OCTOBER 2006

ISSUE 8 - ISSN 1448 - 6326

"BEING CHILDREN OF ABRAHAM TODAY"

PATRICK J. McINERNEY

Abstract

What does it mean to be a child of Abraham? The core issue of Abrahamic identity is the call to otherness or, in theological terms, the mystery of divine election. Rather than being a call to exclusive privilege, it is primarily a call to service. The author explores this call through the use of four identifiers, namely, exodus, openness, inclusiveness and sacrifice. (Editor)

Introduction

I congratulate the Christian Brothers for remembering their colleague Br. Paul Noonan by holding these annual “Conversations” in his memory.  I congratulate them in particular for proposing “Being Children of Abraham Today” for tonight’s conversation.  As recent events have shown, there is hardly a more important topic in today’s world.  I thank Br Tim Moloney for inviting me to take part in this conversation.

Preliminaries

First, some brief comments on covenant.  Most if not all of us are familiar with God’s thrice-repeated covenant with Abraham and Sarah through the descendants of Isaac (see Gen 17:15-17, 19; Gen 18:10-15 and Gen 21:12), and also with the Christian confession of a New Covenant in Jesus Christ - which scripture[1], Vatican II[2] and the teaching of John Paul II[3] clearly affirm does not involve any repudiation of the older Israelite covenant.

But, since it is often overlooked, I note that the Bible also three times records a covenant with the descendants of Ishmael:

·         once, in response to the distressed plight of the fleeing, pregnant mother, Hagar, in Gen 16:10-12;

·         once, in response to the pleas of the father, Abraham, in Gen 17: 18, 20; and

·         once, in response to the cries of the boy himself when he was on the point of dying from thirst in Gen 21:17-18.

So is it not possible that the Muslims too are the inheritors of a biblical covenant through Ishmael? 

Second, something from my research that was a complete surprise to me and will probably surprise most of you too:  after the account of Sarah’s death and burial (cf Gen 23:1-20), two chapters later we read: “Abraham took another wife, whose name was Keturah,” and lists their sons, Zimran, Jokshan, Dedan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah, and their sons after them (cf Gen 25:1).[4]  Whether the account is historical or mythical, this further line of descendants suggests that “Being Children of Abraham” is not restricted to Jews, Muslims and Christians only, but is much broader and more inclusive than we usually presume. 

Aside:  If the descendants of Abraham through Keturah are not the immediate beneficiaries of an express scriptural covenant, still they are the inheritors of the even more ancient Noahide covenant with all creation in Genesis 9:9-17. 

Children of Abraham

The identification Children of Abraham supposes children of different parentage.  We are the children of Abraham (through Sarah, Jesus Christ, Hagar and perhaps Keturah); and there are children of different genealogies i.e. the different religious, sapiential and cultural traditions of Asia, Africa, and Latin American.  For the sake of simplicity, I name the various alternatives inclusively as “society”. 

So we have two basic family trees:[5]

1. the children of Abraham
2. the children of “society”

I am not suggesting conflict between “us” and “them”, the children of Abraham versus the children of “society”.  Also, within the children of Abraham there are significant differences, the difference of the Jewish, Christian and Muslim perspectives represented here tonight, just as there are significant differences among the various peoples that make up “society”.

But I am suggesting that the core issue of Abrahamic identity is our otherness – we are called, not to conform to society, not to be the same, but to be different.  Which begs the question – in what way?

My answer is that what distinguishes Abraham (and his children) from “society” is faith – and acting accordingly.  It is for his originating faith that our three traditions honor him, Jews calling him “father”, Muslims calling him Khalīl Allāh (Friend of God), and the first Eucharistic Prayer calling him “our father in faith.”

But it is not just generic faith in God, which presumably he shared with his contemporaries, and which many others in society today may share.  With Abraham there comes a decisive break from society, a personal particularity.  The difference is his faith in who God is for him, a God Who will prosper him in ways beyond human possibility.

In traditional theological terms it is the mystery of divine election – being chosen by God.  But what does that mean?  Chosen for exclusive privilege?  Or chosen for service that includes everybody? 

The original command to Abraham clearly indicates the latter: “you will be a blessing ... and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” (Gen 12:2-3).  And it is confirmed in the covenant promise: “by your offspring shall all the nations of the earth gain blessing for themselves.” (Gen 22:18)[6] 

But how are the children of Abraham a blessing for society? 

The Christian position is that it is not just a matter of biological descent. 

• John the Baptist warns:  “Do not presume to say to yourselves, "We have Abraham as our ancestor'; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham.” (Mt 3:9, see also Lk 3:8). 
• There is also the dispute in John’s Gospel where in reply to the people’s genealogical claim that “"Abraham is our father," Jesus says to them, "If you were Abraham's children, you would be doing what Abraham did …” (Jn 8:39)

So what exactly is it that Abraham did?  And what is that we are to do to merit the title “children of Abraham”?  What is it that distinguishes Abrahamic faith from generic faith and makes him (and us) other than the rest of society?

I propose four identifiers:

1. Exodus
2. Openness
3. Inclusiveness
4. Sacrifice

1.         Exodus

My first identifier of the otherness of Abrahamic faith is exodus. 

In our first encounter with Abraham in Genesis we read “Now the Lord said to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you …” (Gen 12:1) 

And when God’s address is finished:  “So Abram went, as the Lord had told him …” (Gen 12:4, see also Heb 11:8[7])

Aside:  The command and immediate response are virtually identical with the centurion’s recognition of Jesus’ transparent authority:  “For I also am a man under authority, with soldiers under me; and I say to one, "Go,' and he goes, and to another, "Come,' and he comes, and to my slave, "Do this,' and the slave does it."” (Mt 8:9, also Lk 7:8)

In terms of otherness, his going is an exodus from his own society.  It is not just leaving country, parents, family, and land, but it is leaving the normal and natural human and societal expectations of his future, and setting off for a new and different future, an unknown future, a future that is not a human product but given by a provident God. 

Henceforth for Abraham (and his descendants) “the future ain’t what it used to be.”[8] 

2.         Openness

My second identifier of the otherness of Abrahamic faith is closely related to the first.  It is his radical openness to receive what God has promised, even though it turns his world upside-down. 

Two examples of Abraham’s openness are his going out into the unknown future referred to above, and his trust in God’s promise of an heir (Gen 12:7, 13:15-16, 15:4-5, 17:16, 18:10).  Neither promise was within normal human expectations.  In fact, the latter was so far beyond human expectations that when the promise was made Abraham “fell on his face and laughed” (cf Genesis 17:17), as did Sarah (cf Gen 18:12).

Yet despite the comic absurdity, the biological impossibility of God’s promise, Gen 15:6 states simply:  “And he [Abraham] believed the Lord; and the Lord reckoned it to him as righteousness.”[9] [10]

3.         Inclusiveness

My third identifier of the otherness of Abrahamic faith is inclusiveness. 

After the confirmation of the covenant and the heir (Gen 18:1-15) God chooses Abraham to do righteousness and justice (Gen 18:19), and then shares with him His intention to investigate the outcry against Sodom.  Abraham now tests God to see if God will do righteousness, if God will do justice. 

Most of you are familiar with the account of Abraham’s intercession before God, his style of bargaining still common in the Middle East to this day, reducing the ‘quorum’ of righteous to spare Sodom from destruction from 50, to 45, to 40, to 30, to 20, and finally to 10. 

But what is not so common in our world is Abraham’s insistence on justice. 

"Will you indeed sweep away the righteous with the wicked?  Far be it from you to do such a thing, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked!  Far be that from you!  Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?" (Gen 18:23-25)  And there follows his intercessory dialogue with God.

·         Note that Abraham does not ask that only the righteous be spared, but pleads that for the sake of the righteous the unrighteous be spared.[11] 

·         Note that in doing so Abraham does not plead for his nephew, Lot, and family, but pleads for those who were NOT his family, for those who were strangers.

·         Note also that those for whom he interceded were the very people who had threatened his relatives (cf Genesis 19:4-9), but rather than delighting in the imminent destruction of the enemies of his family, Abraham pleads that they be spared. 

Obviously such magnanimity is very hard - no wonder John the Baptist claimed that children of Abraham can be bred from stones! (cf Mt 3:9, Lk 3:8) 

This is not strict justice.  It is a flexible justice.  It is justice tempered by mercy.  It is justice for the righteous, but mercy and forgiveness for the wicked.  In fact, far from God’s treating the righteous the same as the unrighteous (cf Gen 18:23 quoted above), Abraham in fact pleads that God treat the unrighteous the same as the righteous!  This common destiny is implicit recognition of their (and our) common humanity.  The evil and the good on whom the sun rises, the righteous and the unrighteous on whom the rains fall (cf Mt 5:45) are one people.  Abraham’s appeal to “the Judge of all the earth” (Gen 18:25) acknowledges our common dependence on God.   

So the otherness of Abrahamic faith has nothing to do with elitism, with separation or segregation from society, but rather with the quality of our inclusiveness, the depth of our belonging to society, the totality of our identification with society, our being one with society.

Another name for this inclusiveness is universality, as implied in the “blessing” for all nations that Abraham and his descendants are to be to which I referred in my preliminary remarks.  

3.         Sacrifice

My fourth and final identifier of the otherness of Abrahamic faith is sacrifice, even of the promised son and heir.[12]

The traditional interpretations of this are so familiar that God’s command no longer shocks us as it should - it is, after all, the command to murder the innocent!  But our traditions have wrapped this scandal in piety!  

Even the biblical text presents it as only a “test” (cf Gen 22:1);[13] and reassures that father and son “will both come back” from the mountain (cf Gen 22:5).[14]  Following these textual clues, traditional Jewish and Christian interpretations commend Abraham’s willingness as the epitome of faith,[15] as trusting in the creative power of God, and even as an anticipation of resurrection.[16]  Islam and the Qur’an follow suit,[17] adding to the father’s willingness the exemplary submission of the son.[18]   

But all these pious interpretations are caught in a dilemma – if God’s command to kill the innocent is faking it,[19] then it is a cruel and vicious pretence by God; but if God’s command is real, then if Abraham obeys he commits the sin of murder, but if he refuses he commits the sin of disobedience.

I personally find the interpretation according to René Girard’s mimetic theory of primitive sacred violence to be compelling.  Briefly, society resolves its fractious tensions through the scape-goating mechanism of human sacrifice, then sacralizes the happy outcome as God’s blessing.   

Contrary to traditional pious interpretations of the text, it is not God who asks for human sacrifice, and never was, but society.  Abraham refuses this societal demand to secure peace and prosperity through human sacrifice.  Gil Bailie states:   

What we must try to see in the story of Abraham’s non-sacrifice of Isaac is that Abraham’s faith consisted, not of almost doing what he didn’t do, but of not doing what he almost did, and not doing it in fidelity to the God in whose name his contemporaries thought it should be done.[20]

And again:

The central issue of the story of Abraham’s substitution of a ram for Isaac is precisely that, the issue of substitution.  Abraham renounces human sacrifice and “inaugurates” the ritual substitution of animals for humans.[21]

Abraham does all this in the name of the personal God Who authors and prospers life, and he even commemorates the event by re-naming that place “The Lord will provide.” (Gen 22:14) 

So Abrahamic faith refuses society’s demands for human sacrifice to ensure peace and security, trusting rather in God’s providential care for all. 

Summary: 

In summary, the otherness of Abrahamic faith requires:

1. Exodus – radical trust in a personal God who calls us to let go of society’s demands and expectations
2. Openness – to receive from God the gift of the new life that God desires for us.
3. Inclusiveness – a quality of belonging that transcends all old societal divisions and strains towards a new all-inclusive society
4. Sacrifice - not submitting to society’s demands for human sacrifice, our own or others, that is, constructing our own security and wellbeing at the expense of others, but trusting in God to provident care for all. 
   

Christian fulfillment

I add that for Christians these four qualities of Abrahamic faith are fulfilled in a preeminent way in Jesus Christ.

1. His exodus is his personal Passover from life through death to eternal life, his “going ahead” (cf Mk 16:7) to “prepare a place” for us (cf Jn 14:2-3) which is the promised destiny of us all in God.
2. His openness is his complete and utter dependence on God – “I live because of the Father” (Jn 6:57), including freely laying down his earthly life (cf Jn 10:15, 17) - "Father, into your hands I commend my spirit." (Lk 23:46) - in order to take it, and us, up into new and everlasting life with him.   
3. His inclusiveness is his complete identification both with humanity - “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor 5:21) - and also with God – “The Father and I are one’ (Jn 10:30) which effects the atonement that his intercession before God asks: “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing." (Lk 23:34)
4. As for sacrifice, again, as always, it is not God who asks for it, and never was,[22] but it is the people who clamor for blood (cf Mt 27:25).  But there the differences end - for now it is not the humans who are found innocent, but all are proven guilty of shedding innocent blood (cf Mt 27:24-25); now it is not the son of any man that is the intended victim, but the very son of God (cf Mk 15:40); now there is no substitution of a ram for a human, but it is “the Lamb of God” (cf John 1:29) who substitutes for all humans; now there is no “angel of the Lord” (cf Gen 22:11) to stay the violence, and it proceeds to its bloody climax (cf Jn 19:34-37); now the end result is not a temporary respite, but the beginning of resurrected life for all humanity.

Such is the otherness of Abrahamic faith to which Christians are called to witness to society with our lives, even if needs be, unto death. 

Conclusion

Finally, I would like to conclude with the poem “The Old Man and the Young” by Wilfred Owen.  His context was the trenches of the First World War in which there were over 37 million casualties[23] - including the poet himself at the age of 25 just seven days before the Armistice.

Our context is the wasted lives of today’s society:

• 11 million children younger than 5 die every year, more than half from hunger-related causes.[24]
• More than 16,000 children die from hunger-related causes every day - one child every five seconds[25]
• One woman dies each minute because she lacks access to adequate health care during pregnancy and childbirth. [26]
• Modern conflicts claim an estimated half a million people each year, over 80 percent of them civilians[27]
• Every minute, someone is killed by a gun [28]
• On average 1000 people are killed every day by small arms.[29]
• Landmines maim or kill approximately 26,000 civilians every year, including 8,000 to 10,000 children.[30]

The litany of death goes on and on … not to mention the suffering of the wounded, the survivors, the refugees, the widows and orphans, the poor, the indebted, or the extinction of an estimated 50,000 species every year[31] and the threat to the survival of life on our planet.[32]  This is how Wilfred Owen interprets such wasted deaths in Abrahamic terms: 

The Parable of the Old Man and the Young

So Abram rose, and clave the wood, and went,

And took the fire with him, and a knife.

And as they sojourned both of them together,

Issac, the first-born spake and said, My Father,

Behold the preparations, the fire and iron,

But where the lamb for this burnt offering?

Then Abram bound the youth with belts and straps,

And builded parapets and trenches there.

And stretched forth the knife to slay his son.

When lo! an angel called him out of heaven,

Saying, Lay not a hand upon the lad,

Neither do anything to him. Behold,

A ram, caught in a thicket by its horns;

Offer the Ram of Pride instead of him.

But the old man would not do so, but slew his son,

And half the seed of Europe, one by one. Wilfred Owen (1893-1918)

The topic “Being Children of Abraham Today” confronts us with choice:

1.     Are we the old man of “society”, acquiescing in the suffering and death of millions of our sisters and brothers in the name of the security and the lifestyle we enjoy?

2.    Or are we the young children of “Abraham”, refusing to sacrifice any of our sisters and brothers, rather putting our own lives on the line, trusting in God’s faithful providence for all?

May the God of Abraham - and Sarah and Hagar and Keturah - make us a blessing for the nations of our today. 

 

 LIST OF REFERENCES

Bailie, Gil. Violence Unveiled : Humanity at the Crossroads. New York: Crossroad, 1995.

Appendix I - Jewish responses to ‘Sacrifice of Abraham’

The majority view of Jewish biblical commentators is that God was testing Abraham to see if he would actually kill his own son, as a test of his loyalty. However, a number of Jewish biblical commentators from the medieval era, and many in the modern era, found this theology repugnant. They read the text in another way.

The early rabbinic midrash Genesis Rabbah quotes God as saying "I never considered telling Abraham to slaughter Isaac (using the Hebrew root letters for "slaughter", not "sacrifice".) Rabbi Yona Ibn Janach (Spain, 11th century) wrote that God only demanded a symbolic sacrifice. Rabbi Yosef Ibn Caspi (Spain, early 14th century) wrote that Abraham's imagination led him astray, making him believe that he had been commanded to sacrifice his son. Ibn Caspi writes "How could God command such a revolting thing?" But according to Rabbi J. H. Hertz (Chief Rabbi of the British Empire), child sacrifice was actually "rife among the Semitic peoples," and suggests that "in that age, it was astounding that Abraham's God should have interposed to prevent the sacrifice, not that He should have asked for it." Hertz interprets the Akedah as demonstrating to the Jews that human sacrifice is abhorrent. "Unlike the cruel heathen deities, it was the spiritual surrender alone that God required."

Other rabbinic scholars also note that Abraham was willing to do everything to spare his son, even if it meant going against the divine command: while it was God who ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son, it was an angel, a lesser being in the celestial hierarchy, that commanded him to stop.

In some later Jewish writings, most notably those of the Hassidic masters, the theology of a Divine test is rejected, and the sacrifice of Isaac is interpreted as a punishment for Abraham's earlier mistreatment of Ishmael, his elder son, who he expelled from his household at the request of his wife, Sarah. According to this view, Abraham failed to show compassion for his son, so God punished him by ostensibly failing to show compassion for Abraham's son.

In The Last Trial, Shalom Spiegel argues that these commentators were interpreting the Biblical story as an implicit rebuke against Christianity's claim that God would sacrifice His own son.[33]

Appendix II – World Statistics on Violence

Health

- 11 million children younger than 5 die every year, more than half from hunger-related causes.[34]

- Three million children die every year of preventable disease.[35]

- Every day, more than 16,000 children die from hunger-related causes - one child every five seconds[36]

- One woman dies each minute because she lacks access to adequate health care during pregnancy and childbirth. [37]

Conflict and Warfare

- In the history of warfare the twentieth century stands out as the bloodiest and most brutal - three times more people have been killed in wars in the last ninety years than in all the previous five hundred. War: An Overview, Peace Pledge Union[38]

- Since the end of the Second World War in 1945 there have been over 250 major wars in which over 23 million people have been killed, tens of millions made homeless, and countless millions injured and bereaved.[39]

- Modern conflicts claim an estimated half a million people each year. 300,000 of these are from conflicts, and 200,000 are from homicides and suicides.[40]

- Over 80 percent of all these casualties have been civilian[41]

- There are 2.2 million refugees and people displaced by the conflict. [42]

Military Expenditure

- World military expenditure in 2005 increased 3.4 per cent since 2004, and  34 per cent over the 10-year period 1996–2005. [43]

- World military expenditure in 2005 is estimated to have reached $1,118 billion dollars, or nearly $1.2 trillion dollars. [44]

- This corresponds to 2.5 per cent of world GDP or an average spending of $173 per capita. [45]

- For every $1 spent on development assistance $10 is spent on military budgets.[46]

- At least 1,134 companies in 98 countries worldwide are involved in some aspect of the production of small arms and/or ammunition. [47]

- The USA is responsible for 48 per cent of the world total military expenditure, distantly followed by the UK, France, Japan and China with 4–5 per cent each. [48]

- The process of concentration of military expenditure continued in 2005 with a decreasing number of countries responsible for a growing proportion of spending: the 15 countries with the highest spending now account for 84 per cent of the total. [49]

- 88% of all reported conventional arms exports are from the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council: China, France, Russia, UK and USA.[50]

- This increase has been accompanied by a 15 per cent rise in the combined weapons sales of the 100 largest weapons-producing companies during 2004.[51]

- The volume of weapons transferred in 2005 was 30 per cent higher than in 2000. Meanwhile, the financial value of the international arms trade has risen from (US)$27-34 billion in 2001 to (US)$44–53 billion in 2004.[52]

Weapons and Deaths

- There are 2 bullets for every person on the planet and 1 gun for every ten.[53]

- Every minute, someone is killed by a gun [54]

- On average 1000 people are killed every day by small arms.[55]

- Landmines maim or kill approximately 26,000 civilians every year, including 8,000 to 10,000 children. Those victims that survive endure a lifetime of physical, psychological, and economic hardship.  At least 75% of landmine victims are civilians.  Adopt-a-Minefield (www.landmines.org)[56]

- Small arms light weapons were the weapons of choice in 46 out of 49 major conflicts since 1990, causing four million deaths – about 90 per cent of them civilians, and 80 per cent women and children. [57]

- There are at least 639 million firearms in the world today, of which 59% are legally held by civilians. [58]

- Civilians purchase more than 80% of all the firearms that are currently manufactured worldwide each year. [59]

- 90 percent of civilian casualties are caused by small arms. This is far higher than the casualty count from conventional weapons of war like tanks, bomber jets or warships. [60]

- Estimates of the black market trade in small arms range from US$2-10 billion a year. [61]

- Every minute, someone is killed by a gun [62]

Human Development

- 852 million people across the world are hungry.[63]

- Half the world's people live on less than $2 a day.[64]

- More than 1.2 billion people currently live below the international poverty line, earning less than $1 per day[65]

- More than 100 million children of primary school age remain out of school; 60 percent of them are girls.[66]

- Only 58%$ of the world’s population has access to one of life’s most fundamental needs: adequate or improved sanitation facilities[67]