate the throne.

Both Ugaritic texts are focused on familial relationships. Even though Keret is a king, at the time of his incubation he is mourning the loss of his family, where the text reads "Keret sealed himself in the sanctuary and mourned, going over each tragedy again and again." 16 Certainly, the lack of an heir is an issue, but he is undoubtedly also mourning his personal loss. As the epic demonstrates, he is capable of begetting more children. Danil, however, does not serve a populace, and in Baal's intercession with El, the deity speaks of Danil in explicit household terms, such as ''build Danila house with a child ... raise up a son for his household ... to build a shrine for the household of Danil in their sanctuary." 17 Thus, the setting of the Epic of Aqhat seems similar to that of Genesis 25:22-it envisions a world without centralized authority, based on the household, and, again, the issue is children.

There is also evidence of an incubation ritual in the Bible in 1 Kings 3:3-15, which recounts Solomon's famous dream, where he receives the gift of wisdom from YHWH. Solomon makes a huge sacrifice at Gibeon, the main bamah or high place.18 There the Lord appears to Solomon in a dream, asking Solomon's wish as ruler over Israel, to which Solomon asks for wisdom. Newly instituted as king, this is Solomon's first action as king after marrying the Pharaoh's daughter. It is unclear whether this incuba­tion ritual has to do with establishing Solomon's kingship or celebrating his marriage and seeking fertility. If it is the latter, then this connects it to the Ugaritic examples of childless kings using incubation to ask for chil­dren. It is significant that, in the context of a narrative that gives prophets a major role, Solomon's actions occur as an alternative to prophecy. While one could assume that there would have priests at the sacrifice, particu­larly since he offers a thousand burnt offerings, no one else is mentioned. In particular, his dream is an example of independent divination since it does not require interpretation, as many dreams do in the Hebrew Bible.

Perhaps the clearest act of independent divination is the pericope of Gideon and the fleece in Judges 6:36-40. Having recently been called by an angel of the Lord to lead the tribes of Israel against the Philistines, Gideon's army stands poised for battle, but he still seeks divine assur-

16. Victor H. Matthews and Don C. Benjamin, Old Testament Parallels, 2nd ed. (New York: Paulist Press, 1997) 77.

17. Ibid., 67. 18. The writer or redactor clearly disapproves of the action, saying, "Solomon loved the

Lord, walking in the statutes of his father David; only, he sacrificed and offered incense at the high places" (lKgs 3:3).

8 ERIN E FLEMING

ance that YHWH will give victory to the Israelites under his leadership. To test the Lord's favor, for two subsequent nights he makes trial with a fleece of wool testing where the dew falls. According to the text, Gideon speaks to YHWH directly, sets up the trial, and interprets the result. There is no mention of an intermediary or anyone else being present. Gideon is responsible for the entire idea, action, and interpretation of the result. The Hebrew even emphasizes that it is Gideon who is acting by including the first person singular pronoun ':JJN in 6:37 when he says, "I am going to lay a fleece of wool on the threshing floor." While this example involves going into battle, much like the above examples of prophetic inquiry in Kings, Gideon is also seeking personal affirmation as the leader of this collective group. YHWH responds to his test by commanding Gideon to reduce the size of his army drastically in order to show YHWH' s power.

Similarly, David inquires of the Lord in several instances in 1 and 2 Samuel, the first to ascertain whether he should attack the Philistines and save Keilah (1 Sam 23:2 & 4), the second, where he uses a linen ephod, to see whether he will overtake the raiding party that had attacked while he and his men were absent (1 Sam 30:8), the third to ask if he should "go up to one of the towns of Judah" (2 Sam 2:1), with the result that he is made king in Hebron, and the fourth again to determine if he should attack the Philistines (2 Sam 5:23). In each of these instances the verb ?NW is used, meaning ask or inquire. This verb is common throughout 1 and 2 Samuel because of the word play with Saul.19 ?NW is in many ways comparable to w,,, and there is semantic overlap between them. ?NW is also a term used in divination, referring to the question of one seeking an oracle. However, ?NW is used in a more limited sense, usually in requests for divine decisions that could be answered yes or no, as the examples with David indicate. In particular, in these examples it is a term for seeking an oracle before enter­ing into a war.2° Commentators do not see David as using an intermediary in any of these examples. The priest Abiathar is present in 1 Sam 30:8, but only to bring the linen ephod to David who uses it to inquire of YHWH. Like Eli at Shiloh, his responsibility as a priest is to ensure the purity of the linen ephod for the users (i.e. David). David approaches YHWH directly through divination using the ephod without the mediation of Abiathar.

Both Gideon and David stand in contrast to Rebekah as military and political leaders, like Solomon and Keret. Certainly, they are acting over a

19. See P. Kyle McCarter, 1 Samuel (New York: Doubleday, 1980) 63; also "',K1/J" in Dic­tionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, 9.

20. David's use of the verb fits this context, except perhaps when he goes to Hebron in 2 Sam 2:1. However, since he essentially takes over the town by becoming king, this also follows the same idea.

INDEPENDENT DIVINATION IN GENESIS 25:22 9

group of people, but there is also a personal element to each of their inqui­ries that connects to hers. Also, they seem to practice divination wherever they happen to be located, not at a cultic site or shrine. David's inquiries seem to have the most connection to Rebekah's because both texts provide so little information. They lack any mention of an intermediary, a location, or a time. Indeed, these examples only provide the surrounding circum­stances and the question and answer. It is just as possible to assume that David consulted a cultic oracle as Rebekah from the amount of information in these passages. However, since David is seen as approaching YHWH directly by means of divination, Rebekah should be viewed in the same way, without inserting characters and settings not mentioned in the text.

Obviously, Rebekah still remains distinct from these five examples of independent divination because of her gender and lack of political power. Moreover, Rebekah is also distinct in that she seeks an oracle to explain an already existing physiological situation, whereas the other examples of independent divination seek to affirm future success or an answer to a request from the deity. Indeed the presence of an abnormal physiological situation could indicate that Rebekah uses divination through her own body and experience. Divination through nature was a main feature of ancient Near Eastern religion, where abnormalities were explained by cor­responding omens. In this light, Rebekah could have used her own body as divination, and her abnormal pregnancy would be a sign in nature that required explanation. She would be the appropriate person to determine if her pregnancy was abnormal, since she was the person who felt the unusually active fetal movement. It is possible that Rebekah could have suspected she was pregnant with twins and wanted to know if it was a good or bad sign. According to the omen series ~umma Izbu, having male twins was an inauspicious sign, while having female twins was a sign of prosperity.21 Thus, the divine oracle Rebekah receives is similar to other ancient Near Eastern omens regarding male twins.

Conclusion

As I have shown above, there are several examples of independent divination in biblical and ancient Near Eastern texts. These texts support

21. Erle Leichty, The Omen Series Summa Izbu (Locust Valley, NY: J. J. Agustin, 1970) 39, 42. Number 83 states, "If a woman gives birth to two boys-there will be hard times in the land; the land will experience unhappiness; there will be bad times for the house of their father." Number 100 states, "If a woman gives birth to two girls-that house will prosper."

10 ERIN E FLEMING

my contention that an intermediary was not necessarily required in divi­nation, even in important public situations. If there is textual evidence for independent divination in the period of an organized religious cult in ancient Israel and Judah, it stands to reason that, it would easily have been projected into the setting of Genesis, where the direct communica­tion between YHWH and human beings occurs rather frequently. Though Rebekah's pericope is distinctive in several ways, there is a stronger corre­lation between Genesis 25:22 and the examples of independent divination than the examples of prophetic inquiry that use the verb lll11. Moreover, this interpretation does not necessitate inserting characters and settings that are not mentioned in the text itself. Thus, Rebekah should be consid­ered alongside her many counterparts in Genesis that experience direct divine communication with no intermediary.

In the Name of the Three Headed Monster The Contours of the Judicial Process in Servetus' s Trial

MATTHEW J. PEREIRA

Introduction

An International Fugitive. On August 13th, 1553, while taking temporary lodging in Geneva, Michael Servetus, who was at that time an international fugitive, attended the Sunday service at the church Madeleine. 1 During the service, Servetus was recognized and immediately seized by the Genevan authorities; the trial that followed the arrest would thrust Geneva into the international spotlight. By this time, Servetus, a Spaniard who possessed a keen intellect complimented with a zealous piety had already gained in­ternational notoriety largely on account of his combative demeanor and his non-normative brand of Christianity.2 A brief outline reveals that prior to Geneva, Servetus demonstrated a propensity to exhaust his welcome in a variety of European cities.3 Beyond his temperament, Servetus's the­ology was also ill received throughout Europe. For instance, in 1531, the

1. Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Geneve au Temps de Calvin: Tome II, 1553 - 1564, ed. Robert Kingdom, (Geneve: Librairie Droz, 1964), 3.

2. Servetus was proficient in a wide range of intellectual pursuits, such as medicine, geography, Biblical scholarship and theology. For further discussion see Roland Bainton, Hunted Heretic (Boston: Beacon Press, 1953), 4; E. Doumergue, Jean Calvin: Les hommes et les choses de son temps Tome VI: La lutte (Geneve: Slatkine Reprints, 1969), 206- 218.

3. In a letter dated October 21st, 1553, the pastors of Zurich underscored Servetus's no­toriety in a letter sent to Geneva, "Si non fallit nos similitude nominis, movit hie Servetus hoc ingens malum ante annos vigniti, connate tum beatae memoriae Domino Johanne Oecolam­padio ipsum reducere in viam." Corpus Reformatorum Vol. XXXVI, Calvini Opera VIII, (New York: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1964), 558; onward, we will refer to this work as Calvini Opera VIII. Also, in the Genevan trial, Fontaine opened his case against Servetus by stating, "In the first place that he has been about twenty years since he commenced to trouble the churches of Germany by his errors and heresies." See Calvini Opera VIII, 727.

11

12 MATTiiEW J, PEREIRA

sale of Servetus' s first theological treatise was forbidden in Strasbourg and Basle.4 Soon after, Servetus fled into anonymity for nearly two decades, while taking on the pseudonym Michel de Vtllenueve.5 However, in 1553, Servetus emerged from obscurity and released his third major theologi­cal work titled Christianismi Restutio. Months before his arrest in Geneva, Servetus was burned in effigy in Vienne largely on account of Christianismi Restutio, which ended up being his final significant theological work. 6 This broad panoramic suggests that by the time of his Genevan imprisonment, Servetus' s checkered past had earned him the status of a criminal celebrity of sorts. Thus, the Spaniard's trial would most naturally garner the atten­tion of the wider political and ecclesial European community.

Indeed, the Servetus affair placed Geneva under the scrutiny of the broader Catholic and Protestant world. The Genevan Senate was acutely aware of the wider audience; consequently, during the trial, they sought the counsel and support of four neighboring Swiss cities. The responses from these cities are illuminating. On October 21st, 1553, the pastors of Zurich responded to the Genevan inquiry by exhorting the Council to purge themselves of all heresy. Further, the Zurich divines admonished the Genevans by declaring that God had providentially given them an opportunity to repair the reputation of the Swiss churches, which suffered throughout the European world:

We are therefore of the opinion that we ought to use all our faith and diligence in opposition to this man; especially since our churches are evil spoken of abroad, as if they were heretical, and favored heretics [haereticis faveant]. The holy providence of God [sancta Dei providentia] therefore has put an opportunity into your hands of purging your­selves, together with us, from the vile suspicion [mali huius suspicione] so great an evil, viz. If you shall take effectual care to put a stop to the growing contagion of this person, which we doubt not but you will do to all intents and purposes. 7

4. Servetus's first theological work was De Trinitatis erroribus; see E. Morse Wtlbur, Two Treatises on the Trinity (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1932). For further discussion, see Joseph Leckler, Toleration and the Reformation: Volume One translated by T.L. Westow, (New York: Association Press, 1960), 325 - 326.

5. Theodore Beza, The Life of John Calvin (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1909), 61.

6. For the sentence of the Ecclesiastical Tribunal of Vienne against Servetus see Calvini Opera VIII, 851- 856. Also, for further comment on the Vienne affair, see E. Doumergue, Jean Calvin: Les hommes et les choses de son temps Tome VI, 219 - 223.

7. Calvini Opera VIII, 558.

IN THE NAME OF THE 1HREE HEADED MONSTER 13

From the perspective of Zurich, and perhaps the Genevans as well, this was an opportunity for a geopolitical makeover. Apparently, the Swiss Churches felt they were viewed by the larger Christian world as people who "favored heretics," and thus as a bastion for God slanderers. On the other hand, Geneva was aware of another international audience, which supported Servetus and religious liberty. However, this contingency that supported religious liberty appears to only become truly outspoken after the execution of Servetus.8 In hopes of strengthening their international reputation, the magistrates of Geneva advanced their case cautiously, if not slowly, towards their verdict. 9 After two and a half months of delibera­tions, the trial concluded on October 26th, 1553. The following is an excerpt from the verdict that reverberated throughout Europe:

We syndics, Judges of criminal causes in this city, having seen the Process drawn up before us ... against thee, Michael Servetus of Vil­lanueva ... Having God and his holy scripture before our eyes; saying In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: By this our definitive sentence, which we give in writing, we condemn thee Michael Servetus to be bound, and carried to the place called Champel, and there to be fastened to a post, and burnt alive with your books, both written with your own hand, and printed, till your body is reduced to ashes, and thus you should end your days to give an example to others, who would do the like. We command you, our Lieutenant, to cause our present sentence to be put to execution. 10

On what basis did the Genevan Senate reach the regrettable out­come of the death sentence? In part, this decision was based on the author­ity of precedents as subscribed in Imperial law. The long-standing and influential Codex of Justinian had already deemed the denial of the Trinity as one of two ecclesial offenses that warranted capital punishment. 11 Like

8. This is not to suggest there was no protesting of Servetus' s impending execution dur­ing the trial. However, any protests was rather muted, especially in regards to the outspoken protestations after the execution. Castellio is a popular representative of those who promoted religious tolerance after Servetus's execution. See Concerning Heretics, an anonymous work attributed to him Sebastian Castellio, translated by Roland H. Bainton (New York: Columbia University Press, 1935).

9. Servetus himself thought the trial was moving too slowly. Thus, while in prison, Ser­vetus pleaded with the Genevan authorities for a speedier trial. Calvini Opera VIII, 806 - 807.

10. Calvini Opera VIII, 829 - 830. 11. Bainton, Hunted Heretic, 210. Prior to and beyond the Codex of Justinian, the Codex

of Theodosius articulated an influential policy against heretics. For the texts of Codex of Theodosius and discussion of its reception, see Le Code Theodosien: Livre XVI, esp. chapter five, De Haereticis, (Paris: Les Editions du Cerf), 192 - 299.

14 MATIHEW J. PEREIRA

much of the Protestant and Catholic world, Geneva operated within the traditional framework provided by the Codex of Justinian. For Servetus, the so-called Trinity was a mere construction of the overly philosophical sophistry that emerged with the Council of Nicea. On occasion, Servetus went so far as to scornfully caricature the Divine Triad as a "three headed monster." 12 As one might suspect, for Geneva, legal precedents mandated that it was a criminal act to call the Trinity a monster, or any other slander­ous name that assailed the doctrine of God. In an era where honor to one's conscience was highly prized, Servetus would dare not recant from his theological position-and in a moment of bitter irony, which was not nec­essarily a forgone conclusion-the devout Spaniard was condemned to death under the name of that deity which he deeply scorned: "the name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." 13 However, traditional precepts and heretical views only provide a partial answer to the question: how did Servetus become the first person executed for the criminal act of heresy under Genevan jurisdiction? 14

As previously mentioned, the verdict and sentence of Servetus is one of the most notorious judicial decisions of the sixteenth century.15 Indeed, this infamous affair continues to attract scholarly comment from a variety of perspectives. As often occurs with highly evocative events, this affair has elicited "over representations" of the two primary personalities, Ser­vetus and Calvin. For instance, Servetus has been propped up as martyr for religious toleration; whereas, Calvin has been portrayed one dimen­sionally as the tyrannical despot of Geneva.16 Other accounts, usually de­rived from confessional perspectives, appear apologetical in nature; these

12. Prior to sentencing, the Genevan judges gave an account of thirteen various offenses accorded to Servetus. Of these thirteen items, one asserted that Servetus called the Trinity a "devil and monster with three heads." Calvini Opera VIII, 827.

13. " ... disans au nom du Pere, du Filz et du Sainct Esprit, par iceste nostre diffinitive sentence, laquelle donnons yey par escript, Toy Michel Servet condamnons." Calvini Opera VIII, 529.

14. Naphy comments on Servetus being the first heretic executed in Geneva. See Wil­liam G. Naphy, Calvin and the consolidation of the Genevan Reformation, (New York: Manches­ter University Press),183. Also, for further statistics, see Naphy's graphs that record various crimes and punishments in Geneva from 1551 - 1557, 179 - 181.

15. The notoriety of the affair is widely acknowledged; for example, Leckler assessed that the Servetus condemnation is: "one of the most famous controversies of modem times about religion and freedom." Leckler, Toleration and the Reformation: Volume I, 325. Further, Pettegree surmised, "More than any other event the destruction of Servetus may be said to have left an enduring stain on Calvin's historical reputation." Andrew Pettegree, "Michael Servetus and the Limits of Tolerance," History Today, 40:2, Feb. 1990, 40 ff.

16. Carl Theophilus Odhner, Michael Servetus: His Life and Teachings, (Philadelphia: Press of J.B. Lippincott Company, 1910); MarianHillar, The Case of Michael Servetus (1511-1553) The Turning Point in the Struggle for Freedom of Conscience, (New York: Mellen Press, 1997), 181.

IN THE NAME OF THE THREE HEADED MONSTER 15

studies attempt to minimize Calvin's responsibility by recognizing, if not blaming the socio-historical context for Servetus' s execution.17 Beyond these above-mentioned studies, there have emerged a select number of well-balanced narratives that offer broad and detailed readings. 18

This study examines the affair through an analysis of the delibera­tions beginning with Servetus's imprisonment up through his sentencing on October 26th, 1553.19 In particular, we will assess the judicial process through a reading of select writings from Servetus, Calvin, and the neigh­boring Swiss churches during the months, weeks and days after the arrest and prior to the execution of the most widely known martyr-heretic of the sixteenth century.20 Primarily, this study delimits itself to examining the following set of documents: [1] the thirty-eight articles of Calvin, which were the Genevan Reformer's articulation of Servetus's theology, [2] the three petitions of Servetus, which he penned while imprisoned in Geneva and [3] the correspondences between Geneva and other Protestant Swiss cities that were an integral part of the judiciary process.21

Certainly, the unyielding personalities of Servetus and Calvin were compelling forces that facilitated the final and decisive verdict. However,

17. E. Doumergue, Jean Calvin: Les hommes et les choses de son temps Tome VI, 409 - 429; Karin M. Yaag, "Hero or Villain? Interpretations of John Calvin and His Legacy," Calvin Theo­logical Journal 41, 2006, 222 - 237. Also, see Calvin's own apologetic work Declaration pour maintenir la vraye Joy que tiennent tous Chrestiens de la Trinite des persones en un seul Dieu: contre les erreurs detestables de Michael Servet Espaignol. Ou ii aussi montre, qu'il est licite de punir les heretiques: & qu' ii bon droit ce mechante a ete execute par justice en la ville de Geneve (Geneve: Chez Jean Crespin, 1554), also known by its Latin title, Defensio Orthodoxae Fidei in Calvini Opera VIII, 501 - 644.

18. Bainton, Hunted Heretic; Doumergue, Jean Calvin: Les hommes et les choses de son temps, Tome VI, 173 - 369; James Macl<innon, Calvin and the Reformation, (New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1936); James E. Cameron "Scottish Calvinism and the Principle of Intoler­ance," Reformatio Perennis: Essays on Calvin and the Reformation in Honor of Ford Lewis Battles, ed. B.A. Gerrish, (Pittsburgh, PA. The Pickwick Press), 113 -128. For a more dated, but com­prehensive study, see Robert Willis, Servetus and Calvin: A Study of an Important Epoch in the Early History of the Reformation, (London: Henry S. King & Co., 1877).

19. There are several accounts of the judicial process that served as dialogue partners throughout this present narrative. In particular, see Doumergue, Jean Calvin: Les hommes et les choses de son temps, Tome VI, 306 - 351; Macl<innon, 137 - 151; Bainton, Hunted Heretic 182 -201; Jean Rilliet, Calvin, (Librairie Artheme Fayard, 1963), 182- 204; R.W. Collins, Calvin and the Libertines of Geneva, (Toronto: Clarke, Irwin & Company Limited, 1968), 168-181; George Haldas, Passion et Mort de Michel Servet, (Lausanne: L' Age d'Homme, 1975), 69 - 155.

20. Of course, depending on the historical perspective the death of Servetus could be understood as a martyr's sacrifice, or conversely, the unfortunate but just punishment of a persistent heretic. Rather than portraying Servetus's death as a case of martyrdom, as one might expect, Calvin advised that the "reader should be warned that he [Servetus] had shown there in his death a brutal stupidity." Calvin, Declaration, 95.

21. For a fuller account of the judicial process, which includes aspects not covered in this study, such as the Council's interrogations of Servetus, see Calvini Opera VIII, 721- 872.

16 MATTHEW J. PEREIRA

an examination of the legal process reveals more than a personal debate between two pious men with indefatigable convictions. A proper contex­tualization of the Servetus affair must be multi-dimensional and extend beyond the personal level. Further, in contrast to the assertion that Serve­tus' s trial reveals no "special qualities of the Genevan experiment," 22 this study contends that this case illuminates particular aspects of the complex relationship between Reformed theology, local Genevan politics and the national-international political milieu that served as the matrix for this entire ordeal.

Finally, any attempt to examine this affair needs to convey the emo­tive nature surrounding the entire process, such as the rise of anxiety that permeated throughout Geneva and the wider Swiss Protestant commu­nity during the trial. In hopes of contextualizing this inhumane example of intolerance, we must resist approaching the case too retrospectively because from our vantage point, the affair may readily appear mechanis­tic and predetermined. In this same year of 1553, Geneva had prosecuted two other heretics with both outcomes concluding in sentences ofbanish­ment.23 Geneva was not known for burning heretics, yet Servetus' s heresy was of the highest theological offense-if there was going to be a case that warranted capital punishment, this was likely it. The people of Geneva and the greater European community were left to wonder: what would be the verdict against this most heinous of theological crimes? The uncertain­ty, the angst and the high drama that surrounded this case were immense psychological forces that shaped the trajectory of the judicial process.

Calvin as an Expert Witness

Calvin's Thirty-Eight Articles. 24 Above all else, the Genevan Council desired unity and stability for the volatile city, which was continuously

22. A.G. Dickens, Reformation and Society in Sixteenth-Century Europe, (London: Har­court, Brace & World, Inc.) 164.

23. In July, 1553, Robert le Moine was expelled from the city for maintaining that prosti­tution and fornication were not contrary to God's Word. Also, Jean Baudin was expelled for stating that Jesus was a phantom and the Bible was just an ordinary book like any other piece of literature. See Naphy, Calvin and the consolidation of the Genevan Reformation, 183.

24. Of note, MacI<innon mentions forty articles, MacI<innon, Calvin and the Reforma­tion, 142. In a letter to Farel, dated August 20th, 1553, Calvin stated that there were originally forty articles. However, the articles were inunediately reduced to thirty-eight. Calvini Opera makes a differentiation by noting that Fontaine's Article V was originally Articles V- VII. Defensio Orthodoxae Fidei contains thirty-eight articles extracted by Calvin that do not neatly correspond with the articles given by Fontaine in Calvini Opera. Apparently, there was some

IN THE NAME OF THE THREE HEADED MONSTER 17

under the threat of political upheaval. 25 In 1553, Calvin was not the victori­ous autocrat determining the outcome of this trial.26 Rather, Geneva was in the midst of ongoing power struggles and factionalism that threatened the very fabric of their society. For Geneva, theological homogeneity was one of the threads that bound the people together. The Servetus affair was pull­ing at that thread, and the ordinary citizen, irregardless of their personal religious convictions, was against further strife in a city that had already endured plenty of factionalism. In one sense, the Servetus case was purely a secular matter. 27 On another level, it was a personal debate. Certainly, there were political and personal dynamics interweaved throughout the case against Servetus; however, the prosecution's argument was primar­ily based on theological offenses over and beyond personality conflicts and political posturing. 28 For Servetus and Calvin, protecting God's honor superseded personality and political issues. Both Servetus and Calvin rec­ognized heresy to be a criminal act while each of them simultaneously believed they were faithfully adhering to authentic Christianity. They presupposed the existence of one correct theological answer to the ques­tion of ultimate reality, which was bound up with salvation. The thirty­eight articles were not an exercise in theological speculation between two specialists; rather, the salvation of souls were in the balance. In some real sense, the ensuing thirty-eight articles are an attempt to charge Servetus with the attempted murder of many souls through false doctrine.

Calvin was the chief architect of the case against Servetus. However, Calvin did not defend the majesty of God by serving as lawyer for this

altering of the articles throughout the judicial process. This study maintains the numeration of thirty-eight articles given in Defensio Orthodoxae Fidei while noting some of the variances throughout the course of our analyses. For discussion on the variances in numeration see Calvini Opera VIII, 727, fn. 2. Also, for a complete account of these different renditions of the articles see Defensio Orthodoxae Fidei and "Plainte portee par Nicholas de la Fontaine contre Servet," Calvini Opera VIII, 501 - 508; 727 - 731.

25. Naphy, Calvin and the consolidation of the Genevan Reformation, 43. 26. Most scholars recognize that Calvin had numerous struggles and conflicts with the

Genevan Council and citizens for many years before securing any sense of ultimate control. Naphy locates Calvin's securing control over Geneva in 1555, coinciding with the defeat of the Perrinists. See Naphy, Calvin and the consolidation of the Genevan Reformation, 208 ff.

27. Naphy's observation of the secular nature of the affair was made in regards to the Consistory not being a part of the judicial process. Naphy, Calvin and the consolidation of the Genevan Reformation, 183.

28. We do not wish to completely dismiss any consideration of the political turmoil, which Bainton describes as "coming to head" upon Servetus's arrival. Yet, we concur that the trial "wore a political aspect only in the broader sense that heresy was always regarded as socially subversive." For further discussion of the interplay between Genevan politics and theology, see Roland Bainton, "Servetus and the Genevan Libertines," Church History, 5 1936: 141-149. Also, see R.W. Collins, Calvin and the Libertines of Geneva, 153-200.

18 MATIHEW J, PEREIRA

particular trial; rather his secretary Nicholas Fontaine was appointed as lead prosecutor.29 In accordance with the Caroline code, Fontaine charged Servetus within twenty-four hours of imprisonment. 30 The next day, on August 14th, Fontaine went before the Council and presented Servetus's errors to the lord lieutenant, Pierre TISsot.31 Yet, while Fontaine brought forth the evidence, he certainly did not build the case on his own. Ser­vetus' s theology was quite complex, and consequently any cogent ex­plication of his offenses would have required a high level of theological expertise. Therefore, as one might suspect, the less experienced Fontaine acquired Calvin's assistance in formulating Servetus' s theology. Upon Fontaine's request, not that much urging was required, Calvin extracted thirty-eight articles, primarily from Christianismi Restitutio, which artic­ulated Servetus's central theological positions.32 Here, Calvin displayed some seasoned political maneuvering, for he had placed himself in an ad­vantageous position from where he was able to use Fontaine as surety in prison while simultaneously advancing the case against Servetus.33 It is undeniable that Calvin is the true prosecutor throughout this case; indeed, Fontaine's interrogation was largely based on the thirty-eight articles.34

If there was any doubt of Calvin's immense participation in this judicial process, all was clarified on August 17th, when the Genevan Reformer pre­sented himself before the Council and accepted the responsibility for as­sisting Fontaine in articulating Servetus's theological errors.35

The thirty-eight articles, which are sometimes notated as thirty­nine or forty, 36 offered a detailed account of Servetus' s theology whereby

29. Doumergue, fean Calvin: Les hommes et les choses de son temps Tome VI, 312 - 313. Perhaps, Calvin deemed himself to busy to be the lead prosecutor in the case, especially because he did not wish to waste time in jail as surety, see Haldas, Passion et Mort de Michel Servet, 75.

30. Calvini Opera VIII, 727; Haldas, Passion et Mort de Michel Servet, 75. 31. Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Geneve: Tome II, 1553 -1564, 3, fn. 4. Of note,

on August 16'h, Philip Berthelier, the Libertine, replaced TISSOt as the lieutenant. Calvini Opera VIII, 741- 742.

32. For various accounts of the thirty-eight articles, see Calvini Opera VIII, 727 - 731; Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Geneve: Tome II, 1553 - 1564, 4 - 46. For the principal parts of the thirty-eight articles and their varied use throughout the trial, see Haldas, Passion et Mort de Michel Servet, 75 -117.

33. Calvin's brother Antoine assumed the place of surety in place of Fontaine on August 151h, Bainton, Hunted Heretic, 183.

34. Calvin admitted, "I will not deny ... that it was by me that the articles of inculpa­tion were drawn up." Originally stated in Calvin's Declaration, this quote is borrowed from David Cuthbertson, A Tragedy of the Reformation, (London: Oliphant, Anderson and Ferrier, 1912), 47 - 48.

35. Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Geneve: Tome II, 1553 - 1564, 3, fn. 5. 36. See footnote 24.

IN TifE NAME OF TifE THREE HEADED MONSlER 19

Calvin thoroughly referenced specific books and chapters from the Span­iard's writings, which served as the basis for his account of his opponent's theological thought. Calvin's first article underscored Servetus's position that all those who believed in the Trinity are Tri theists [Tritoitas ], true Athe­ists [veros Atheos] who have imaginary gods [Imaginarios habere deos] that are three phantasms [tribus phantasmatibus].37 The majority of the ensuing articles referred to Servetus' arguments against the doctrine of the Trin­ity, 38 his rather eccentric Christology, 39 and his intermingling and confu­sion of particular persons in the Trinity.40 Some other distinctive aspects that Calvin detailed are Servetus's idea that God is made up of parts, the Spaniard's perspective concerning the human soul, 41 the Spirit, 42 and his contention against infant baptism. 43

Notably, articles II and III explain that Servetus argued against the Trinity because it proved difficult for Jews and Muslims. 44 Servetus's recognition of the problematic nature of the doctrine of the Trinity for Jews and Muslims reflected his Spanish heritage. In Spain, more so than the more thoroughly Catholic or Protestant territories, the Jews, Muslims and Christians had co-existed for generations. As a Spanish native, Servetus was keenly aware that the doctrine of the Trinity served as a stumbling block for Jews and Muslims that might otherwise have considered the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For Servetus, the stumbling block provided by Trinitarian theology to the Christian way of life was utterly reprehensible because the Spaniard was deeply concerned with the salvation of others. Again, as mentioned above, the vigor and intense nature of Servetus and Calvin should not be regarded as an esoteric theological debate. Rather,

37. Calvin, Declaration, 99; Calvini Opera VIII, 501. 38. Articles IY, VI, Vll; Calvin, Declaration, 100; Calvini Opera VIII, 501 - 502. 39. See Article V, where Calvin stated, "In his [Servetus's] first dialogue ... there is no

real difference [realem differentiam] between the word and the spirit...that there was in God no real generation [generationem] or spiration [spirationem]." Also, see Articles VIll-XVI, XX­VII, XXVIII; Calvini Opera VIII, 501 - 508.

40. See Article XXIV, where Calvin asserted, "Confounding the persons, he says thus, that the Logos, or Word, was naturally and voluntarily the ideal reason [idealis ratio] and manifestation [prolatio], the resplendence of Christ with God; the Spirit of Christ with God, his light with God; from whence it follows it was no substance [substantiam], but only the figure of what did not exist, and at the same time does not differ from the spirit. Dial. De Trin. p. 208." Also, see Article XXVI, Calvini Opera VIII 504 - 505.

41. See Article XXIX, which states, " ... our spirits were substantially from eternity, he adds, that they are consubstantial [consubstaniales] and coeternal [coeternos]." Also, see Ar­ticles XXXV, XXXVI and XXXVIII, Calvini Opera VIII, 505 - 506.

42. Articles XXX, XXXI, Calvini Opera VIII, 506. 43. See Article XXXVII, where Calvin asserted, "That he [Servetus] has written and pub­

lished horrid blasphemies against infant baptism ... " Calvini Opera VIII, 506 - 507. 44. Calvini Opera VIII, 501.

20 MATTHEW J. PEREIRA

the affair, which began with two devout intellectuals expressing diver­gent theological views through many correspondences had grown into a full blown civil trial because both men where relentless in their positions, which were buttressed by their presuppositions that souls were at stake.

Throughout the trial, Calvin's thirty-eight articles served as an es­sential component of the prosecution's case. The articles set the agenda for much of the evolving discussion in the trial; consequently, Servetus offered the Genevan Council refutations to each of Calvin's thirty-eight assertions. 45 As one might expect from the truculent Spaniard, Servetus enjoyed answering Calvin's assessments by calling him a liar [Mentiris]. In fairness, Calvin demonstrated no less a capacity to undertake ad ho­minem arguments. While both were pious men, they did not recoil from name-calling. It is difficult to substantiate any intentional misrepresenta­tion by Calvin; rather, the Genevan Reformer's meticulous referencing of Servetus's work demonstrates a high level of attentive detail. Nonethe­less, Servetus's rhetoric betrays the pain of one feeling misunderstood. 46

Indeed, Servetus' s frustration mounted through decades of feeling misin­terpreted by Calvin; one may wonder if the Spaniard's arrival in Geneva was partially spurned on by a deep desire to be rightly understood? In any case, the Genevan Council dismissed these accusations of misrepre­sentation while displaying an unmitigated confidence in Calvin's analy­sis of Servetus' s theology. However, the Genevan Council was not quite ready to bring forward a conclusive verdict; they were in need of further support. Thus, on September 5th, 1553, the Genevan Council sought the opinion of four Swiss cities.47 We will examine the responses in a little while, for now, we turn to Servetus' s prison letters, which were written during the interim period while Geneva waited to receive replies from their neighboring Protestant allies.

Servetus's Self-advocacy

Three Pleas for Justice. Servetus was not provided any legal represen­tation, 48 and thus, he we was left with no recourse other than self-advoca-

45. For a couple sets of Servetus's responses, see Calvini Opera VIII, 507 -518; 731 -735. 46. There were at least some remnants of public opinion that believed Calvin utterly

misinterpreted Servetus' s theology; Castellio asserted, "Although you misrepresent and mutilate much in Servetus, nevertheless many are seduced by the excerpts in your book." Concerning Heretics, 266.

47. Calvini Opera VIII, 796.

IN 1HE NAME OF 1HE TIIREE HEADED MONSTER 21

cy.49 While in prison, on three different occasions, Servetus penned letters that pleaded his case before the Genevan Council. Servetus' s letters dem­onstrate a wide range of dynamics that permeated the trial. Below, we will briefly analyze the three letters and underscore particular elements that highlight distinctive aspects of the ordeal. Servetus was a competent defendant, in as much as his knowledge of the Genevan judicial process and their political structure have led some to conclude that he was ad­vised by a political insider, likely from the Libertine camp. 50 Irregardless of assistance from Genevan Libertines or not, Servetus demonstrated an exceptional working knowledge of a foreign judicial system. Perhaps, no one was as well equipped to defend the frequently misunderstood Ser­vetus with more accuracy than the Spaniard himself, or it may have been that no one dared associate with Servetus as the case gained momentum. Throughout these three pleas, one solemnly perceives alienation and iso­lation rising within Servetus. In these letters, there is an increasing heavi­ness and desperation that seemingly corresponds to the Spaniard's grow­ing loneliness and diminished health.

The Opening Plea. On September 15th, 1553, Servetus forwarded his initial petition to the Genevan Court. Servetus began by portraying Calvin as his chief adversary; he remarked, "Calvin is put to his last shift, and knows not what to say, and is resolved that I should rot in prison to please himself." 51 This was a calculated assertion for it was advantageous for Ser­vetus to frame this trial in personal terms; he wished others, especially the Genevan Court would see this debate as an ongoing disagreement between two theologians rather than a civil manner. While it is too facile to understand the proceedings as a singular contest between Servetus and Calvin, one can appreciate why the Spaniard hoped that the Genevans would simply interpret this trial as a interpersonal debate. Servetus was attempting to disassociate the Council with Calvin in hopes of placing the Genevan Reformer on trial. Servetus continued his framing of the trial as follows:

... Calvin has quoted Justinian against me. Certainly he is a very un­happy man, to allege against me what he does not believe. He him­self does not believe what Justinian says, De sacrosanctis ecclesis, &

48. The providing of legal representation was left to the discretion of the Genevan Court; see Doumergue, Jean Calvin: Les hommes et les choses de son temps Tome VI, 326, fn. 4.

49. The public prosecutor Rigot, who succeeded Fontaine, quipped that Servetus was capable of lying without any assistance from legal representation. Calvini Opera VIII, 775.

50. For further discussion see Bainton, Hunted Heretic, 172 ff. 51. Calvini Opera VIII, 797.

22 MATIHEW J. PEREIRA

de episcopis & clerics. Of the sanctity of churches, and of bishops and clerks, and other things related to religion: He knows very well, that the church was then corrupted. This is a great shame for him to do so; but this is a greater shame still, that he should have kept me a close prisoner these five weeks, without alleging any one passage against me.s2

Servetus argued that Calvin did not subscribe to Justinian's dic­tum, De sacrosanctis ecclesis, & de episcopis & clerics, which set a long-stand­ing precedent for the possibility of death penalty against heretical crimi­nals. Servetus's questioning of Calvin's use of precedents demonstrates an underlying difference between the two men. While both men were re­formers, Calvin was a conservative orthodox, whereas Servetus lived as a radical innovator. 53 Throughout the construction of Calvin's theological program, the Genevan Reformer appropriated various aspects of tradi­tional Catholicism while disposing other teachings. As a renovator of or­thodox Christianity, Calvin was unwilling to fully shed all the vestiges of Catholicism.54 Indeed, Calvin had struggled throughout his career, espe­cially in his early years, against accusations of being non-Trinitarian and an against tradition. Calvin responded against such slanders with a nu­anced approach that held tradition in a balanced relationship with Scrip­ture.55 The Genevan Reformer's complex approach to tradition was sus­ceptible to varied assaults. Servetus drew attention to Calvin's selective use of tradition in order to suggest that the Genevan Reformer's incon­sistent attitude towards Catholicism demonstrated an inferior reforming impulse. Perhaps, the question Servetus desired to plant within the mind

52. Calvini Opera VIII, 797. 53. Bainton observes that Servetus's clash with Calvin "was the conflict of the Reforma­

tion with the Renaissance, and of the right wing of the Reformation with the left." Bainton, Hunted Heretic, 4.

54. For further discussion, see J.F. Peter, "The Place of Tradition in Reformed Theology," The Scottish Journal of Theology, v. 18, 1965, 294-307.

55. For example, in March, 1539, Calvin responded to the Catholic Cardinal Jacopo Sa­doleto's accusation of being non-orthodox and a mere novelty as such: ''You know, Sadoleto, and if you venture to deny, I will make it palpable to all that you knew, yet cunningly and craftily disguised the fact, not only that our agreement with antiquity is far closer than yours, but that all we have attempted has been to renew the ancient form of the Church, which, at first sullied and distorted by illiterate men of indifferent character, was afterward flagitiously mangled and almost destroyed by the Roman Pontiff and his faction ... As to our doctrine, we hesitate not to appeal to the ancient Church." See John Calvin and Jacopo Sadoleto: A Reforma­tion Debate, edited by John C. Olin, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House), 64.

IN TiiE NAME OF TiiE 1HREE HEADED MONSTER 23

of the Genevan Senate was this: what kind of reformer would subscribe to the Catholic notion of the death penalty?

After requesting legal representation, Servetus pleaded to be brought before the "Council of Two Hundred," and he insisted that poe­na talionis should be exercised upon himself and Calvin.56 Servetus's re­quest for a hearing before the Council of Two Hundred demonstrates the Spaniard's broad knowledge of the Genevan political structure. 57 In the Berthelier case, the Petit Conseil had recently asserted that in matters of excommunication, ultimately, the Senate was to be regarded as the final authority.58 This was an exacting blow against the authority of Calvin and the Consistory. Thus, the timing of Servetus' s request appears either as a serendipitous happenstance, or a calculated maneuver, for requesting the Council of Two Hundred could have broadened the discussion and potentially further invigorated an already simmering contentious power struggle between the Presbytery and Senate. 59 However, Servetus' s re­quest was without effect, for he was never brought before the Council of Two Hundred.

The insistence upon poena talionis underscores Servetus' s nuanced position regarding capital punishment. At this point, Servetus did not launch a defense against the death penalty; rather, he confidently request­ed that upon being found innocent, the old Roman law of "exaction of compensation in kind [talionis]" be applied to Calvin.60 Certainly, Servetus did not see himself as a purveyor of ecclesial tolerance for he was not very interested in promoting religious liberty. Rather, Servetus desired to restore Christianity through his prophetic voice. Indeed, Servetus' s mode

56. Calvini Opera VIII, 797. 57. Servetus's relationship with the Genevan Libertines is one possible explanation for

the Spaniard's knowledge of the Genevan political system. Bainton questions this historical construction, see Bainton, "Servetus and the Genevan Libertines," 141 -149. For an alterna­tive view that holds together the Servetus-Genevan Libertine relationship, see G. Coleman Luci<, "Calvin and Servetus," Bibliotheca Sacra 104, 1947, 236 - 241.

58. The Petit Conseil's decision to diminish the power of the Consistory came on Sep­tember 1st, 1553. As one might suspect, a struggle between the Consistory and Petit Conseil would ensue thereafter-the Servetus case occurs in the midst all this infighting. See Regis­tres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs: Tome II, 1553 - 1564, 48 ff ..

59. For a brief discussion concerning the Genevan political turmoil in 1553, see Beza, The Life oflohn Calvin, 62 ff.

60. The precedence for poena talionis is likely derived from the Justinian Code and the law of the Twelve Tables. See Corpus Juris Civilis: Text und (ibersetzung I: Institutionen 4.4.7, (Heidelberg: M!iller Juristischer Verlag, 1990), 216. For a brief discussion on the Twelve Tables, see Peter Stein, Roman Law in European History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 3 ff. See Oxford Latin Dictionary, ed. P.G.W. Glare (Oxford: Oarendon Press, 1980), 1901.

24 MATTHEW J. PEREIRA

of Christianity, in some respects, was created under the pretense that he was reclaiming the pre-Nicene faith in hopes of advancing a singular re­ligion that was capable of incorporating Christians, Jews and Muslims. 61

Servetus, like Calvin, was a product of his age, and while his position con­cerning capital punishment wavered throughout the trial, the Spaniard understood that the severe nature of heresy required righteous judgment, which may include the possibility of execution. 62

A Second Petition. A week after his initial petition, on September 22nd,

1553, Servetus submitted his second appeal to the Genevan authorities. The bulk of Servetus' s argument followed along the lines of his first cor­respondence. Once again, Servetus portrayed the affair as a personal mat­ter between himself and Calvin. Also, like the previous letter, Servetus demanded poena talionis for himself and Calvin. Of note, in this letter, Ser­vetus conceded that if he is found guilty of heresy, then he is willing of to die.63 Also, Servetus expanded his defense beyond the first letter by assert­ing that Calvin falsely accused him of the following two heresies:

My honored Lords, I am confined like a criminal, and prosecuted by John Calvin, who has falsely accused me, pretending that I have pub­lished. [1] That human souls are mortal; and also [2] That Jesus Christ took only the fourth part of his body from the virgin Mary. These are horrid and execrable things ... Had I said and published such a thing, to infect the world; I should condemn myself to death. 64

Servetus' s anti-Trinitarianism has often been over emphasized at the expense of other distinctive theological traits, which permeated his in­novative thinking. 65 This second letter reveals the multi-layered theologi­cal issues examined by the Genevan Court. More so, as is characteristic

61. For further discussion, see Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Geneve: Tome II, 1553 - 1564, 5, fn 1.

62. While a product of his era, Servetus held a tempered position concerning capital punishment. On one occasion, Servetus wrote it is best to "hope for correction by other pun­ishments than to punish them by death. Among these punishments, the banishment has been reserved, of which Jesus Christ approved, such as excommunication is approved in the Church." Calvin, Declaration, 13.

63. Calvini Opera VIII, 805. 64. Calvini Opera VIII, 805. 65. For example of the breadth of their theological debate, see the exchange between

Servetus and Calvin in the Declaration which revolves around three questions: [1] Knowing Jesus Christ crucified, and how does he take this filiation, [2] To know if the reign of Jesus Christ is from man, how is he regenerated and [3] Are baptism and Lord's Supper instituted by New Testament? See Declaration 60 - 99. Also, see Jerome Friedmann, "Michael Serve-

IN THE NAME OF THE THREE HEADED MONSTER 25

throughout their years of correspondence and debate, Servetus argued that Calvin simply misunderstood his theology. This perceived misunder­standing had long aroused Servetus to such a degree that he had previous­ly, before this visitation in August of 1553, expressed interest in coming to Geneva in order to meet Calvin and clarify his theological positions. 66

Most likely, as alluded to above, Servetus' s desire to be rightly understood in a face-to-face meeting was a contributing factor for his unexpected visit to Geneva. 67

With this second petition, Servetus attached six brief articles and four "undeniable reasons" that argued for Calvin's condemnation. The first five articles are related to Calvin's supposed involvement concerning the arrest and sentence of Servetus in Vienne.68 The sixth article is distinct from the previous five; here, he asserted, "Whether he [Calvin] knows not, that it does not become a minister of the gospel to prosecute a man to death." 69 Apparently, Servetus welcomed the death sentence under the ru­bric of poena talionis, providing the civil authorities performed the penalty. Servetus maintained that Calvin and other clergy were strictly prohibited from any participation during the execution of a criminal.7°

Servetus continued his defense with four indictments against Calvin: [1] Calvin inappropriately pursued criminal prosecution, for this is not the role of a minister, [2] Calvin is a "false accuser," as is plainly seen in Servetus's writings; [3] Calvin desired to "stifle the doctrine of Christ," and [4] Calvin was a follower of Simon Magnus that deserved to be ex­pelled from Geneva and his estate should be appropriated as repayment to Servetus. 71 Once again, Servetus demonstrated a solid working knowl­edge of the Genevan judiciary process, which stated that the accuser could potentially receive the punishments awaiting the defendant if the accused

tus: Advocate of Total Heresy," Profiles of Radical Reformers: Biographical Sketches from Thomas Muntzer to Paracelsus, editor W. Klaassen, (Scottdale, PA. Herald Press, 1982), 247 - 254.

66. In a letter dated Feb. 13, 1553, Calvin wrote to his friend and colleague Farel, stat­ing that Servetus had made overtures for an encounter, "Servetus recently wrote to me and has joined to his correspondence a long volume full of his mad ideas, adding with theatrical pomposity that I would see in the book some astounding and until then unheard of things. If I like, he will come here. But I do not want to bind myself. Because if he came. And my authority still counted for something, I would never let him leave alive." Quote borrowed from Leckler, Toleration and the Reformation, 327.

67. For further discussion, see Bainton, Hunted Heretic, 172 ff. 68. Calvini Opera VIII, 805 - 806. 69. Calvini Opera VIII, 806. 70. Calvin held similar views regarding the involvement of clergy in matters of capital

punishment. See John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion Volume II, IV.20.1, 2, 6, 10 (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1960), 1485 ff.

71. Calvini Opera VIII, 806.

26 MATIHEW J. PEREIRA

was found not guilty.72 In this attachment to the second letter, Servetus does not demand capital punishment for Calvin, but rather, merely called for his expulsion &om the city. Perhaps, Servetus is losing confidence in his case, for seeking banishment or monetary compensation against Cal­vin would seemingly imply, under the poena talionis, that he too would be assigned these exact penalties and nothing more.

In the first of the above four assertions, Servetus questioned the co­mingling of the ecclesial and civil roles in society. For Geneva and Calvin, there was no modern notion of separation of church and state; however, there were significant points of delineation between the two sources of au­thority.73 Calvin, like Servetus, supposed a degree of demarcation between the civil and ecclesial authorities; for example, it was the sole role of the secular authorities to execute heretics.74 However, sixteenth century Swiss Protestant leaders commonly believed that the church in cooperation with the state played a vital role in assisting in the prosecution of heretics. 75

Servetus' s fourth assertion revealed that he had undergone financial loss, and that he believed one viable legal option was for recompense to be sup­plied through the estate of Calvin.

The Third and Final Petition. The third letter, dated October 10th,

1553, unlike the previous two, is devoid of theological issues, and rather, Servetus solely raised concerns revolving around specific physical and legal complaints. First, Servetus bitterly complained of mistreatment, "I am very much troubled with cold, by reason of my cholick and rupture, which occasions some other miseries that I am ashamed to write." 76 Sec­ond, Servetus believed that the judicial process was moving too slow; he reminded the court that it had now been three weeks since he requested a hearing. 77 In summary, Servetus's third letter is a complaint against in­humane treatment and a lack of due process. As with the other petitions,

72. Ordinance of 1529, number 8; for further discussion, see Haldas, Passion et Mort de Michel Servet, 74.

73. For Calvin, Muller rightly notes, "the two spheres [church and state] are 'widely separated' yet, because they both have their origin in God and both must serve the purpose of God, they ought to be related o one another." William A. Mueller, Church and State in Luther and Calvin, (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1954), 138.

74. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion vol. II, IV.20.1, 2, 1485 - 1488. 75. Of note, regarding the role of civil authorities in connection with right worship, it

appears Calvin differs from Luther "inasmuch as he [Calvin] holds the view that civil gov­ernment is responsible not only for enforcing the second table but also the first table of the law." Muller, Church and State in Luther and Calvin, 128.

76. Calvini Opera VIII, 807. 77. Calvini Opera VIII, 807.

IN THE NAME OF THE 'IHREE HEADED MONSTER 27

there is little evidence of tremendous effect generated from these protesta­tions other than the Genevan Council providing Servetus with a change of clothing. 78

Apparently, there was precedent for humane treatment of prison­ers and speedy judicial hearings, for Servetus urged, "[do] not deny me what you would not deny a Turk." There are some noticeable lacunas in this third plea, such as no mention of Calvin, or of any reference to theo­logical issues. For Servetus to bypass any polemic against Calvin, and to forego any further clarification of his theological positions indicates that he was truly under immense physical and emotional distress. Perhaps, Calvin had no direct involvement regarding the treatment of prisoners, for if he did, Servetus would have not passed on the opportunity to ex­plicitly condemn him in this particular correspondence. It is clear that the weeks, now months in prison, were having ill effects on Servetus-hence he desired a speedy verdict-his wish would be tragically realized in a few more weeks. There was one more vital step needed before the Gene­van Court could confidently reach a verdict; Servetus, Calvin and Geneva were awaiting the replies from the other four Swiss cities.

The Ecumenical Consensus

A Collaborative Enterprise. From the early stages of the trial, the Gene­van Council had strived to keep their neighboring Swiss cities informed of the ongoing judicial process. As the trial proceeded, Servetus himself appealed for the involvement of the Swiss cities. Perhaps, Servetus was aware of the lenient verdict, or at least the avoidance of the death penalty afforded to Jerome Bolsec in his heresy trial of 1551. 79 During Bolsec' s trial, the Genevan magistrates and church sought the opinion of their Swiss al­lies in Berne, Basie and Zurich. 80 Of note, the Swiss cities offered tempered responses to Calvin's doctrine of predestination. 81 Ultimately, Bolsec was exiled on account of denouncing the doctrine of predestination. However, upon being exiled to Berne, Bolsec continued his attacks against Calvin's

78. Bainton, Hunted Heretic, 201. 79. Naphy, Calvin and the consolidation of the Genevan Reformation, 171 -172. 80. For the full text of the Lettre-circulaire Compagnie aux Eglises de Suisse Geneve, 14

novembre 1551, see Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Geneve au Temps de Calvin: Tome Premier, 1546 - 1553, ed. Jean-Francois Bergier (Geneve: Librairie Droz, 1964), 119 - 120.

81 For responses from the Swiss churches of Basie, Zurich, and Neuch4tel, see Reg­istres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Geneve au Temps de Calvin: Tome Premier, 1546 - 1553, 120-128.

28 MATI'HEW J. PEREIRA

doctrine of predestination. Perhaps, the Bolsec verdict left Calvin feeling slighted by the Genevan magistrates and the neighboring Swiss cities.82

Yet, despite the Bolsec affair, Calvin understood himself as one leader among many within the wider Protestant community, thus he was not against seeking a broader hearing for the Servetus case. Neither Calvin, nor the Genevan magistrates necessarily subscribed to an isolationist po­litical philosophy. Rather, they shared an ecumenical consciousness that only became heightened under the pressure of this trial. Throughout the sixteenth century, Geneva's political survival depended on nuanced power relationships with their neighboring Swiss cities. Geneva turned to their Swiss allies for military and financial support, and on occasion, such as the Servetus case, they sought their advisement on judiciary issues. 83

On September 21st, 1553, the Genevan Council sent a form letter and select writings of Servetus and Calvin to four Swiss cities: Zurich, Bern, Basie and Schaffhausen.84 Each reply reflected, more or less, a consensus with similar lines of argumentation, thus, we will only need to set forth and examine the correspondence from Zurich as a representative response of the other three cities.85

The Reply from Zurich. In a letter, dated October 21 •t, 1553, the pas­tors of Zurich sent forth their reply to Geneva. In their response, Zurich confirmed receipt of the letters, "together with Servetus's book, and the articles taken out of it, signed mutually by your preachers, our venerable, and dear brethren and by Michael Servetus." 86 The Genevan magistrates fully expected their fellow Protestant pastors to carefully read the writings of Servetus and the articles of Calvin in order to offer some critical reflec­tions. Geneva deeply desired the wider support of their Swiss neighbors. This impulse to transcend the local sphere and engage the wider global community would continue to grow at various rates throughout Euro­pean Protestant territories into seventeenth century.

The divines of Zurich, like the other three Swiss cities, understood themselves to be aligned with the true universal church, which had pre­sumably always held to the doctrine of the Trinity. As mentioned above,

82. Naphy, Calvin and the consolidation of the Genevan Reformation, 172. 83. Naphy, Calvin and the Consolidation of the Genevan Reformation, 20 ff. 84. Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Geneve Tome B2 1553, 4, fn 4. To see the form

letter in its entirety, see Calvini Opera VIII, 803. 85. For further discussion concerning each response from the Swiss cities, see Bainton,

Hunted Heretic, 202 - 215. 86. "Accepimus per hunc tabellionem literas Amplitudinis vestrae una cum libro Serve­

ti et articulis ex ipso consignatis, cum collatione scripta per Amplitudinis vestrae conciona­tores, fratres nostros venerabiles et caros, at Michaelem Servetum." Calvini Opera VIII, 555.

IN THE NAME OF THE THREE HEADED MONSTER 29

Servetus diverged from the orthodox position because he believed that true Christianity was represented in the pre-Nicene era, which, in his esti­mation, was not a Trinitarian faith. For Servetus, pre-Nicene Christianity was devoid of much of the sophistry and philosophical terminology per­petuated by the later Trinitarian theology of so-called orthodoxy. Serve­tus' s radical heterodoxy allowed Zurich, Geneva, and the other Protestant cities to situate themselves within the trajectory of the orthodox church while placing the Spaniard and his foreign ideas on trial. The Swiss Prot­estant cities allied themselves with traditional Christianity by employing traditional trinitarian language. 87 Servetus was unwilling to affirm these Latin terms, and thus he further distanced himself from the traditional Christian doctrine of God and the mainstream civil religion.

In unison with the other Swiss cities, the pastors from Zurich encour­aged the Genevan magistrates to protect the orthodox faith against all heresies. However, they were careful not to offer any concrete recommen­dations.88 As mentioned from the outset of this study, the Swiss churches were disparaged throughout the greater Christian world. Thus, the Serve­tus case was a double-edged sword for it had the potential to be another example of Geneva's shortcomings, or on the other hand, the upside was the possibility that the impending verdict could bring a higher degree of legitimacy to Geneva and their Swiss neighbors. In other words, Servetus was not the only one on trial; there would be a second judgment of sorts that weighed the actions of Geneva and their Swiss allies. In light of the political attention, the four Swiss cities responded cautiously by recom­mending punishment without being overly explicit. As we might guess, none of the four Swiss cities fully demanded the execution of Servetus, but just as telling, there is no strong objection given towards the possibility of capital punishment. The divines of Zurich concluded their correspon­dence by admonishing Geneva to purge themselves of all heresy, for their audience is not only local, not only international, but even more so-their verdict was to be exercised under the providence of God.89

An Ecumenical Spirit? Calvin, the Genevan Senate, and the neighbor­ing Swiss cities were guided by orthodox doctrine and traditional imperi-

87. Zurich employed traditional theological language, "We therefore acknowledge with the holy and universal church of God [sancta et universali Dei ecclesia ], that the essence of God is one [unam esse Dei essentiam], that there are three distinct persons [tres personas distinctas], not confused; for the Father testified from heaven of his own Son ... " Calvini Opera VIII, 555.

88. Zurich asserted, "Now in what manner you may use a coercive power upon this man, who revives those heresies that were formerly exploded and condemned by the church according to the scriptures [ab ecclesia per scripturas convictas et damantas haereses renovat] ... we leave to your judgment to determine." Calvini Opera VIII, 558.

89. Calvini Opera VIII, 558.

30 MATIHEW J. PEREIRA

al legislature that had long established that the denial of the Trinity was a capital crime.90 If Calvin, or any other Genevan for that matter, sought tol­eration on behalf of Servetus, they would have been potentially perceived as a threat to the pervading tradition and an affront to their own citizen­ship.91 Certainly, one could hope that Calvin would have demonstrated the same strident resolve towards religious toleration as he displayed in regards to doctrinal issues. However, for Calvin, and to some extent the wider ecclesial community, the honor of God and the protection of souls trumped religious freedom.

While the Swiss cities neither explicitly nor unanimously encour­aged capital punishment, the ecumenical consensus that wholeheartedly deemed Servetus guilty only strengthened the resolve of the Genevan Sen­ate. On October 26th, 1553, which happens to be the same day which the Ge­nevan Council unanimously condemned Servetus to death, Calvin wrote his mend Farel the following summation of the Swiss correspondences:

Behold what will give you some gratification ... The messenger has returned from the Swiss Churches. They are unanimous in pronounc­ing that Servetus has now renewed those impious errors with which Satan formerly disturbed the Church ... He will be led forth to punish­ment to-morrow. We endeavored to alter the mode of his death, but in vain. Why we did not succeed I defer for narration until I see you. Adieu, most upright brother, and distinguished minister of Christ. May God ever preserve you, Much health to all mends. Ours salute you again.92

Unlike the more cautioned response from the Bolsec affair, this was a strong and unanimous condemnation of Servetus. Calvin often struggled to define his role alongside a Genevan Council that could have overruled him at any moment. 93 Thus, the ecumenical involvement was necessary for Calvin and the Genevan magistrates to proceed confidently, since on their own, the fractured power base was scarcely secure enough to advance toward a decisive verdict. On one level, the ecclesial opinion derived from the Swiss cities was clear: Servetus was guilty of heresy.

90. See Edward Dixon Junkin, "In Defense of Intolerance: A Conversation with John Calvin about Heresy,'' Austin Seminary Bulletin, vol. 97, 1982, 23 -41.

91. James Cameron, "Scottish Calvinism and the Principle of Intolerance," 115. 92. John Calvin, Letters of John Calvin Vol. II, edited by Jules Bonnet (London: Hamilton,

Adams and Co. 1855), 417 - 418. 93. Dickens, Reformation and Society in Sixteenth-Century Europe, 154.

IN TIIB NAME OF TIIB THREE HEADED MONSTER 31

However, the Swiss cities gave ambiguous instructions concerning what might be an appropriate sentence.94 It was here, at the point of determin­ing a just sentence, that the Genevan Council truly preceded on it's own. Those from beyond the Genevan community who secretly desired Serve­tus' s execution "spoke in code" for they wished to distance themselves, or in some sense, secure an alibi if and when Servetus was condemned to death. 95 On October 27th, a day after being condemned to death, Servetus was brought to the plateau of Champel, where he was burned alive at the stake. To this day, Geneva and Calvin have been rightly assigned the responsibility and consequently carried the condemnation that is justly associated with blood stained hands.

Contours of a Verdict

Multi-Dimensional Factors. Despite the impressions and carica­tures that often reside in our historical consciousness, in manners of here­sy, capital punishment was rarely employed throughout sixteenth century Protestantism. 96 One historian notes that capital punishment was "quite unique in the whole Protestant world even in that barbarous age."97 The execution of heretics was an exceptional occurrence, which usually de­manded a set of corresponding circumstances that worked together to cul­minate into a death sentence. Of note, Geneva exercised the death penalty against heretics no more than other Protestant cities,98 and as with many other instances of capital punishment, in Geneva there was a specific set of variables that coalesced to secure Servetus' s condemnation.

In the particular case of Servetus, we have acknowledged several fac­tors that contributed to his condemnation: [1] the two mammoth personal­ities of Servetus and Calvin, [2] Geneva's alliance with neighboring Swiss cities, [3] Geneva's awareness of their geopolitical reputation being at stake, [4] the influential traditional judicial framework of the Code of Jus­tinian and [5] the Reformed theological perspective that highly prized the

94. Bainton, Hunted Heretic, 204 - 207. 95. An excerpt of the sentencing of Servetus was provided earlier in this study, see

fn.10. 96. For a chart of the annual averages of Protestant executions for heresy during the

years spanning 1520- 1599, see William Monter, "Heresy executions in Reformation Europe, 1520 - 1565," Tolerance and Intolerance in the European Reformation, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 48 - 64.

97. Odhner, Michael Servetus: His Life and Teachings, 2. 98. Monter, "Heresy executions in Reformation Europe, 1520 -1565," 49.

32 MATIHEW J. PEREIRA

honor of God over and beyond a sensitivity towards freedom of religious expression. The strong cohesiveness of these varied aspects, rather than any particular person or factor, led to the regrettable execution of Michael Servetus. Moreover, there are other viable historical realities that contrib­uted to the inhumane verdict, which are not given significant exploration in this particular study, that may further advance a more comprehensive and detailed account of the Servetus affair. In particular, one question de­serving further attention is this: where are the voices of the dissidents and advocates of religious toleration during the trial?99

Throughout this narrative we have muted any discussion of the said "prejudice and ecclesiastical bias" that permeated the triaI.I00 Also, we have given little attention to the contemporaneous voices for religious tol­eration largely because while they existed in Geneva and the surround­ing areas, they remained nearly invisible in the above set of documents. IOI Rather, we have explored the specific mechanisms of the judiciary pro­cess that allowed the Genevan Court to move from their presuppositions, or to say it another way-their "biases" -and from there to a final deci­sion. Further, this study did not attempt to exonerate Calvin from his due culpability. In fact, as mentioned above, the Genevan Reformer accepted full responsibility for bringing Servetus to trial.102 Calvin full heartedly accepted and admitted his involvement in the trial because he primarily understood himself as a servant of the Lord, who was called to protect God's glory and the souls of the congregation, which entailed quieting heretics and blasphemers. I03

99. While this study does not endeavor in such a direction, I am most interested in locat­ing the muted voices of protestation and advocates of religious toleration during the affair. They rapidly and loudly [if not at times anonymously] appear after Servetus's execution, but where is the displeasure during the affair, when the Spaniard needed their defense most? An account of the dissidents during the affair would offer a fuller historical picture. Also, I am aware of the numerous correspondences of Calvin, Servetus and others that would po­tentially contribute to a fuller historical account. One also wonders about homilies, or even commentaries, which may make historical reference and add greater depth and insight into this tragedy.

100. Cuthbertson, A Tragedy of the Reformation, 49. 101. According to a letter by Gulielmus Gratarolus, dated November 16th, 1553, there

were Genevans who held Calvin responsible for the death of Servetus and accused the mag­istrate of acting unjustly. Calvini Opera XIV, 666.

102. For further comment, see J.E. Cameron, "Scottish Calvinism and the Principle of Intolerance," 114.

103. Calvin recognized a relationship between church and government, but he also as­serted a necessary distinction between the two realms: "Christ's spiritual Kingdom and the civil jurisdiction are things completely distinct." Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion Vol. II, IY.20.1, 1486.

IN nm NAME OF nm THREE HEADED MONSTER 33

This narrative has attempted to interpret the Servetus case within the conceptual framework of the sixteenth century judicial process in Geneva with little discourse concerning the moral failings of Calvin and the Gene­van Council. If desired, one could easily locate the ethical shortcomings, for there is plenty of blame to go around to all the integral parts that comprised the systemic establishment, which allowed the death penalty. However, rather than assigning guilt onto any specific persons, traditions, or politi­cal systems, this study traced specific contours that gave shape to the final verdict against Servetus. The Servetus case captures the growing pains, not only of Calvin, but also of the broader Protestant world, which was still in the process of redefining itself in relation to the Roman Church. Calvin and the Genevan Council were unable, or unwilling, to shed the constraints of particular traditioned precedents that guided the verdict against Servetus. However, this study suggests that Servetus's trial facilitated what would become a collective consciousness that allowed for further critical self-re­flection within the Protestant movement over and against specific eccle­sial traditions and ordinances. Here, in the Servetus case, we witness the impulse of a more inclusive international Protestantism that showed the potential to transcend Confessionalism under particular circumstances. 104

Partly due to his involvement in Servetus's trial, Calvin has been de­scribed as" one of the last great figures of the Middle Ages." 105 While not an unfair or inaccurate characterization, it is certainly not a complete portrait of Calvin's complex personality and varied activities. On some level, Cal­vin displayed an innovative international-ecumenical consciousness that served as a model for future generations. 106 It is difficult to maintain that Calvin's impulse for broadening and strengthening Protestant Christian­ity was a relic of the Middle Ages while operating from the ecclesiological perspective of a second generation Reformer. Rather, to simply state it, Calvin's international policies were a calculated approach to strengthen Protestantism during the European Reformation. The Servetus affair dem­onstrates one example, from many, of Geneva and Calvin's willingness to seek out the counsel of their neighboring Protestant churches. 107

104. In the later Reformation, Cameron argues for evidence of a broader Protestantism that extended beyond "Confessionalism." See Euan Cameron, "One Reformation or many? Protestant identities in the later Reformation in Germany," Tolerance and Intolerance in the European Reformation, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996) 108 -127; p. 127.

105. Bainton, Hunted Heretic, 170. 106. Beard rightly states, "[Calvin] is the only one of the great Reformers who can justly

be called international." Charles Beard, The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century in its Relation to Modern Thought and Knowledge, (London: Williams and Norgate, 1885), 244.

lQZ For further discussion of Calvin's role as mediator between the churches of the

34 MATIHEW J. PEREIRA

Geneva and Calvin's desire for communion and unity within the larg­er Protestant world was not a nostalgic longing for the uniformity and hegemony of Catholicism in .the Middle Ages. Rather, Geneva and their lead Reformer desired to unite Protestantism under a particular under­standing of the Word of God over and against the Roman Church. Unity and peace were highly valued in Geneva while seldom realized. Geneva and Calvin not only desired internal unity, they further sought solidarity with their Protestant neighbors, which at times entailed rallying together against armies, countries and persons that threatened their way of life. Servetus was such a threat. One wonders why Servetus would not recant and then be on his fway? While tragic, it is also seemingly heroic, that Ser­vetus died as a true believer in the Jesus he encountered in the Scriptures. During his final days in jail, one may imagine Servetus fervently praying to his Jesus for strength and comfort; this Jesus was his Lord and Savior and so much more, but he was certainly not a hypostasis or an imagined part of any "three headed monster."

Reformation and his activity in international politics, see MacI<innon, Calvin and the Reforma­tion, 188 - 213.

The Army of God and the Psyche

LAURA D' ANGELO

Religious terrorists find justification for killing in obscure passages of sacred texts. Each expression of terror is a unique outgrowth of a culture, religion and specific set of socio-political and economic circumstances. De­spite vast differences in grievances, agendas and tools employed by ter­rorist groups, there are uncanny similarities in the ways terrorist groups relate to images of the divine and to women. James Jones, psychologist and scholar of religious terrorism, says religious terrorists share a "puni­tive and abjecting image of God, the splitting of the world into all good and all evil camps, and with that comes the loss of empathy for the other and their social death, the sanctification of violence, and the connection of purification with bloodshed." 1

Scholars of terrorism point out that religious terrorists of all stripes have two interlocking goals: the establishment of a religious state and the subjugation of women. The desire to "purify" society drives the wish to impose "God's law," which translates to strict gender laws and the op­pression of women. Belief in this religious destiny makes an enemy of secular politics, and fuels the need to undermine the separation of church and state.

What propels people to devote their lives to causes that require noth­ing less than murder? An examination of the speech, literature and ac­tions of one terrorist group - The Army of God - reveals powerful forces at work in the psyche that are projected into the world. Central to these psychic factors is a catastrophic collapse of the gap between terrorists and their images of God.

The Army of God, an American terrorist group that advocates bomb­ing clinics and killing abortion providers, worships a God that is woman hating, wrathful and avenging. This God image does not inspire a path

1. James Jones, "Blood that Cries from the Earth," (Unpublished manuscript used with permission of author) 125.

35

36 LAURA D' ANGELO

of slow spiritual transformation, but promises an immediate fusion with the holy. To worship this God is to become God and to execute His mur­derous will. This holy merger between "soldiers" and their God image propels them to fight what they see is a great cosmic battle - the ulti­mate war against Satanic forces. Envisioning the world as a battleground where holy and demonic forces clash is a concept shared by almost all religious terrorists. 2

"Silent, except in mother's nightmares"

On March 11, 1993, 31-year-old Michael Griffin shot three .38 caliber bullets into the back of Dr. David Gunn. The murder made Griffin the first to draw blood in the nation's cultural war over abortion. According to Griffin, God directed him to offer the doctor a final chance to repent and then kill him if he refused. Griffin testified that he walked over to Gunn' s car outside the Pensacola Women's Medical Services building in Florida and tapped on the window. "I looked him right in the face and said, 'Da­vid Gunn, the Lord told me to tell you that you have one more chance.' Gunn did not take the "chance." 3

Griffin is celebrated as a "Prisoner for Christ" on the Army of God website. Displayed is his photo from the Okaloosa Correctional Institu­tion, and a link to his essay that urges Christians to tum from their "wick­ed ways" and stop abortions. He writes: "There are 40 million Americans aged conception to 28 years old. There are 40 million more that are silent (except in their mother's nightmares). Since January of 1993 (when I first met John B and I saw for the first time, an4 abortion in a jar). I had tried endlessly to express how outraged I was at this and the thousands like that happen everyday!!!" 4

Five days after Gunn' s death, a then-obscure minister, the Rev. Paul Hill appeared on the "Donahue show" defending Griffin's homicide. The next year, Hill of the Presbyterian Church of America, followed in Griffin's footsteps. He fatally shot the doctor who had taken Gunn's place at the Pensacola clinic - Dr. John Britton. Like Griffin, Hill saw himself as chosen to execute God's plan. He wrote: "The battle over abortion is

2. Ibid., 58. 3. James Risen and Judy L. Thomas, "Pro-Life Turns Deadly," Newsweek. Magazine,

Oanuary 26, 1998). 4. http:/ /www.armyofgod.com/ Michael Griffin.html 5. Hill, Paul J. "Mix My Blood with the Blood of the Unborn." 2003. Available at http://

www.armyofgod.com/PHillBookForward.html

nm ARMY OF GOD AND nm PSYOIE 37

primarily spiritual. The conflict is between God's will and kingdom and Satan's opposing will and kingdom." 6

Hill was convicted and executed on September 2003. His death was memorialized on the Army of God website. "Paul Hill saved 32 children from being murdered by baby-killing abortionist," the site claims.7

Since that time, the self-proclaimed "leaderless resistance" has been linked to acts of terror against abortion providers that include shootings, bombings and Anthrax hoaxes. The group's front man Neal Horsley, along with fellow soldiers Bob Lokey and Jonathan O'Toole have been the most vocal "soldiers" in the movement. They granted:interviews to magazines and were profiled in an HBO documentary, Soldiers in the Army of God. They liken themselves to the anti-Hitler forces in Germany before World War II. Killing in the abortion fight is justifiable homicide, they argue, be­cause they are rescuing the most oppressed group in America - unborn fetuses.

Working on the side of "the good" is the context for Horsley's web site, the Nuremberg File. It lists the names and.home addresses of doc­tors who perform abortions. Horsley insists he is keeping records for a time when these "child killers" will be put on trial for murder. The day after a sniper fatally shot Dr. Barnett Slepian, who was standing with his wife and son in the kitchen of his home on Oct. 23, 1998, Horsley drew a grey line through the doctor's name on the website. Outraged, Planned Parenthood sued him and a judge ordered Horsley to take down the list. 8

In 2001, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the verdict, ruling that the "unwanted" posters were protected speech. The Nuremberg Files went back up. 9

Splitting in the Army of God

The Army of God's crusade against "evil" is,documented on its web­site. Two types of images dominate. The first are horrific photographs of aborted, dismembered fetuses. In one photograph, a pair of tongs dangles a small head with a missing jaw. Shriveled bodies lie next to heads on white sheets. A gloved hand pinches two small legs over a body. The pictures are revolting and upsetting. They are featured in the Christian

6. "Prisoners of Christ." Available at http:/ /www.armyofgod.com/POClist.html 7. "The Propagandist." The Intelligence Report, Southern Poverty Law Center. Available

at http:/ /www.splcenter.org/ intel/ intelreport/ article.jsp?pid=261 8. Ibid. 9. Jessica Stem. Terror in the Name of God. (New York: Echo Press: 2003), 160.

38 LAURA D' ANGEW

Gallery, a website run by Horsley. Each fetus is given a biblical name: "Malachi" "Matthew" "Barnabas" "Hannah." The fetus named "Mark" includes disturbing commentary on the photo: "Note hospital band on wrist!" "Was the baby experimented on while still alive. (sic)"

The other images fall under the category of "the killers" - unsuspect­ing women who go to clinics for abortions. The women are caught on film by "abortion cams" which have been feeding the website photos since 2001. Browsers to the website are invited to click on a state to view women in clinic parking lots on any given day. The pictures have the feel of mug shots. Captions read: "Killers queue up at the butchertorium" and "Park and Kill."

Psychological Split

The images - the idealized fetus and the demonized women - reflect a disturbing psychic split that does not tolerate ambivalence. Melanie Klein, a British psychoanalyst, described this as a "splitting defense" in her book, Envy and Gratitude and Other Works 1946-1963. She said that very early on babies experience envy, anxiety and aggression. They seek to retain good feelings and expel the bad ones. The infant's ego splits the mother into "good" and "bad" parts, separating them to keep the bad from destroy­ing the good. The "good" mother is internalized and forms the develop­ing ego. The "bad" mother is projected outside and must be defended against. She is experienced as attacking, rejecting and prosecutorial. This, says Klein, is the "paranoid position."

Slowly, the baby realizes that the good and bad objects are really as­pects of the same mother. The baby enters into a stage Klein calls "the depressive position" where she feels guilty about her rage and anxious about annihilating her mother. When there are enough good experiences of the mother, the infant grows to tolerate ambivalence in her mother and herself. She realizes that both she and mother have good and bad aspects. She learns to deal with her destructiveness, not by splitting but by making reparations. Psychic health is a reintegration of those splits in a move­ment toward wholeness. On the path from infantile dependence to matu­rity, a conscience is born.

The severity of the splits and the ability to repair them depends on early experiences, the baby's own constitution and the overall quality of care giving. The reintegration doesn't always happen. Splitting can become an internal psychic structure, from which all other relationships are processed.

THE ARMY OF GOD AND THE PSYCHE 39

The Army of God's war on abortion reflects a severely split psychic structure. The "soldiers" express solid identification with the "good" fe­tus, which is helpless, dependent and violently ripped from the source of life. The women are the ultimate "bad" mothers - rejecting and loyal only to Satan. Lokey, a member of the Army of God, who converted to Christianity in prison while serving 20 years for armed robbery, is unam­bivalent in his assessment of women. "A perfect woman is a good ~other. Most women are vile," he said. 10 Women are not only rejecting, they are annihilating. They must be defended against. This bloodthirsty hatred of women is juxtaposed to a sweet sentimentality toward the fetus whose purity is held out as the ideal. The identification, when enacted in public, can take on eerie qualities. Prior to the murder he committed, the Rev. Paul Hill stood outside abortion clinics, crying out: "Mommy, mommy don't kill me!"

"Women are Not Equal"

The Army of God is a predominately male affair. The "prisoners of war" - people in prison for abortion-related crimes - are predominately white men, with the exception of two women. The overt agenda - to stop abortions - belies a broader mission: to subjugate women in a religious patriarchal state. Michael Bray, the movement's leading intellectual, was a model for Paul Hill. Bray spent four years in prison for conspiring to bomb ten clinics in Washington, D.C. He sees his role as the inspirational leader. His book, A Time to Kill, is touted on his website as "an ethical trea­tise on the use of force in defense of the child in the womb." 11

Bray's "position papers" posted on the web site outline his conten­tion that women are inferior to men. He calls feminism one of the "great­est heresies of time" because it rejects the God-ordained hierarchy of men over woman. 12 Bray believes that the presence of women endangers men in the military. Men are "demoralized by the fact that the overall strength of the unit is diminished by ... the relative physical weakness of the female sex." 13

10. Available at www.armyofgod.com 11. http://www.ezekielsystems.com/Bray / positionpapers/ positionpaperVI.G.htm 12. Ibid 13. http:/ / www.christiangallery.com

40 LAURA D' ANGELO

Dangers of Sexuality and Homicidal Moms

Bray's position on women seems mild when compared to the depic­tions of women produced by Army of God image-makers. On websites and in interviews, women are consistently characterized as evil tempt­resses who must be controlled through humiliation and intimidation.

Women are the targets of terror and public shaming. Neal Horsley helps to shape these images on the Christian Gallery website. He writes: "There are words for what a mother does when she kills her unborn child for any reason other than clear and present self-defense . . . words like infanticide and homicide, and evil, and sin, and punishable by law and God," Horsley writes on the site. "[These] homicidal mothers must be held up for the world to see." 14

On his website, Horsley announced a plan to include real-time im­ages of women going into clinics on "live abortion cams." He advertises for "sidewalk counselors" who are willing to use their own video equipment to " ... catalog (sic) the people who go out to kill God's little babies."

Women are characterized as Satan's pawns, sacrificing babies to empower the Evil one. "Satan hates the live web cam project because it actually has the power to interfere with the delivery of his daily diet of slaughtered babies. Satan gets very angry when his favorite food (sacri­ficed human babies) fails to be delivered," Horsley writes. 15

The television documentary, Soldiers in the Army of God, captures a conversation between Horsley and his friend Bob Lokey that reveals the depths of the psychological struggle with women. Lokey says: "I've been vaginally defeated all my life. Finally, God said to me 'Son ... you have got to leave this thing alone.' I was so attracted to women; at one time I thought women were gods. And he made me quit women then and there. I quit smoking, quit drinking, quit meat; I even circumcised myself." 16

The penis, for Lokey, seemed to carry the symbolic tension be­tween the despised dependence on women and their perceived evil pow­er. In fact, Lokey' s penis became the target of his aggression, not once but twice. The first time occurred after Lokey went to prison in 1963 and suf­fered the loss of the only woman he said he loved, the ex-wife and mother of his two children. Lokey was so devoted to her that he tried to tattoo her

14. http:/ / www.christiangallery.com/ atrocity/ 15. Jessica Stem, 159 16. Daniel Voll, "Neil Horsley and the Future of the Armed Abortion Conflict," Es­

quire. Available at http:/ / www.esquire.com/ features/ articles/ 2001 / 001322_mfr_abortion_ 6.html

THE ARMY OF GOD AND THE PSYCHE 41

name - Charlotte - on the head of his penis. Excruciating pain stopped him from finishing the job, so the tattoo read "Char." 17

The next act of self-attack occurred in 1973 after the Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade. Lokey said God spoke to him, telling him to do something about it. Said Lokey: "I was called to circumcise myself. I obeyed the call." In another act of genital mutilation, then 40-year-old Lokey, sat on a toilet after lights out. With a single-edged razor blade, he cut away the foreskin on his own penis. This, he said, was a religious act: "God took and guided my hand. It was the same as if he had done it with his own hand." 18

This experience led Lokey to a life of celibacy and the conclusion that most women are "vile."

Psychologist James Jones identifies the linking of sex and violence as a theme present in most theologies adopted by terrorist groups. "The dangers of sexuality, the repression of women, and the conjoining of sex and violence are the salient themes of patriarchal religion and terrorist religions are almost always patriarchal," he said. 19

Lokey' s mutilation of his penis can be seen as testimony to the power attributed to women. The dead fetus, on the other hand, symbol­izes the perceived helplessness in the confrontation with this extraordi­nary force.

Identification with the "womb babies."

Another common theme shared by religious terrorist groups is an un­derstanding that birth and rebirth happen in real time. The Christian gal­lery website makes this theme explicit in its call to soldiers: "We must and can make the babies come alive in this nation." 20 It is the dead fetus with which the "soldiers" ruthlessly identify and idealize. A gruesome photo of an aborted fetus is displayed on a 16' by 20' billboard on Lokey's yard in front of his home. Lokey says he knows what it is like to be a fetus because he had a religious moment in prison where he re-experienced his own birth. He said: "I'm in the joint, in the typewriter repair shop. I felt a tight band around my head. My friend the foreman called me, 'Lokey!' I turned sideways. The band was proceeding down my body. I fell out into space. I

17. Ibid. 18. James Jones, "Blood that Cries from the Earth," (Unpublished manuscript used with permission of author) 120. 19. http:/ /www.christiangallery.com/winstrat.html 20. Jessica Stem, 158.

42 LAURA D' ANGELO

tried to breathe - I knew I had to fall down and cry. I felt someone spank­ing me - the pain was incredible. I heard a baby crying- I heard the words of the doctor, I heard my mother travailing. Satan embodied himself in the man I had been talking - my friend. I knew I was looking straight into the eyes of the devil himself. I heard the voice of an angel. Satan said, ''This child is mine." The angel said, 'Deliver him from evil." I was being deliv­ered from evil and into life. This happened in 1968."21

Lokey is mentor to Jonathan O'Toole, the youngest of the three most outspoken "soldiers." Their first point of connection was a tender tie to the "babies." Following online correspondence the men met for the first time in person. Lokey grabbed O'Toole by the head, and said:

''You love the babies, don't you?" "Yes, sir. I do," O'Toole answered.

"I can tell. Never let anybody tell you that babies aren't souls be­fore they are born. I have memories that predate my own conception," said Lokey. 22

In a follow-up email to Lokey, Jonathan expressed rage and shame for not doing enough for "the babies."

"Hatred has become my driving force. It is a hatred which pours out from a fountain of love for the unborn children . .. I am very ashamed of myself. I speak about a fountain of love for the unborn, but where is the evidence of that? Lokey, it's building up inside of me. I can't contain it forever. I am con­taining it now, and trusting that the Lord knows how much I can take.

Lokey responds to Jonathan in a warning about the seduction of the "babies."

I need to caution you about getting too close to these babies. Your time will come. You have to wait for it, and don't push it, don't rush it. You will know when it is here and you will know what to do. It might be any of a number of things . ... Not being there yet does not spell failure . ..

Now, I can't expect the babies not to be on your mind twenty-four hours a day, as they are on mine. And I wouldn't have it any other way for myself. We can't do everything alone right at this moment. The world will catch up and then hell will break loose. I give my most solemn word on this. 23

21. http:/ / www.esquire.com/ features/ articles/ 2001 / 001322_mfr_abortion_7.html 22. http://www.esquire.com/ features/ articles/ 2001 / 001322_mfr_abortion_6.html

THI! ARMY OF GOD ANO THI! PSYCHE 43

Reunification with Mom: God as the Ego Ideal

O'Toole seems to suggest that he is awaiting God's instruction be­fore he acts on behalf of the ''babies." His expectation sheds light on how the image of God functions in the collective psyche of the Army of God. The image of God outlined by the "soldier" testimony and writing is an overpowering and wrathful deity, at war with an insatiable fetus-starved Satan. You' re either with God or against God; no psychic space is available for time and transformation. God does not represent an ideal that the "sol­diers" can move toward. In fact, the gap between the soldiers and their God image often closes in on them, creating a God-like grandiosity that is disturbing and fraudulent. O'Toole awaits the word from God. Lokey' s God guides his hand in a circumcision. The God of Hill and Griffen issues direct orders to kill. Charles Wagner, imprisoned for sending fake anthrax to abortion clinics, testified that God told him to kill abortion providers. 24

In his essay "Thus Saith The Lord," Wagner claims to speak for God. " It was difficult for me to deliver this prophecy .... All I knew was that it was from God and I could not hold the words inside of my mouth." 25

The "soldiers" have taken on their God's most powerful role: decid­ing who should live and die. After shooting the abortion doctor, Hill says: "The Lord had done great things through me." 26 l

This God image functions like an "ego ideal," a psychic agency that promises ultimate reunification with the mother. According to French Psychoanalyst Janine Chasseguet-Smirgel, the ego ideal is the "heir'' to primary narcissism, a time when an infant experiences fusion with the mother in a powerful way. This unity is both a psychic and bodily experi­ence of love. The infant is held, fed, swathed and rocked by the mother, and because all his needs are met, the infant does not distinguish between "me" and "not me." Mother and infant is an undivided pair. This primary experience, however gratifying, inevitably comes to an end. The infant slowly realizes that the mother is a separate person, a "not-me." Ideally, this realization happens slowly. It's ushered in by moments like when the baby is hfmgry and the breast fails to immediately appear. Or when the baby must wait for mother to get out of the shower before her diaper is

23. "The Propagandist" Available at http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/ar­ticle.jsp?pid=26l

24. http:/ /www.armyofgod.com/ OaytonProphecy.html 25. Paul Hill. (1997) "Why I killed an abortionist." Available at http:/ /www.saltshaker.

us/ Americanlssues /Life /Why.htm 26. Janine Chasseguet-Smirgel,_Ego Ideal, A Psychoanalytic Essay on the Malady of the Ideal.

(New York: Norton and London: Free Association Books, 1985), 98.

44 LAURA D' ANGELO

changed. Those moments of loss and frustration lead to realizations of "me" and "not-me." The awareness makes the infant feel helpless and dependent; the original feeling of unified perfection gets dislodged. It's a free-floating feeling that the infant projects onto the mother, her first ego ideal. The ego ideal - now carried by the mother - offers the promise of recapturing the earlier fusion.

In essence, it's the child's very longing to regress that spurs his de­velopment. The mother can help the child develop, by aiding the child in mastering the world bit by bit. With work and real capabilities, the child believes the gap between the ego and ego ideal is narrowing. The child is becoming closer to the ideal, and as he experiences a move to­ward it, the ego becomes more lovable to the id. Chasseguet-Smirgel quotes Freud saying: "Look, you can love me too - I am so like the ob­ject."27 Because the ego ideal demands perfection, the gap never closes. The promise is kept alive.

The child goes on to project his ego ideal onto the father and the fa­ther's penis. He wants to become like the father and have the father's penis with all its capacities and privileges. In normal development, the father accepts the idealization and the boy sublimates his desire toward his father and becomes like dad. He takes in admirable qualities of the father, lessen­ing the gap between himself and his dad, the ideal. This experience of ide­alization and growth allows the child to project the ego ideal onto others he deems admirable. And he moves through life, growing and becoming, finding new role models, always with an eye toward reunification.

Of course, there could be perilous pitfalls along the way. The father can thwart the process by rejecting the boy's idealization. Or the moth­er may prefer the son to the father, communicating "deceptions" to the child like his penis is already better than dad's. The child sees no need to struggle to take dad's place; he already has it. The libido doesn't move from child to father, in the hopes of developing like him. Instead, the in­stinctual energy circles back to the boy's own penis, his own ego. The boy idealizes his own pre-genital penis as the ego ideal. Collapsed is the gap between the ego and the ideal.

The problem is that the boy, on some level, knows it is a lie. His penis is smaller than dad's and doesn't have the same capabilities. It's a fake, what Chasseguet-Smirgel calls a "fecal penis." Unlike a genital penis, the boy's penis is made of feces. The lie produces tremendous anxiety and the boy must exert psychic energy to conceal the fake. He dresses up the penis

27. Ibid., 112.

THE ARMY OF GOD AND THE PSYCHE 45

in silver wrapping, trying to convince the world that his fecal penis is bet­ter than the real thing.

The boy with the fecal penis has imitated the father by copying his actions. "Imitation means trying to be the envied parent and not necessar­ily to become it," Chasseguet-Smirgel says.28 For example, the boy mimics the father by holding the newspaper just like him. But the boy who suc­cessfully projects his ego ideal onto dad, doesn't just hold the newspaper, he learns to read the newspaper. The boy with the fecal penis has an ego ideal - his own penis and ego. His libido goes toward propping up the lie. There's no free libido to direct outward in the service of his growth. Throughout life, his psyche fails to take in potential role models in ways that service his maturation. He may, for example, refuse to take piano les­sons because the teacher is seen as a stand in for the father. To avoid the dangers of interjecting the father's penis, the boy prefers to be a "self­taught" pianist. 29

Sublimation gets the real penis; idealization gets the fake. Chasseg­uet-Smirgel says idealization is like "mutton dressed as lamb" or a dinner prepared in beautiful crockery with lots of herbs disguising the flavor. But sublimation effects real change. "In the case of sublimation it is the flesh of the animal itself that has been transformed, the preparation and the cooking of it that have made it delectable .... when the substance itself has undergone some intrinsic change there is much less need to be concerned about appearances; whereas in the case of idealization this is all one has," she says. 30

The process of sublimation nudges the child along on a path of de­velopment. He projects his ego ideal onto people successively, introjects aspects of their personalities and experiences real capabilities and growth on the way to the promise held out by ego ideal. When the child's ego ideal is his own penis/ego, growth is stunted. Transformation can't hap­pen because the boy has been seduced instead by the false gift of fusion. No need to become like the ego ideal, he's better already. He is grandiose insisting that his fecal penis is superior. And, at the same time, he lives in fear of being unmasked.

This condition leaves the boy vulnerable to "idealized father substi­tutes" who promise the automatic phallus "sparing (the boy) the painful process of development." Chasseguet-Smirgel says ideolpgical leaders like Hitler "make the illusion - the promise of a coming together of ego and

28. Ibid., 122. 29. Ibid., 104. 30. Ibid., 114.

46 LAURA D' ANGELO

ideal - sparkle." The appeal to others is not the promise to "become big, but to be big immediately, thus by-passing the process of maturation." 31

God image as Ego Ideal

An image of God that offers the sparkling promise to be big now without demanding transformative work fits the model detailed by Chas­seguet-Smirgel. In a healthy relationship with the divine, the devotee may project her ego ideal onto God, the Buddha, Jesus or any religious figure. She then embarks on a process of development and transforma­tion. Along the way, she takes in qualities ascribed to the ideal, such as strength, justice, patience, caring, and non-attachment. Her ideal spurs her to develop real-world capabilities that express those qualities. She cultivates compassion through study, prayer and practice. She offers compassion in relationship with others, and is able to receive in turn. She is changed by those interactions.

But the image of God adopted by the soldiers in the Army of God has all the trappings of an "idealized father substitute." This image resurrects the old wish for ego and ideal to fuse, while safely bypassing the demand for real transformation. Soldiers' testify to a feeling of merger with God - speaking God's words, feeling God's hand guiding their own to cut flesh and pull triggers. This unity bolsters Chasseguet-Smirgel's argument that the false ego ideal - in this case the God image - holds out the opportunity to ''be" not to ''become like" the ego ideal.

In the biographical material of Soldier O'Toole we see shades of the metaphoric fecal penis - feelings of inadequacy and shame swept aside by waves of grandiosity. O'Toole was home schooled and taught rigid Chris­tian values until the sixth grade, then attended a small Christian school. The subsequent adjustment to a public school was rocky. "I lacked th~ social skills to relate to people who hadn't grown up in a church environ­ment. I went between being withdrawn to having an air of superiority," he said.32 Social awkwardness made gym classes painful for O'Toole who had never played team sports and could barely throw a ball. His rage ap­peared one night in a dream where he slaughtered his classmates with an automatic rifle. "I just mowed them down, and I didn't feel any guilt until I woke up," he said. 33

31. http:/ / www.esquire.com/ features/ articles/ 2001 / 001322_mfr_abortion_6.html 32. Ibid.

TiiE ARMY OF GOD AND THE PSYCHE 47

Keep the Gap Alive

Union Theological Seminary Professor and Psychoanalyst Ann Ula­nov says that as "image-creating creatures" we should understand that our images of God are just that - images. God is beyond our images of God. Dragging our unconscious god-images into awareness enlivens our faith and transforms us.34 "If we are ever to reach through our God-im­ages to the God who breaks all our images, then we must begin with our own pictures for God - noticing them, embracing them, housing them," she said. 35

When religion is a transformative process, the gap between oneself and one's God image remains intact. Our imagination helps us to traverse the gap, keeping our God images alive by allowing them to change, to ad­dress us, and to change us. When we fail to honor the gap, she says, trou­ble arises. "One danger about falling into identification with our pictures is that if we aren't in relation to our unconscious pictures of God, they don't go away. They will acquire more power in the unconscious because no interceding ego is struggling to connect these images to the reality of a shared existence with other people in the world. Instead of having images, they have us. We live them as literally true while we lose them as images of truth, " she said. 36

Living our God image as true can lead us to absolute truth claims and imposing them on others. Our will becomes God's will. Believing that we speak for God, we issue divine mandates. Gone is the ineffable, mysteri­ous God. We are now identified with our picture of God and demand that others be also. Those who aren't are expelled from the sphere of holiness and subject to demonization.

Maintaining the gap between ourselves and our symbols of the ultimate takes effort. It requires hard work and imagination to contain the power of these images, Ulanov says. "To neglect God-images as im­ages means that they are free to gather power to knock us over. Only if we keep them as images of God do we have a chance to keep a foot in reality too. What should grow into symbol will instead get stuck in a symbolic equation. For example, to say God is like a father means we get a glimpse through the human experience of father, good and bad, a bit of God's mys-

33. Ann Belford Ulanov, Picturing God, (Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2002), 167. 34. Ibid. 165 35. Ibid. 169. 36. Ibid., 170.

48 LAURA D' ANGELO

tery. But the symbol collapses when we say 'God is a father and if you object to that they you reject God. Then we equate God's mystery with our human notion of fathering. We substitute image for reality and forsake the help of the image in penetrating God's mystery,' " she said. 37

Conclusion

Religiously motivated terrorism is a multi-dimensional phenomenon that draws its momentum from social, economic and political grievances. At work too are deep-seated religious and psychic factors. It is difficult to know what motivates individual soldiers in the Army of God because each person brings to the movement a unique psychological makeup, his­torical experiences, and reactions to the world. But an examination of the themes that weave through the literature and testimonies of soldiers point to a frightening link between sex and violence, a desire to subjugate women and a solid identification with the dead fetus.

Tribute is paid to an image of God that promises instant fusion with the holy, rather than a God that inspires awe and mystery, who encour­ages us to move on a path of slow transformation and maturation. Unlike this rocky spiritual process, instant fusion causes the gulf between "sol­diers" and their God images to cave in. Images of God become God - a God who offers the promise that you too can be God, speak God's words, do God's will, experience God's hand instead of your own - even kill God's children.

37. Ibid. 170.

Sympathy for the Devil? Origen and the End

JENNIFER L. HECKART

Origen of Alexandria is, depending on whom you ask, either one of the Church's greatest Fathers, or one of its greatest heretics. Over the years, the Roman Catholic Church has managed more or less successfully to hold both of those positions in tension, thereby granting Origen what is surely a unique place in its theology. His thought provides a foundation for everyone who came after him; yet his doctrines were anathematized by the emperor Justinian in 543, and Origen himself was formally con­demned by the 2nd Council of Constantinople in 553. He had been dead for three hundred years. His reputation had begun to suffer a century and a half earlier, under attacks from scholars such as Epiphanius, Jerome, Theophilus and Augustine. They chiefly objected to his views on creation and redemption, including the pre-existence of souls and the restoration of all things, or apokatastasis.

Although apokatastasis is usually associated with Origen, it was ac­tually his teacher, Clement of Alexandria, who first outlined the main points of the doctrine. Likewise, other theologians built on Origen's work after him, most notably Gregory of Nyssa and Maximus the Con­fessor. Origen, however, was the only one to be anathematized. David Kelly invokes what amounts to a "Who's Who" of the early church, in order to demonstrate how widespread and accepted the idea of apo­katastasis was. 1 David Satran propounds a sort of conspiracy theory of Origen's condemnation, revolving around Jerome. He demonstrates how Jerome, in his biblical commentaries, smears Origen by quoting from some of his followers' more incautious statements regarding the salvation of the devil, successfully imputing to him things that he never

1. David M. Kelly, "'Apokatastasis' in the Early Church," The Patristic and Byzantine Review 9.1 (1990): 71-74.

49

50 JENNIFER L. HECKART

actually said.2 Misunderstood by some, and understood all too clearly by others, apokatastasis continues to be one of the most contentious as­pects of Origen' s legacy. 3

He himself, introducing his chapter on "The End or Consummation" in On First Principles, says that he will proceed "with great fear and cau­tion, discussing and investigating rather than laying down fixed and cer­tain conclusions."4 This caveat has been lost on almost everyone, from the very beginning. What Henri Crouzel aptly referred to as a "research the­ology" has been treated as hard-and-fast (and heretical) doctrine. Though centuries of critics have ignored his disclaimer, Origen never professed to know what would happen at the end. He repeatedly stressed the fact that no one could know for sure whether anyone was saved or damned, and that one couldn't possibly pass judgment one way or the other.5 It is ironic to think that his critics were more certain he was wrong than he was certain he was right!

Origen' s eschatology, as it is represented in his major writings, con­tains some contradictions. It has also been consistently misunderstood and/ or misrepresented by both his friends and his enemies. Origen ar­gues that no sinner, not even the devil, is beyond redemption, and that in theory, all rational beings will be part of the apokatastasis. Many scholars argue that a universal restoration is irreconcilable with the principle of free will; however, such scholars overlook Origen' s view of the restoration as a process rather than an event.

Origen' s thought links Creation to Redemption in an integral way - for him, the end must resemble the beginning, must involve a "resto­ration" of the original state.6 In the beginning was God, surrounded by created "intelligences." Through their own choice, they fell away from God, at different speeds, and to different depths. Those who remained the closest gained luminous bodies and became angels. Those who fell further gained material bodies and became human beings, and the world was created to hold them. Those who fell the furthest gained "tenebrous"

2. David Satran, "The Salvation of the Devil: Origen and Origenism in Jerome's Biblical Commentaries," Studia Patristica 23 (1989): 171-177.

3. The debate goes on today. For an excellent introduction to the 20th century debate within the Roman Catholic Church, see John R. Sachs, "Current Eschatology: Universal Sal­vation and the Problem of Hell," Theological Studies 52.2 (1991): 227-254.

4. Origen De Principiis I.Vl.1. 5. See Hans Urs Von Balthasar, Origen: Spirit and Fire: A Thematic Anthology of His Writ­

ings, trans. Robert J. Daly, S.J. (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1984), 335.

6. Eugene de Faye, Origen and His Work, trans. Fred Rothwell (New York: Columbia University Press, 1929), 148.

SYMPATHY FOR 1HE DEVIL? ORIGEN AND THE END 51

bodies and became demons.7 Thus, even Satan was once an angel (as Ori­gen points out, Lucifer means "light-bearer," so he cannot always have been evil).8 The Fall is explained thus: "holiness is in every created being an accidental quality, and what is accidental may also be lost."9 The flip side of this, of course, is that unholiness is also an accidental quality .

... [N]o one is stainless by essence or by nature, nor is anyone pol­luted essentially. Consequently it lies with us and with our own actions whether we are to be blessed and holy, or whether through sloth and negligence we are to turn away from blessedness into wickedness and loss ... 10

If we travel far enough in either direction, we eventually join the ranks of the angels or the demons. The important point, however, is that we can travel in either direction.

Augustine saw post-lapsarian creation as a one-way, dead-end street. Human beings were fallen, and they kept on falling; only the grace of God, breaking in, could save them. Origen, by contrast, saw creation as a superhighway with God as the infinitely receding horizon. All rational souls were constantly moving back and forth along it, at varying speeds, reversing direction at will. Angels and demons are simply those beings whose souls have made more progress in one direction than the other. This is much more constructive than seeing them as somehow ontologi­cally different than ourselves.11 The angels are not inherently good; they have simply worked harder than we have, and made better choices. By the same token, the demons are not inherently bad. They were not always so.12 Goodness and evil are not intrinsic; neither are they irrevocable. In his Commentary on John, Origen cites the passage "We were once darkness, but now light in the Lord" (Ephesians 5:8) and asks, " ... [I]f it is true that darkness became light, as in the text, how is it unreasonable to suppose

7. There are a few disputed passages in which Origen opines that those who fell even further became animals, and then plants - see De Prine. I.VIII.4, for example.

8. De Princ. l.V.5. 9. Ibid. 10. Ibid. 11. Jeffrey Burton Russell asserts that, in fact, that is exactly what they are - ontological­

ly as well as morally different. He views the confusion of the two as a major flaw in Origen' s thinking. (See Russell, Satan: The Early Christian Tradition (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1981), 126-128). He seems to be defining ontology in terms of existence, however, whereas I am defining it in terms of essence. If Origen's doctrine of creation is correct, then all "rational beings" have the same essence even if they don't have the same existence.

12. Origen Contra Celsum VII.69.

52 JENNIFER L. HECKART

that all darkness is capable of becoming light?" As a result, he concludes that human beings do not have fixed natures, and that there is a "possibil­ity of a change on each side for the better or for the worse." 13 He makes a similar point in his Commentary on Matthew: both good and evil result not from human nature but from human choice. Thus, at any given mo­ment a righteous person can choose evil, and a wicked person can like­wise choose the good.14 As one approaches a critical velocity in either direction, it gets harder and harder to reverse oneself, and Origen seems to be unsure whether this critical velocity can ever be reached - does habit at some point harden into nature? If so, this contradicts his claim that the soul, over the course of eternity, "may either descend from the highest good to the lowest evil or be restored from the lowest evil to the highest good." 15

In any form, the notion of the pre-existence of souls was bound to be controversial. How does one reconcile the assertion that we were created in the image of God with the assertion that our material bodies result from our fall away from God? At the same time, the idea that our humanity is a result of our sins (as opposed to the other way around) is certainly intrigu­ing. When one applies it on an individual level, however, it becomes es­pecially problematic - not to mention unbiblical. In a disputed fragment, Origen uses the example of a baby blind from birth. If God is no respecter of persons, and if most babies are not born blind, then this baby must be blind because of sins committed before birth. 16 However, this very situ­ation arises in the gospels, when Jesus heals a man blind from birth, and the disciples ask, "Who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?" Jesus replies, "Neither" (John 9:1-3). Of course, one could argue that Jesus's explanation-the man was born blind "in order that the works of God might be made manifest in him" - is no more acceptable than Origen's. The claim that God chooses to use some people as illustrative examples creates as many problems as the claim that God visits infants with the sins of their parents. What Origen is trying to do, of course, is to formulate a viable theodicy - surely one of the earlier Christian attempts to do so. It simultaneously preserves the impartiality of God and the free will of humanity. Moreover, the thought that we were once like the angels (and could be again) and that the demons were once like us (and could be

13. Origen Commentary on John 11.14. 14. Origen Commentary on Matthew X.11. 15. De Prine. III.1.23. This raises the question for many scholars: what then is to prevent

a second fall after the apokatastasis? What is to guarantee a linear, and not a cyclical, view of salvation history?

16. De Prine. I.VIII.I.

SYMPATHY FOR TIIB DEVIL? ORIGEN AND THE END 53

again) changes one's perspective on the universe. If the consummation will not take place until all are restored, then our destinies are bound inex­tricably together. Origen does not think in terms of humanity, but in terms of "rational creatures." The light is the life of all, he points out, not just the life of human beings. 17 In one tantalizing passage, he even suggests that we might have something to teach the angels!18

Apokatastasis entails each fallen creature making the long and ar­duous climb back to God, so that God may once again be "all in all." 1 Corinthians 15, from which this phrase is taken, is the ur-text of apoka­tastasis. Origen quotes it numerous times in his writings. On the sur­face, his view resembles Gnostic teachings on the first and last things. The Gnostics saw the process as inevitable, however; Origen saw it as a choice. Just as the intelligences fell of their own free will, so they had to return of their own free will.19 Indeed, this emphasis on free will is one of the most important aspects of Origen' s thought, and we will return to it at the end of the paper.

One common misunderstanding about the restoration is that Origen denies punishment for sin. This is untrue. There are a couple of instanc­es in which Origen' s view of punishment is decidedly non-traditional, however. In the Parable of the Tares, he interprets the good wheat as the "children of the Kingdom," and the tares not as the children of the devil, but as evil opinions and evil words. It is they who will be cast into the fire, not those who hold them or pronounce them. The stumbling­blocks will be destroyed, and the stumblers, repenting, will punish them­selves.20 In De Principiis, Origen suggests that the fire which consumes sinners is more an internal than an external one - like a fever.21 For the most part, however, he holds to the view that sinners will be chastised in the usual way. To Celsus' claim that Jesus will have mercy on sinners regardless of whether they repent, Origen replies in Contra Celsum that Jesus will punish sinners.22 However, it is clear that for him, God's mercy undergirds God's justice. The trials we undergo in this life are exactly that - trials. They are meant to discipline us in a positive, not a nega­tive sense. Because Christ respects our free will, he does not take away the sins of all - only the sins of those who repent. However, Christ de­sires to take away the sins of all, so he does what is necessary in order

17. Co. John 11.16. 18. Co. Matt. XIII.28. 19. De Faye, 126-127. 20. Co. Matt. X.2. 21. De Prine. 11.X.4. 22. Con. Cels. 11.71.

54 JENNIFER L. HECKA~

to help us repent. Some people require chastening with "afflictions and evil spirits and dangerous diseases and grievous sicknesses."23 The im­portant point, however, is that these punishments are for our own good. 24

By this theory, God does not punish sinners because God hates them. God punishes sinners because God loves them and wants to cure them of their sins.25 Indeed, Origen claims that the one who is punished is much better off than the one who isn't, because that one is not even deemed wor­thy of correction.26 Origen does state that some beings - namely the devil and his angels - are "regarded as unworthy" of the instruction provided to humans, and that they consequently attempt to hinder our instruction. 27

Does this mean that God has given up on such beings? Or does it mean that they have fallen too far for God to work with until they regain some ground on their own? As mentioned above, Origen is unsure whether the soul reaches a "critical velocity" which makes redemption impossible; however, the overall tendency of his thought seems to run against that.

It appears to follow from this, in my opinion, that every rational na­ture can, in the process of passing from one order to another, travel through each order to all the rest, and from all to each, while undergo­ing the various movements of progress or the reverse in accordance with its own actions and endeavors and with the use of its power of free will.28

In his Commentary on Matthew, however, Origen does make distinc­tions between the saved and the unsaved (see XIII.25, for example, or X.12-13, in which Origen asserts that the angels are in charge of sorting out the righteous from the wicked, and casting the latter into the fire). One way of reconciling these claims with apokatastasis is to posit that judgments of salvation and damnation are penultimate and contingent - the equivalent of being remanded to custody while awaiting trial. God's clemency, if it comes, comes at the end of the process, not the beginning. This reading is

23. Co. John VI.37. 24. Obviously, this explanation of mental and physical illness is no more acceptable

today than the previous explanation of birth defects; however, the functionality of suffering was part of Origen' s cosmology.

25. De Prine. II.V.3. 26. See Von Balthasru:; 332. This vaguely masochistic idea has had a lengthy life: John

Donne, in his poem "Good Friday 1613. Riding Westward" expressed it thus: "O think me worth Thine anger, punish me, /burn off my rusts and my deformity,/ restore Thine image so much, by thy grace,/ that Thou may' st know me, and I'll tum my face."

27. De Prine. I.VI.3. 28. Ibid.

SYMPATifY FOR THE DEVIL? ORIGEN AND THE END 55

supported by an almost casual aside in the same commentary: discussing the blessed state of those who are being saved, he adds: "(because those who are not such are not yet purified) ... "29 Those who are not being saved are not beyond saving; they are simply not ready to be saved just yet.

Such arguments were bound to be controversial, and so Rufinus took the liberty of deleting the most explicit statements concerning universal salvation from the Latin version of De Principiis.30 At the same time, how­ever, there remain passages where Origen seems to affirm that the pun­ishment of the wicked will indeed be eternal - Con. Cels. VIIl.51-52 for example. The odd thing about this passage is that for once Celsus agrees with Christian doctrine, as he understands it, and lends his approval to it. Origen affirms Celsus' statement, and pushes him to take the logic further, rather than refuting or even correcting him. However, earlier in the work, in response to Celsus' s taunt that Christians believe they will be the only survivors of the final conflagration, Origen comments that for ordinary people, "the ordinary interpretation of punishments is suitable because they have not the capacity for any other means of conversion and of repentance from many evils, except that of fear and the suggestion of punishment." 31 In other words, hell is a deterrent! Origen puts this most explicitly in a fragment from his Commentary on Genesis, in which he writes that if we knew that things were going to be all right, we would lose our incentive to struggle. " ... [T]he foreknowledge that we will all turn out to be good in any case would cripple our efforts. Therefore it is fitting for us not to know whether we will turn out good or bad." 32

The most significant passage on the subject is perhaps in Contra Cel­sum, where Origen claims that God will indeed bring fire on the world, not - as Celsus sarcastically suggests - like a cook, but rather like a re­finer, who must burn away the dross in order to reveal the gold. Origen does admit that he is being somewhat circumspect, since he wants to an­swer Celsus without going into things that are not suitable for everyone to hear. "The Logos, accommodating himself to what is appropriate to the masses who will read the Bible, wisely utters threatening words with a hidden meaning to frighten people who cannot in any other way turn from the flood of iniquities." 33 Origen then states that the following will suffice to make his meaning clear to those who are capable of under­standing: "For my name's sake I will show mine anger ... so that I will not

29. Co. Matt. X.3. 30. For example, in De Prine. II.X.3. 31. Con. Cels. V.16. 32. Quoted in Von Balthasar, 344. 33. Con. Cels., V.15.

56 JENNIFER L. HECKART

destroy thee" (Isaiah 48:9; italics mine). This passage provides the key to Origen' s thinking on the subject. The punishment for sin is not destruc­tion. Sin is punished in order to save the sinner from destruction. God, in God's mercy, does not broil us (as per Celsus) but purifies us (as per Malachi 3). However, if one has the opposite impression, that is because God purposely wishes to give such an impression, so that God's mercy may not be taken for granted and abused. At this point, it makes sense to ask: Does Origen, perhaps, do the same thing? Does the confusion about apo­katastasis result from his sometimes obfuscating in this way? Can the seeming contradictions in his thought about the end be explained thus? Later in the treatise, Origen says:

It is risky to commit to writing the explanation of these matters, be­cause the multitude do not require any more instruction than that punishment is to be inflicted upon sinners. It is not of advantage to go on to the truths which lie behind it because there are people who are scarcely restrained by fear of everlasting punishment from the vast flood of evil and the sins that are committed in consequence of it.34

He continues that the point of talking about punishment is to scare people into behaving. " ... [W]e are concerned with the improvement of the human race," he says, defending Christian teachings about reward and punishment. Not that the punishments are inefficacious in them­selves, he adds.

Despite the contradictions, Origen expresses some consistent theories. He believes punishment for sins is real, palliative, and temporary. In other words, he envisions an early form of what came to be known as purgatory. However, for obvious reasons, hell is a better deterrent, and thus it is ap­propriate to deceive people for their own good. As John Sachs points out, "despite some texts which indicate the possibility of final, eternal dam­nation (or uncertainty about it), the vast majority of Origen's statements express his conviction about the noneternity of hell and the final salvation of all human beings." 35

If the salvation of all humanity is - to use a Pauline phrase - a scan­dal and a stumbling-block, then the salvation of the devil is even worse. While it is true that Origen never teaches it specifically, he alludes to it on many occasions, in no uncertain terms:

34. Con. Cels., VI.26. 35. John R. Sachs, "Apokatastasis in Patristic Theology," Theological Studies 54

(1993): 623.

SYMPATHY FOR TIIE DEVIL? ORIGEN AND TIIE END 57

For the destruction of the last enemy must be understood in this way, not that its substance which was made by God should perish, but that the hostile purpose and will which proceeded not from God but from itself will come to an end. It will be destroyed, therefore, not in the sense of ceasing to exist, but of being no longer an enemy ... 36

By Origen' s reading, 1 Corinthians 15 implies the salvation of the dev­il; so, however, does his own view of the cosmos. If all rational creatures have free will and can change their minds at any time, then the devil, as a rational creature, can change his mind as well.

And yet, Origen does appear to waver on this from time to time. In Contra Celsum he confesses in at least two passages that the final dispo­sition of evil is beyond the scope of the work (see Con. Cels. IV.69 and VIII.72). We also have a strongly-worded denial from Origen that he ever taught the salvation of the devil: In a letter "To Friends in Alexandria," preserved by both Jerome and Rufinus, he claims that "Even one who has lost his mind cannot say this." 37 However, in a dialogue with the Gnos­tic Candidus, also preserved by Jerome, Origen acknowledges that it is within the realm of possibility. 38 This would seem to be the most logical and consistent position for him to take; we cannot know the context of his letter to his friends. Of the three possible options, then - the devil will not be saved; the devil may be saved; the devil will be saved - only the middle alternative preserves both the power and the goodness of God, and the freedom of the devil to refuse them.

Origen' s conception of sin harks back to the archaic sense of hamartia as "missing the mark." He sees God not as a divine judge, but as a divine teacher, whose painstaking task is to lead us out of error into truth, howev­er long it takes. The premise that all will be saved resembles the pedagogi­cal principle that no student is unteachable. Our posthumous education takes place in stages, in what Origen refers to as a "school for souls." 39 It presupposes a tiered universe - the Greek "spheres," the Christian "heav­ens." The soul starts on earth, and works its way up through the various heavens, instructed by angels in each region, until finally it progresses as

36. De Prine. m.VI.5. Note that while the "last enemy" of the scripture is technically death and not the devil, Origen clearly conflates the two. See Crouzel, "L' Apocatastase," Xll.286.

37. Quoted in Frederick W. Norris, "Universal Salvation in Origen and Maximus" in Nigel M. de S. Cameron, ed. Universalism and the Doctrine of Hell: Papers Presented at the Fourth Edinburgh Conference on Christian Dogmatics, 1991 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992), 47.

38. Ibid., 48. 39. De Prine. 11.XI.6.

58 JENNIFER L. HECKARI'

far as God. Along the way, all questions will be answered, and the soul will grow in knowledge and in truth. As it does, it will become less and less corporeal, until finally it returns to pure intellect and is subsumed in God.40 The school for souls is an academic's dream. Origen even views the opportunity to attend it as an incentive for martyrdom! 41 Moreover, those who study theology in this life are better prepared than others for the next (good news for some of us). Just as the body continues to need food after it is grown, so the intellect, even after it has been perfected, needs communion with God in order to sustain it.42

By dispensing with the juridical model of salvation in favor of a ped­agogical model, Origen offers a profound alternative to our prevailing conceptions of God. The Calvinist belief in predestination is a recipe for either complacency or despair, depending on whether or not one views oneself as among the elect. The Catholic belief in the efficacy of confession and absolution is also subject to abuse. Origen does not view salvation as a single decision, made either before birth or after death. Salvation is an ongoing process, as is damnation. It is the cumulative effect of all of our thoughts and deeds, not the consequence of a single success or fail­ure. Thus, Origen says, all of our deeds will be taken into account, "for we have not been so pure that our evil deeds are not at all imputed unto us, nor have we fallen away to such an extent that our better actions are forgotten." 43 This in itself is not as unorthodox as the time frame involved, however. We have all eternity to get it right - or wrong. Origen uses the story of Jonah, as have others, to argue that the dead can repent from the grave.44 Jean Danielou vigorously objects to this; Hans Urs Von Balthasar has, on the other hand, taken it - and the harrowing of hell - to its logi­cal conclusion.e In essence, Origen has extended the principle of free will both horizontally and vertically. Human beings possess free will, and are subject to its consequences, both before and after our lifetimes. Moreover, God grants free will not only to us, but to angels and demons as well. By placing all rational beings on the space-time continuum, Origen proposes

40. The question of whether the soul ever becomes wholly incorporeal is much debated and is beyond the scope of this paper.

41. Origen Exhortation to Martyrdom XIII. 42. De Prine. IIJ<I.7. 43. Co. Matt. XII.30. 44. Origen De Orationis XIII.3; see also Von Balthasar, 336. Jonah repents from inside

the fish, and is saved; the "sign of Jonah" which Jesus speaks of in the New Testament is his own resurrection from the dead.

45. See especially Mysterium Paschale (1970). The ancient doctrine of the harrowing of hell refers to Jesus' solidarity with- and liberation of- Satan's captives on Holy Saturday.

SYMPA1HY FOR TIil! DEVIL? ORIGEN AND TIil! BND 59

an explanation of the cosmos that is both logical and elegant and in some ways anticipates modem physics. 46

The beauty of Origen' s emphasis on free will is that it eliminates both fate and chance47 - without undercutting the authority of God. We are the masters of our fate and the captains of our souls; at the same time, God is the Lord of the universe. It is necessary that evil exist; it is not necessary that it come into the world through you, and woe to you if it does.48 At the same time, God is continually working with our decisions in order to bring good out of evil. Exclaims Origen: "How could a mere human mind have come to such a thought: that with the free will of each individual preserved, what is a work of evil for one is turned into a work of salvation for anotherf "49 In this violent world, with all evidence to the contrary, a leap of faith is indeed necessary in order to hold such a view.

The question of whether or not universal restoration violates free will continues to be a stumbling block for scholars, despite Origen' s claim that "God does not wish that the good should belong to anyone by necessity, but willingly."50 Two of Origen' s most distinguished interpreters, Crouzel and Danielou, object to apokatastasis on this ground. Crouzel: "Certainty about a universal apokatastasis would be in contradiction to the authenticity of the free will with which God had endowed mankind." 51 Danielou:

... [C]e n' est aucunement l'instauration de toutes choses dans le Christ. Comment cette instauration se concilie-t-elle avec le mystere de la li­berte humaine? ... Origene a done bien vu qu'il y avait deux realites en presence : l' amour de Dieu et la liberte de l'homme. Mais dans sa ten­tative pour les concilier, il a abouti a deux conceptions dont l'une, la necessite metaphysique de la fin du mal sauve l' amour, mais detruit la liberte, et l' autre, l' etemelle instabilite des libertes, sauve la liberte, mais detruit l'amour. 52

Though Danielou is skeptical, it is possible to preserve both God's love and our free will.. Origen firmly believes that the day will come

46. One corollary of the "Big Bang Theory" is that the universe will ultimately reach a point of maximum expansion, upon which it will slowly begin to collapse back inward, until eventually all matter is reduced to a single point of infinite density. As it was at the begin­ning, so it will be at the end: all in all.

47. De Prine., ID.V.5. 48. Co. Matt. XIlI.23. 49. Quoted in Von Balthasar, 338. 50. De Orat. XXIX.15. 51. Henri Crouzel, Origen, trans. A. S. Worrall (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark 1989), 265. 52. Jean Danielou, Origrne (Paris: La Table Ronde, 1948), 282-283.

60 JENNIFER L. HECKART

when "each individual simply by the exercise of his freedom will choose what the Logos wills and will be in that state which he has chosen." 53

Moreover, God has foreseen this from the beginning of time.54 Perhaps it is the Logos implanted in us; perhaps it is just common sense. We could choose to be eternally separated from God - but why in the name of heav­en would we?

The decisive moment comes when Christ, having put all things into subjection, then subjects himself to the Father. According to Origen, the process of putting all things into subjection involves "the salvation of those subjected and the restoration of those that have been lost."55 It will not happen in an instant. It is a long - perhaps infinitely long - process, tailored to each individual, from the holiest angel down to the very last enemy.56 He does assert, however, that at no point is our free will violated - God will not force us to be saved. God will persuade us and cajole us and threaten us if necessary, but ultimately God requires our assent. 57 In a somewhat startling passage, Origen states that Christ is not the master of those who have not voluntarily submitted to him. He desires them to submit, and will try to persuade them to, but he will not force them. 58 At the same time, Origen refuses to conclude that Jesus will give up on any­one, or declare anyone beyond redemption. As Eugene De Faye remarks, "Here, his logic is one with his charity."59

Even a cursory survey of the secondary literature demonstrates that the "Origenist Controversy" is far from over. Scholars not only disagree about the soundness of Origen' s doctrine, they disagree about what that doctrine is - and even if he has a doctrine of salvation in the first place! Thus, it is possible for one to assert that the salvation of the devil is "an essential part of his system of thought," while another asserts that it is a later extrapolation. 60 Scholars advance varying theses on every­thing from whether or not Origen espouses the transmigration of souls

53. Con. Ce1s. VIll.72. 54. As Origen puts it, our freedom, "along with everything else from creation and from

the foundation of the world ... will be known to God before it comes to be for what sort of freedom it will be." Thus, "if God takes the order for the governance of the universe from His foreknowledge, then all the more is our individual freedom useful for the ordering of the world." De Drat. VI.3.

55. De Prine. 111.V.7. 56. De Prine. 111.VI.6. 57. De Prine. 111.V.8. 58. Con. Cels. VIII.IS. 59. De Faye, 134. 60. See G. W. Butterworth, introduction to Origen, On First Principles, trans. G. W. But­

terworth (Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, 1973), xxxix and Henri Crouzel, "Origen and Origen­ism," The New Catholic Encyclopedia (1989), 772.

SYMPATHY FOR TI-IE DEVIL? ORIGEN AND TI-IE END 61

to whether or not Rufinus is a trustworthy translator. Perhaps the most telling aspect of the problem is that each scholar cites different passages in support of his or her argument. Clearly, several interrelated phenom­ena are at work here. To begin with, the vast majority of Origen's vast output has been lost. Out of an estimated one thousand works, only a handful survive. It is possible that if we possessed the complete opera, we could resolve the discrepancies concerning Origen' s understanding of apokatastasis. On the other hand, it is likely that scholars would con­tinue to pursue divergent interpretations just as fiercely. Origen was not a systematic theologian, so there are gaps and contradictions in his thought. Nor did he claim to have all the answers, but always remained open to new possibilities. This is his strength, but it is also his weakness; Crouzel attributes Origen's "malheurs posthumes" primarily to this lack of precision. 61 At the same time, Kelly points out that one cannot fairly be deemed a heretic apart from an established orthodoxy, which would not arise until after the Council of Nicaea. 62

Having discussed Origen' s theory of apokatastasis - what it is, and what it is not - I turn now to the question of whether or not the church to­day should hold it. There are a number of reasons why I believe it should. In the first place, with the rise of pluralism, the Christian view of salva­tion is often the major obstacle to interfaith dialogue. Origen' s view can provide a way to talk about salvation without either eliminating Christ from the equation, or immediately alienating the non-Christian. Simul­taneously, with the rise of fundamentalism, the fear of relativism often leads to paralysis. The form of Origen's thought on salvation - its flex­ibility, its willingness to admit that no one knows the mind of God, not even the theologian - along with its content, provides a kind of antidote. In the second place, at a time when the plight of the third world and the ecological crisis are at the top of the church's agenda, apokatastasis pro­vides a crucial reminder that the entire creation, human and non-human, is interconnected, and that there is no such thing as individual salvation. In the third place, the emphasis on the process of restoration, rather than on its end, increases (or should) our sense of responsibility concerning every

61. Henri Crouzel, "L' Apocatastase Chez Origene." Les Fins Dernieres Selon Origene (Brookfield, VT: Variorum, 1990), XII.283. Crouzel points out, however, that none of the Anti­Nicene Fathers, with the possible exception of Tertullian, concerned themselves much with the definition of doctrine - that only became necessary with the rise of the Arian heresy, and the passing of the church into state control.

62. David M. Kelly, "Origen: Heretic or Victim? The 'Apokatastasis' Revisited," The Patristic and Byzantine Review 18-19 (2000-2001): 274.

62 )BNNlFBR L. HECKARJ'

decision we make and action we take in the course of our days. 63 Finally, and most importantly, apokatastasis seems to me to be the only theory of salvation worthy of God's ultimate sacrifice.

There is no question that God will ultimately triumph over sin and death - the finite cannot conquer the infinite, and there is no place for sin and death in the Kingdom. As Origen puts it, "the end of all things is the elimination of evil." 64 The only question is whether evil will be destroyed, as the vast majority of Christians continues to believe, or whether it will be converted, as Origen (at least most days!) seems to think. The question then becomes: Does the ultimate triumph consist in killing a defector, or does it consist in winning him back? God will not destroy God's own cre­ation, and "those things which were made in order to exist cannot cease to exist." 65 They can be transformed, but they cannot perish. 66 We cannot know whether or not the devil will accept God's offer of salvation, but we can be fairly sure that God will tender it. God's mercy ultimately trumps God's justice. And who could refuse God's mercy? The devil may be the most fallen of all creatures - as fallen as it is possible to be - but as a crea­ture he must still bear, somewhere deep inside, that longing for God that is built into each one of us at our creation. However he may rage against it and deny it, if he is ontologically one of us - if he came from God - then he has the same homing device that we all do. In his Commentary on John, Origen remarks that "the Logos is present in the nature of reasonable be­ings as such."67 The devil, as we know, is one of them and, as Origen re­peatedly emphasizes, Christ died for all reasonable beings. 68

I believe that Origen was onto something. I find his conception of restoration to be worthy of God, and his conception of God to be worthy of belief. Moreover, his view of the cosmos, and of our place in it, gives human beings an agency that we are too often denied. Every thing we do matters. God wants to save us, but cannot, without our consent. However, God's love is so great that God is willing to spend all eternity trying to win our consent. "See, I have placed before you death and life. Choose life, that you may live" (Deuteronomy 30:19). But don't just choose life, says

63 The question as to whether apokatastasis is satisfactory from the point of view of the victims of earthly injustice requires a separate paper. I will just note here that the debate over retributive versus restorative justice is highly relevant, and in many ways mirrors the debate over Origen's cosmology.

64 Quoted in Von Balthasar, 342. 65lbid. 66 Again, Origen anticipates modern physics - matter/ energy cannot be created or

destroyed, it can only change form. 67 Co. John, 11.9; emphasis mine. 68 See Von Balthasar, 147.

SYMPATHY FOR THE DEVIL? ORIGEN AND THE END 63

Origen. Choose it over and over again. Choose it every minute of every day. And of course you won't, and it may feel like you're taking two steps forward and one step back, but you'll get there eventually. In God's own time, we all will.

Book Reviews

Bound and Free: A Theologian's Journey, by Douglas John Hall. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005. Pp. 168.

What is the vocation of a theologian? What is it to be called not only to hear, but to try to understand the Christian message? With intimate honesty, Bound and Free: A Theologian's Journey dives deeply into these questions. Through this text, Douglas John Hall guides the reader on an autobio­graphical and theological journey through a lifetime of experience as a per­son called to the vocation of theology. It is a book that speaks with integ­rity and simplicity, theological force and delightful personality. It reflects glimpses of the source of all hope and recognizes the presence and power of grace throughout life. It purposefully and effectively unites theological spirit and autobiographical flesh, and in doing so opens a window into the teaching office of the church, into the vocation of a theologian.

"Theology ... demands free people" (18). This quotation of K. Barth introduces Hall's discussion of the theologian as both "bound" and "free." In distinction from a common conception of freedom, a theologian's free­dom exists in relationship with accountability to the past and responsi­bility to the present and future. A theologian's freedom is not the easy freedom of solitary individuals, but the freedom of a person in the midst of and belonging to an ongoing community, one stretching back in time to (and beyond) the decisive events in the lifespan of Christ and forward through the often grim realities of the present and on toward the future. The theologian as bound is accountable to her tradition; the theologian as bound is responsible to the future for encountering fully and deeply the reality of the present. It is precisely in this being "bound" however that the theologian as "free" gains full meaning. The Christian tradition leads to freedom. Tradition requires the theologian to free herself to encounter reality creatively and deeply and to teach with relevance and truth. Hall was once asked on a flight what a theologian does. He answered that the

64

BOOK REVIEWS 65

theologian thinks about everything all the time. The vocation of a theolo­gian "is to open oneself - or, more accurately, to find oneself being opened - to everything" (26).

The second and most substantial chapter of the book is an autobiogra­phy of Hall's theological journey. Originally formed as three lectures for clergy of the ELCA, this chapter travels from his matriculation in 1953 at Union Theological Seminary through his years of self-claimed "appren­ticeship" during the chaotic but euphoric sixties and seventies to where Hall places himself now. This place is with a theology of the cross, teach­able in a room with a young student dying of leukemia or in a world ravaged by violence, empire, ecological disaster and poverty. Hall tells of finding this place in his kairotic encounter with J. Moltmann's The Theol­ogy of Hope, a book which illumined the importance of theologia crucis as the foundational spirit of the theologian's vocation. Christian hope must never be confused with Enlightenment optimism. Invoking the image of R. Niebuhr on the cover of Time in 1948 with the heading "Man's Story Is Not a Success Story," Hall cautions that although society may want final­ity, complete religious victory, and a theology of glory, our current politi­cal and social context reminds us that we remain in Golgotha under the cross, and thus so must theology.

In a look toward the future, Hall formulates a strong programmatic proposal for theology formed under the cross. He offers that theology must view the disestablishment of Western Christianity as an opportu­nity for transformation, should approach world religions with a spirit of "hospitable Christianity," and might surprise itself by finding in the par­ticularity of the suffering and victorious Jesus Christ a true opportunity for dialogue and solidarity across faiths. Ecologically, theology needs to recognize the human vocation as the role of steward of all creation. And finally, in order to speak within a culture that exhibits in its proclivity for fundamentalism a terror of relativity and incertitude, theology must wres­tle in new ways with the inseparable dialectic of faith and doubt. This, for Hall, will entail the recovery of a "thinking faith."

The last three chapters round out what the first two began. The third chapter continues Hall's programmatic vision with many of the same themes but this time shifting the perspective to the communal vocation of Protestantism. This vocation finds its path in taking seriously classical Protestant traditipns related to being "stewards of the mysteries of God." This leads to his final two meditations on the reality of doing theology. The mere five pages comprising the fourth chapter ask how theologians are to speak of God when words are simply incapable of grasping God.

66 BOOKRBVIBWS

Words do become cheap, and it is true that at times no more is possible than silence, but God's Word continues to be heard. God's Word calls the theologian and offers the courage to engage in her task of speaking even faint whispers of joyful witness. In the final six pages of the book this task is shown to be "going 'right deep down into life."'

Bound and Free is a poignant reflection on the vocation of a theologian. It is human in more than its autobiographical elements, moving organi­cally through the theological wisdom of Luther, Tillich, Niebuhr, Barth, Moltmann and others. Its most precious offering is the honest and theo­logically astute examination of a life appointed by God to this particular ministry of the church. For individuals discerning or engaging in a theo­logical vocation, Hall's honest self-reflection will echo, then resonate, and finally offer light to illumine theological paths. While Hall has included several strong programmatic elements for the future of theology, these el­ements remain necessarily overshadowed by the foundational question: Whatis a theological vocation?

Hannah Hofheinz Union Theological Seminary, New York

Just Love: A Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics, by Margaret A. Farley. New York, NY: Continuum. Pp. xiii + 322.

Does Christian ethics have anything to do with sexual and romantic love? How can we discuss sexual love within our religious traditions as a way of enhancing our humanity? In Just Love, Margaret Farley invites us to contemplate human sexuality and loving relationships with others, offering a justice-oriented framework for Christian sexual ethics based on a theological understanding of human beings as sexual beings.

Beginning with an historical overview of sexual ethics in the West (Chapter 2), Farley explores the sexual ethics of various cultures and religions (Chapter 3). Farley is keenly aware of the impossibility of addressing a universal ethic of sexuality, although her historical and cross­cultural analysis of sexual ethics shows that constructive criticism is useful in understanding ourselves and others. Farley then analyzes various understandings of the human body, gender, love, desire and sexuality, all

BOOK REVIEWS 67

of which are inseparable from the concrete reality of being human. Farley suggests the possibility of wholeness and encounter with God through a sexuality shaped by love (Chapter 4).

Before proposing a framework for Christian sexual ethics, Farley invites the reader into preliminary considerations, namely, normative questions for a sexual ethic. What is the connection between sexuality and justice? Farley's reading of Paul Ricoeur's The Symbolism of Evil shows that sexuality should be considered in the realm of the ethical. She builds upon foundations of feminist sexual ethics that stress the role of justice in shaping one's sexual identity and activity. Theological ideas about sexual ethics are drawn from scripture, tradition, secular disciplines of knowledge, and contemporary experiences, and lead ultimately to the criterion for a good, just, and true love: the concrete reality of the beloved (Chapter 5).

Finally, Just Love presents the contours of a Christian sexual ethics in which justice is central (Chapter 6). First, Farley states that justice entails a basic ethical principle: Persons and groups of persons ought to be affirmed according to their concrete reality, actual, and potential (209). Then she offers a framework for sexual ethics based on norms of justice which "derive from the concrete reality of persons and are focused on respect for their autonomy and relationality. This is to respect persons as ends in themselves" (231). The components of sexual justice include doing no unjust harm, the free consent of partners, mutuality, equality, commitment, fruitfulness (not simply in the sense of child-bearing but also in the sense of encouraging the wholeness of both lover and beloved), and social justice. These foundational components respect the concrete reality of persons in both their autonomy and their relationality, while the element of social justice moves beyond the relationship between individuals and views persons as sexual beings in society. In the last chapter of Just Love, through the lens of her framework, Farley examines concrete social issues such as marriage, same-sex relationships, divorce, and remarriage.

Those who have attended Margaret Farley's lectures or presentations may feel her presence on every page of Just Love - deep compassion, clear reasoning, carefully drawn conclusions, and the centrality of justice. She does not deride the opinions of others regarding their own sexuality and sexual morality. Rather, she challenges us to reconsider our perceptions of sexuality and sexual ethics, regardless of where we place ourselves on the conservative-liberal continuum. Most importantly, at the heart of Farley's framework is the question of what it means to be human: "per­sons are of unconditional value, ends in themselves, because they are cre­ated so and loved so by God" (212). This claim is not abstract; Farley

68 BOOK REVIEWS

concretizes what it means to treat persons as ends in themselves within the realm of human sexuality. Nor is Farley's Christian sexual ethic cold to the sensitivities of human feelings and sufferings but understands hu­man emotions. In addition, she does not simply ask us to do good to others, but also to ourselves.

This book is also a model for doing Christian ethics with regard to a complicated subject matter such as sexuality. Farley's normative conclu­sions are drawn from sensitive analyses of the reality of human sexuality, as well as from moral discourses on the subject. Although she keeps a non-judgmental attitude toward scripture, tradition, secular disciplines, and contemporary experiences as resources for Christian sexual ethics, Farley is not afraid to criticize and challenge these sources in terms of justice. Her methodology includes recognizing those who have been marginalized in Christian sexual ethics and challenging all of us (main­stream and marginalized alike) to make our loving and sexual relation­ships more just.

Some important questions may be raised by the lack of economic and class considerations in regard to sexual ethics. Given the fact that many people continue their marriages and relationships solely for economic rea­sons, how do we understand justice when the breaking of unjust marriages or relationships threatens some people's physical survival? In the contem­porary world, money destroys many relationships and threatens the treat­ment of a person as an end. With these considerations in mind, would Farley's framework for Christian sexual ethics be as powerful to the poor as it might be to white middle class Americans? A discourse on just sex­love seems fragile to those who are deprived of basic economic needs.

While Farley structures her argument to allow some readers to focus on Chapters 1 and 6, it is worth reading all of Just Love for the presentation of Farley's rationality as well as her compassionate spirituality. Thanks to Farley's work, we have an ethical guidepost for the contemplation of hu­man sexuality and the building of a more just society.

Keun-joo Christine Pae Union Theological Seminary, New York

BOOK REVIEWS 69

Psychotherapy as Religion: The Civil Divine in America, by William M. Ep­stein. Reno and Las Vegas: University of Nevada Press, 2006. Pp. xv + 271.

In Psychotherapy as Religion: The Civil Divine in America, William M. Epstein denounces psychotherapy as a pseudo-science and relegates it to the status of religion. He follows a consistent approach throughout the book. He introduces a topic, presents a quantity of research on that topic, and then explains how the research is faulty; hence the applicability of psychotherapy to that topic is invalid.

Epstein presents first several psychological illnesses ("Depression," "Anxiety," "Addiction," and then "Eating Disorders, Juvenile Violence, Group Treatments, and Other Problems"). He then examines some of the standardized measurement guides used in the research ("A Cacophony of Instruments by the Gentlemen-in-Waiting"), and at the primary tool of psychotherapy, the therapeutic relationship between therapist and patient ("Magic, Bias, and Social Role"). He concludes with three chapters in which he directly compares a particular theory with a "religious" theory ("Psychodynamic Psychotherapy" with Theosophy, "Be­havioral Therapy: The Owl and the Mule" which is sort of a shamanistic carrot­and-stick approach, and finally "Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy as Christian Sci­ence"). The book finishes with a section entitled "Hope without Faith" in which Epstein summarizes his book: "The principal lesson of psychotherapy is that it has failed" (230).

On the face of it, his argument is compelling. When one applies a critical hermeneutic, however, many questions arise.

His underlying hypothesis seems to be that happiness can be measured objectively, a perspective that underscores his continued dissatisfaction with the reliance of many studies on the participants self-reporting their feelings. He wor­ries that people may not tell the truth because they would rather please the re­searcher than give an honest statement. While this may be true, is there any more valid way of learning someone's emotional state? Even if various body chemis­tries are examined, there is no direct universal correlation between hormones and specific emotional states. People have different pain thresholds; is it not credible there should be different emotional thresholds?

His primary argument is that there is no clinical evidence supporting the claim that psychotherapy has benefited patients. For him the only valid form of evidence would be the results of studies following the model of scientific objec­tivity. It is interesting to note that when he lists the various components necessary for genuine objectivity, he does not mention ethics. A human is not a lab rat. Can a researcher ethically refuse even potentially beneficial treatment to a patient be­cause the test is supposed to be random?

An additional barrier to objectivity is the bias of researchers. They pick the subjects, they ignore the negative results, they gloss over the messy

70 BOOK REVIEWS

details. However, the same could be said for Epstein. He admits his choice of research materials is not exhaustive but he offers no criteria for why he has cho­sen some studies over others. It is more than likely that he chose those studies which support his thesis. He makes unfounded deductions from the data with no explanation, and seems to believe that the reader should accept his conclu­sions uncritically.

As one reads the book, one wonders what Epstein's own agenda actu­ally is. Because he is a professor of Social Work at the University of Nevada, one would naturally presume that his motive is somehow related to his profes­sion. And there does seem to be a continual dissatisfaction with the idea that psychotherapy is focused on the health of the individual without looking at underlying social ills. Indeed, in his dismissal of psychotherapy as a science and "demotion" to the status of a religion, we may be getting closer to the actual core of the book.

Epstein uses the word "religion" in such a way that it seems to serve a social function without showing any real understanding of its practice and ben­efits. He seems to be unaware that there are practicing Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, etc. in the United States. His only awareness of religion in this country seems to be limited to the Christianity he has read about in textbooks.

But Epstein's main concern is clearly with the symptom in the American psyche he labels "heroic individualism," which he regards as one of the major problems confronting our culture today. He defines it as a "dogma of extreme personal responsibility" (130). He suggests that this emphasis on the ability of the individual to overcome any social situation is a national characteristic of"spiritual and emotional transcendence" that Americans regard as "proof of [their] chosen­ness, divine favor, and both national and personal exceptionalism." And the prob­lem he has with psychotherapy is that it seems both to feed into and out of this cultural attribute.

It is a shame that Epstein raises important questions about research and psychotherapy and then essentially falls victim to the same failings he criticizes in the research he examines. Examination of the white, middle-class, Europe­an emphasis of classic psychotherapeutic and developmental theories would be worth-while. Research in psychotherapy is very difficult and attempts to use the scientific method in experiments are challenging. Suggestions on how to improve the rigor of the research would be more beneficial than Epstein's potshots. How­ever, perhaps the greatest failing of this work is that there is no examination of the possibilities and flaws in Epstein's own approach, but merely the substitution of one dogma for another.

Not proving that something works is not the same thing as proving that it does not work. There may be all of the flaws in the research cited by Epstein. That does not mean that psychotherapy is the failure Epstein claims. Many people

BOOK REVIEWS 71

believe they are happier because of their therapy. Is their happiness invalid be­cause research does not prove that it happened?

William F. Smith Fordham University, New York

Transforming Spirituality: Integrating Theology and Psychology, by F. LeRon Shults and Steven J. Sandage. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006. Pp. xxxvi + 304.

In this rich interdisciplinary endeavor, the murky divide between theology and psychology is negotiated with sophistication and skill. In Transforming Spirituality, the reader is offered a complex and searching analysis of spirituality within a Christian and psychological context. The first half, written by Christian theologian LeRon Shults, attempts to revi­talize a theological understanding of Christian spirituality. His intention is twofold: to transform the reader's understanding of spirituality grounded in Christian theology, and perhaps more importantly, to identify spiritual processes that are inherently transformative. He tackles Trinitarian doc­trine alongside pneumatology, faith, and justice as it is modeled in the life of Christ. His writing is full of scholarly insight and a passionate discus­sion of a spirituality rooted in relationality. This is the book's heart - its ability to bring a substantial understanding of spirituality solidly into the relational realm. Any seminarian struggling with the psychological nu­ance of Christian doctrine would be well-served by Shults' s methodical approach to the relational overtones in theology. While his writing is at times circuitous, and filled with references to what he identifies as second­ary in distinction from his primary message, he nonetheless offers a highly topical analysis of Christian theology that successfully infuses spirituality with its rightful complexity.

Psychologist Steven Sandage authors the second half of Transforming Spirituality. While the language, style, and context are in clear contrast to the theological musing of the first half, it continues the themes that give the book its meaning and consistency. Like Shults, Sandage aims at constructing a relational model of spirituality. Through clinical case stud­ies and a lucid exploration of germane psychoanalytic concepts, Sandage brings the reader's attention to spirituality as the means through which

72 BOOK REVIEWS

we relate to the sacred, to self, and to others. For clinicians and students of psychology and religion, this is a wonderfully lively and caring analysis. He presents poignant and culturally relevant explorations of interperson­al relationships that offer insight into the psychological dynamics at play in one's relationship to religious belief and practice. Through his keen and compassionate approach, the book comes alive in a trenchant exploration of attachment theory as it is applied to spirituality. He explores divergent constructs of attachment and differentiation theory, the psychoanalytic concept of narcissism and grandiosity, and the psychological prerequisites for cultivating a mature spirituality that strengthens rather than sabotages interpersonal relationship.

Transforming Spirituality comes out at a time when the tendency to divorce spirituality from religion has become problematic and divisive. Shults and Sandage are quick to acknowledge the growing number of Americans who define themselves as spiritual, but not religious. Simi­larly acknowledged are those who respond with a knee-jerk aversion to the concept of spirituality as somehow bypassing the inherent depth and moral challenges posed by religious doctrine. Transforming Spirituality strikes a balance in its refreshing and three-dimensional exploration of spirituality. This book asks its readers to explore anew issues of justice born out of Christian spirituality, and models a genuine capacity to envi­sion spirituality that is dynamic, relational, and rooted in alterity. While the book is decidedly Christian in its theology, it is useful for clinicians and religious scholars across faith traditions.

The conversation between psychology and religion is growing. But it is a slow and occasionally unfriendly exchange. For readers interested in this complex integration of theoretical paradigms, there remains a space to be filled with literature that explores the dialectical imprint of psychol­ogy and theology. To that end, Shults and Sandage have offered an im­portant text to psychologists and mental health providers attempting to understand the subtle impact of spiritual beliefs and practice on psychic structure. Similarly, theologians will be well served by this illuminating exploration of psychological processes that mediate spiritual and religious belief. Transforming Spirituality brings a new and helpful perspective to this integration, inviting seminarians, clinicians, and clergy to reflect on spirituality as a transformative agent in our relationships to one another and to the sacred.

Pilar Jennings Union Theological Seminary, New York

About the Contributors

LAURA D' ANGEID 1s AN M.D1v CANDIDA'IE AT UNION THEOIOGICAL SEMINARY,

WHO HAS CDNCENIRA'IED HERS1UDIES IN PSYOilA'IRY AND REIIGION. SHE IS A FREE­

LANCE WRI'IER WHO HAS CDN'IRIB U'IED 'IO MANY NATIONAL MAGAZINES INOIJ"DING

Good Housekeeping, Parenting, Parents, American Baby, Brain,Child, Parade Publications' react, Scholastic, and online publications such as ivillage.com and healthykids.com. Her work has appeared in the academic journal, the Justice System Journal, and she is the author of three books: The FBI's Most Wanted (Chelsea House, 1997), Hate Crimes (Chelsea House, 1998) and UFOs: Fact or Fiction? (Scholastic Inc., 1999). Following graduation, she plans to pursue psychoanalytic training.

Erin E. Fl erring is a third-year Master of Divinity student at Union Theo­logical Seminary whose focus is Hebrew Bible. In the fall, she will join the Department of Near Eastern Studies at Johns Hopkins University to pursue a Ph.D. in Hebrew Bible. She hopes to teach and write in a university setting.

Jennifer Heckart is a 3rd year Ph.D. student at Union Theological Semi­nary. She grew up in New York City, and graduated from Princeton Uni­versity in 1998, with a B.A. in Religion. After exploring alternative voca­tions in ministry and activism, she returned to school and received her M.Div. from Union in 2004. Her primary area of research is the intersec­tion between liberation theology and pacifism, best expressed in modern communities of resistance, but she continues to nourish a deep interest in patristics. She wrote the preceding paper in the spring of 2002; it has been slightly modified for publication.

Hannah Hofheinz is a senior Master of Divinity candidate at Union Theo­logical Seminary striving to understand and pursue her calling to a life as

73

74 ABOUT TifE CONTRIBU'IORS

a systematic theologian. Next fall, she will continue her education at the Th.D. program at Harvard Divinity School.

Pilar Jennings is a psychotherapist in training, currently pursuing doc­toral studies in Religion and Psychiatry at Union Theological Seminary. Prior to her current training, she earned a bachelor's in interdisciplinary writing at Barnard College, and went on to study illness narratives at Co­lumbia University where she earned a master's degree in medical anthro­pology. She has been practicing Vipassana meditation for the past twenty five years and is interested in the clinical applications of Eastern spiritual practice in psychoanalysis.

Keun-joo Christine Pae is currently a doctoral student in Christian Ethics at Union Theological Seminary. She is also a Research and Teaching Fel­low of the Ecologies of Learning Project at New York Theological Semi­nary, and Youth Pastor at St. Peter's Korean Episcopal Church at North Bergen, NJ.

Matthew J. Pereira is a S.T.M. candidate studying Church History and Theology at Union Theological Seminary. He holds the M. Div. degree from Fuller Theological Seminary, and is a candidate for ordination in the Presbyterian Church USA [PCUSA]. His primary research interests are Early Church and Reformation History.

WilliamF. Snith is a 2005 Master of Divinity graduate of Union Theologi­cal Seminary. He is currently working as the Protestant Chaplain at the Jewish Home & Hospital, Bronx Division. He is also at Fordham Univer­sity pursuing an M.A. in Mental Health Counseling with an eye toward Pastoral Counseling; his student placement is counseling in a substance abuse clinic in the East Bronx.