Fujimoto, Mitsuru. Translated by Cynthia Dufty. "The Black Curtain of Fundamentalism -- An Idea from Theological Anthropology" (排他主義という黒幕 -- 神学的人間論からの考察). Japan Evangelical Association Theological Commission Pamphlet 6 (May 2006): 37-48.
Link to pages: [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 4 ] [ 5 ]
II. THE MECHANISM OF EXCLUSION8
II.A. From Individual Distinctiveness to Exclusion
The German theologian Pannenberg writes that it is in the process of establishing our identity as humans that the seed of sin is sown. As we construct ourselves, our instinctive will to be ourselves is in itself something healthy, but when the seed of sin is sown in the midst of this, we face the tendency for the self to “become the infinite basis and reference point for all objects, thus usurping the place of God.”9 In these circumstances, humans, in order to assert their selves, establish boundaries, judge the whole of reality from the point of view of the self, and try to use “everything” as a means of asserting the self.10
As far as the mechanism by which individual distinctiveness moves to the exclusion principle, the above applies also to social systems. When we try to construct a social group with individual distinctiveness, we inevitably try to distinguish ourselves from the other. Thinking about social groups, for example, if members wear the same uniform, sing the same song, have the same badge attached, and live according to the same rules, values and principles, then it can be said that to the extent these things are unique and thoroughly implemented, the group's unity is solid. Through doing this, in order for group consciousness to be born, it is necessary to be able to distinguish insiders and outsiders. Because of this, sooner or later antagonism or enmity towards the other develops.
To put it simply, this is a “We” versus “They” picture. Once, Jesus' disciples, seeing a man who was driving out evil spirits through the name of Jesus but was not “one of us”, rebuked him and told him to stop (Mark 9:38). In this story we can see that they had a strong distinctive “in-group” sense and that this had already moved to a condition of self-righteousness.
It is not a difficult thing for group consciousness and distinctiveness to become exclusiveness. It is a matter of building a wall between self and others, maintaining your boundaries and making yourself master of those boundaries. The world of the other is viewed from within one's own demarcated world. You can only look at the other's world from your own point of view and according to your own demarcated value system, sitting in judgment of the whole outside world. Even if a clash doesn't break out with the other's boundaries, just through stubbornly holding to one's own boundaries, a situation of exclusion has already arisen. Because your own boundaries are important, towards the other, especially the other who exists far away and towards the rest of the world, you can't help but having unconcern. However, on the other hand, if the other begins to invade our boundaries, all at once we become aggressive. This is the exclusion principle.11
II.B. Exclusion as Seen in Cain
Regarding this mechanism of exclusion, there is something we can learn from the story of Cain and Abel in Genesis 4. Cain and Abel are born of the same parents; eventually Cain becomes a tiller of the soil, and Abel a keeper of the sheep. When both bring a sacrifice, God accepts the sacrifice of Abel, who brought the best part of the best animals (firstlings) but he did not look on the sacrifice of Cain. Because his sacrifice is refused, Cain's pride is wounded; he feels humiliated and begins to nurture a fierce jealousy and anger towards Abel. Instead of looking up to God, his face falls. Shutting his ears to God's advice, refusing to change himself, he attacks and kills his brother Abel.
Cain, who couldn't change God's decision and moreover refused to change himself, committed the ultimate act of exclusion of erasing Abel's existence. The essence of his exclusionary act was an egotism of not recognizing his own sin, but obstinately shutting himself up in his own righteousness, losing his way and, at last erasing the other to establish himself. Even when God asked Cain, “Where is your brother?” he said, “I am not my brother's keeper,” severing any relationship with the other. God gave him the sentence that he would become “a fugitive wandering about the earth” but for Cain who had cut his relationship to his surroundings, this was already his way of living. An egotistic way of living is to be detached from the world around one and to close one's ears to one's environment. An example of people who prioritize themselves were those who traveling to Jericho, even though they saw an injured man lying in the road, disliking involvement with the other, passed by on the side of the road. Another are those who have a weak and dying person like Lazarus in front of their own house, but banish any thought of them to a corner of their mind to the point where their existence is completely forgotten. This too again is one form of the exclusion principle. At the root of a lack of concern for others is a human egotism that monopolizes one's world with concern for oneself and will not make any place for others.
The spirit of exclusion is the string puller behind “fundamentalism”. For example although “principles” are correct, suddenly without notice, if attention is not paid to the exclusivism lurking behind them, an exclusivistic fundamentalism comes about. This danger is similar to the fact that while we affirm that the Law is “holy, righteous and good” (Romans 7:12), when sin enters the situation, legalism can overcome us. If we don't pay attention to the exclusivism that creeps in behind a principle, when staking a claim on a certain truth (one piece of the whole truth), we persistently build up our own world and then don't allow other truths entry into that world. Therefore the fundamentalist evades the complexity of reality and lives according to one brand of fundamentalism. Not admitting his own sin, he hides his face from a realistic identification and frantically clings to his own fundamental truth. Not admitting that other truths exist in this world, we lose our way. Whether we shut ourselves up in our own castle, or we aggressively try to bring other truths into submission, whichever path we choose, we are stuck with a “We versus Them” type oppositional configuration in a world of exile described in the Bible as “East of Eden.”12
**********
8 Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness and Reconciliation (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996) 57-98.
9 Wolfhart Pannenberg, Systematic Theology, trans. By G. W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991) II, 260ff.
10 Pannenberg, Theological Anthropology, trans. By J. O'Conell (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1985) 85.
11 In Volf's work in note 8, exclusion is analyzed as attitude towards the other that can be expressed in practices of assimilation, domination, abandonment or indifference. Op.cit. 72-78.
12 Old Testament scholar Westman, argues that just as all human beings are Adam and Eve, proposing that each human being is Cain and Abel explains the universality of this story for humanity.
Publications
