Re-visioning Christology through a Māori lens

Re-visioning Christology through a Māori lens Wayne Manaaki Rihari Te Kaawa A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, the University of Otago, 2020 Abstract The central premise of this thesis is to re-vision what is known about Jesus Christ with a fresh set of Māori eyes to see what new insights can be added to Christological discourse. This thesis begins with a survey of Christological reflections by thirteen Māori writers from different theological, denominational and tribal backgrounds. This survey shows the richness and diversity of Māori epistemology in articulating and understanding who Jesus Christ is for Māori. Two significant themes are identified for further investigation being whakapapa (genealogy), and the relationship between land, people and God. The two genealogies of Jesus recorded in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are analysed using a whakapapa methodology. New insights are discovered about the four women included in Matthew’s version of the genealogy of Jesus where the women are viewed through their indigenousness to the land of Canaan. Indigenousness and the land also play a major role in revisioning the genealogy of Jesus recorded in the Gospel of Luke. The land is articulated as the foundational layer in this genealogy that connects the world of humans and the world of God. The second theme significant to understanding Christology is Jesus providing a new hermeneutic to the relationship between land, people and God. This tripartite relationship is an important theme in the Old Testament and is held together in creative tension through Covenants and the Law. Chapter seven applies a Māori Christological analysis to this relationship and establishes that the land is more than a geographic backdrop to the story but has theological and Christological significance to understanding Jesus Christ. Chapter eight explores the term tangata whenua (people of the land) in the biblical context while drawing on comparisons with the Māori understanding of being tangata whenua in Aotearoa New Zealand. This term appears in the Bible for the first time in the narratives of Abraham and Sarah who acknowledge the Canaanites as the ‘people of the land’ of Canaan. As the biblical story progresses the Canaanite people go from being ‘people of the land’ to being disenfranchised landless people whose history and story is over-written by another people. All things Canaanite are the antithesis of all things Israelite. Jesus who has Canaanite women in his genealogy must realign his mission to address this bitter and violent historical past when he is conscientized in his encounter with a sole Canaanite woman with an ill daughter that he initially doesn’t care to much about. ii Acknowledgements It has been a long journey since leaving Kawerau College in 1980 without any educational qualifications to completing a Doctorate forty-years later at one of the country’s most prestigious Universities. He mihi mai tāku wairua ki āku pakeke i whāngai ahau i Te Onepu. E koro mā, e Arapeta, e Taha, e Haki, e kui mā, e Mihiwai, e Maata, e Hōhipera. Kua tutuki to koutou wawata moku me to koutou moemoea mō to koutou iwi, kua eke au ki tērā taumata teitei o te ao mātauranga. Moe mai e koro, e kui ma i to koutou moenga roa. My first acknowledgement is to my wife, Dr Helen Papuni for her support over the three years that has allowed me to undertake my doctoral studies. Ko koe tāku tuara mō te take tino taumaha a Turakina Ngā Hara. Kua tau tēnā ināianei. I also wish to acknowledge my whānau whānui in Onepu, Tauranga and Auckland who have always been my inspiration. Living in Dunedin I have become part of the whānau of St Marks Presbyterian in Pinehill. Their various methods of support have been wide ranging from prayers, encouragement, dinners and home baking that has always been enjoyed and appreciated. A special thank you to Dr Alistair Yule for the firewood to ensure that I did not go cold on those Dunedin winter nights when you stay up late reading and writing. Acknowledgements must be made of my Dunedin colleagues in ministry the Rev Dr Kerry Enright of Knox Church and the Rev Brendan McRae of Flagstaff Union Community Church who were always supportive with good coffee. He tuku mihi tēnei ki ngā kaimahi o Te Huka Mātauraka mō o rātou whakahoatanga. Te hohonu, te tiketike, te whānui o rātou tautoko kia ahau me ngā akonga Māori katoa o te Whare Wānanga o Ōtākou. Kare e mutuhia taku mihi ki ōku tuahine e Peral, Arihia, Karin, Vicki me Kiritapu me ōku tuakana a Frank raua ko Ken. Huri ki tēnā taha o te huarahi o Castle me Hato Rāwiri ki te tari o Māori Development (OMD). He aumihi tēnei ki a Tuari Pōtiki me ngā kaimahi o te tari OMD mō o rātou awhina kia ahau. He mihi anō ki taku tuakana a Hata Temo, nana i whakatau ahau i te tīmata o taku rangahau. iii Nei te mihi whānui ki te hāpori Māori o te Whare Wānanga o Ōtākou, ngā pūkenga me ngā kaiāwhina katoa. Me ōku hoa tauira kairangi, tino mihi ki a koutou e hika ma e, ka kite koutou i runga i te atamira mō te whakapōtaetanga e hoa ma. In the course of my research and writing I have been the recipient of financial grants that have been of great assistance. I would like to acknowledge the University of Otago for a generous Māori Doctoral Scholarship that has paid all my fees and provided living support. I would also like to thank Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau Settlement Trust for a generous grant, the Knox Centre for Ministry and Leadership for a minister’s study grant and the New Zealand Education Foundation for a Sister Annie Henry grant. I wish to also express my sincere thanks to my supervisors Professor Murray Rae and Dr Jenny Te Paa Daniel for their guidance over the last three years. What has driven me to complete a doctorate are the children and those yet to be born in Onepu to show them that there is no river too wide that cannot be crossed or mountain too high that cannot be climbed. I pray that the days of educational under achievement of the children of Onepu will be finally put to rest and there will become high achievers in education. Ko te mihi whakamutunga maku, ki tāku whaea. Tau tahi, tau rua, maringi noa tonu ngā roimata. Kare koe i konei i roto i tēnei ao, kei tērā taha o tua te ārai ināianei, kei te pai, a te wā ka tūtaki anō taua. Moe mai e kui i to moenga roa. iv Table of Contents Abstract page ii Acknowledgements page iii List of illustrations, maps, genealogies, tables, charts and diagrams page ix Chapter One: Introduction Introduction page 1 The Research Topic page 1 Outline of thesis page 7 Definition of the topic page 11 Revisioning page 11 Christology page 12 Māori page 13 Lens page 16 Methodology page 18 Conclusion page 20 Chapter Two: Social location and theology Introduction page 21 Cultural Influences page 21 Religious Influences page 25 My Current Location page 28 Christological Influences page 28 Conclusion page 32 v Chapter Three: The Talking House of Māori Christological Reflection Introduction page 34 Outline of the survey of Māori Christological reflections page 34 He Whare Kōrero, The Talking House page 35 • • • • • • • • • • • • • Rev Dr Moeawa Callaghan Rev Māori Marsden Rev Dr Henare Tate Rev Dr Hone Kaa Rev Ruawai Rakena Rev Dr Te Waaka Melbourne Graham Cameron Kāhautu Maxwell Rev Dr Peter Wensor Rev Dr Jubilee Turi Hollis Rev Hone Te Rire Rev Dr Hirini Kaa Dr Jenny Te Paa Daniel page 35 page 37 page 42 page 45 page 51 page 53 page 55 page 57 page 59 page 61 page 63 page 65 page 66 Kupu Whakapono, Creedal Statement page 68 Conclusion page 71 Chapter Four: Christological Themes from Chapter Three Introduction page 72 Whakapapa page 72 Te Whenua, te Iwi me te Atua, the land, the people and God page 81 What the Māori writers say about land page 83 Māori and land page 85 Land in the Bible page 87 Christology and the land page 90 Conclusion page 91 vi Chapter Five: A Whakapapa Analyses of Genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew 1:1-17. Introduction page 93 Whakapapa in Mātauranga Māori page 93 Te Reo Wahine Māori, Te Ture o Taku Whaea, The law of Mothers page 96 Genealogy in the Old Testament page 97 The Genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew page 100 Women in the Genealogy of Jesus page 102 Revisioning the women in the genealogy of Jesus page 107 Revisioning Tamar page 107 Revisioning Rahab page 110 Revisioning Ruth page 116 Revisioning Uriah’s Wife page 119 Te Reo Wahine Māori page 123 Summary page 126 He Kupu Whakapono. Creedal Statement page 129 Conclusion page 130 Chapter Six: A Whakapapa Analyses of the Genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke 3: 23-38. Introduction page 132 Genealogy in the Gospel of Luke page 132 Adam – Jesus Typology page 136 Revisioning the Genealogy of Jesus page 139 A Theology of the Land, Part I page 139 A Theology of the Land, Part II page 144 A Theology of the Land, Part III page 146 Jesus and Abraham page 152 Revisioning the Volschenk and Tate Models page 158 Conclusion page 160 vii Chapter Seven: The land and Jesus Introduction page 161 Jesus and the Land page 161 Jesus and Water page 165 Mapping the Geography page 168 The Desert page 170 The Wilderness page 172 The Level Place page 173 The Fields page 174 Mountains page 177 Water page 188 The Sea of Galilee page 196 The First Disciples page 200 Manifestations on the Sea of Galilee page 202 Conclusion page 205 Chapter Eight: The people of the land Introduction page 207 Tangata Whenua page 207 The People of the Land in Old Testament Discourse page 209 The Canaanites as the People of the Land page 217 Jesus and the Canaanite Woman page 228 Conclusion page 240 Chapter Nine: Conclusion Areas of Future Research page 244 Outcomes of this Doctoral Journey page 246 Bibliography page 248 viii List of illustrations, maps, genealogies, tables, charts and diagrams Illustration Stain-glass window, St Mary’s Church, Tikitiki page 49 The structure of a wharenui showing the pou-tuarongo page 62 Formula: Flow of genealogies Genesis chapter 4 page 97 Formula: Flow of genealogies in Genesis chapter 5-9 page 98 Formula: Flow of genealogies in Numbers and 1 Chronicles page 99 Chart 4 Flow of events in the Synoptic Gospels page 201 Chart 5 Flow of events in the Gospel of John page 202 Comparison of land in the biblical context and the context of Aotearoa New Zealand page 91 Table 2 Adam – Jesus typology page 138 Table 3 Mountains in the Old Testament page 181 Table 4 Mountains in the Gospels page 186 Table 5 Water events in the Gospels page 188 Table 6 The Sea of Galilee in the Gospels page 198 Table 7 Nature of Canaanite references in the Old Testament page 222 Canaanite gender-land-people references page 225 Illustration 1 Illustration 2 Charts Chart 1 Chart 2 Chart 3 Tables Table 1 Table 8 ix Genealogy Genealogy 1 Whakapapa of Wayne Te Kaawa page 23 Genealogy 2 Whakapapa of Hāmiora Pio to Wayne Te Kaawa page 27 Genealogy 3 Judah and Tamar to King Solomon page 104 Genealogy 4 Jehoiachin to Jesus page 106 Genealogy 5 Terah to Jesus page 116 Genealogy 6 Obed and Ahithophel to Jesus page 119 Genealogy 7 Noah to Abraham page 121 Genealogy 8 Eleazar to Jesus page 129 Genealogy 9 Genealogy of Israelites and Canaanites page 218 Diagram 1 Volschenk model page 150 Diagram 2 Tate model page 151 Diagram 3 Koru model page 159 The Land of Canaan and the Canaanite tribes page 219 Diagrams Maps Map 1 x Chapter 1: Introduction Introduction In this chapter I will introduce the topic under investigation in this thesis, the structure of this thesis and the context in which the research has taken place. To give some understanding to the topic I will also define the individual words in the topic. Finally, I will give an outline of the methodology that is used in this thesis. The Research Topic When I embarked on this doctoral journey in 2017, I had one over-arching goal that I believed was realistic and achievable. The goal was to contribute to Christological reflection written by Māori and expressing a distinctive Māori Christian view of Jesus Christ. Written resources from this particular perspective and on this subject are limited and hard to find unless you know where to search, what to look for and have an awareness of who the writers are. My intention in this thesis is to identify and compile a body of Christological reflections written by Māori that can be used as a resource for anyone wanting to known what Māori think about Jesus Christ. Once the data is compiled the critical analysis and evaluation of Māori thinking can be applied to various aspects of Christology. Furthermore, this thesis will also identify future research projects in Māori theology and Christology. Since I began studying theology at tertiary level in 1995, being the sole Māori enrolled in many theological papers became a familiar experience. At times this became an unpleasant experience due to the invisibility of Māori staff, students and curriculum content. What I learned is that theology originated largely in Europe, and the principal languages used were Hebrew, Greek, Latin, German, French and English. Theology made its way past the equator turned left to northern and southern America, then took a right turn to Asia and then a sharp left to Africa. When Aotearoa New Zealand did rate a mention, it was Pākehā (European New Zealand) theology that was offered as Māori and the Pacific countries allegedly did not have sufficient breadth and depth in their native language or thought to hold a theological or philosophical conversation. This statement was made during a lecture in my first year of theology at Otago University. Changing this reality and raising the visibility of Māori theology while inspiring more Māori people to pursue theological study at under-graduate and postgraduate level has also been a personal goal in this doctoral journey. 1 The topic of this doctoral thesis is: Re-visioning Christology through a Māori lens. Māori epistemology is used to take a fresh look at what is known about Jesus Christ. This thesis and methodology showcase the depth and breadth of Christological reflection that is grounded here in Aotearoa New Zealand. Māori have never been silent or invisible in providing an opinion of the one called Christ. The place where you will hear Māori engage in conversations about Jesus Christ are in little churches in out of the way communities like Ruatāhuna, Te Teko, Waimana, Waiōhau and Onepu. In these predominantly Māori communities, their views of Jesus Christ are central to the life of the community. In these intensely Māori villages Christological conversations are not limited to Sunday sermons or bible studies held in church buildings. The places of conversation and reflection are in wharenui on marae, on the ātea associated with marae, in hui (meetings) and wānanga (schools of learning), while out fishing, hunting and gathering food and herbal remedies, or on protest marches and land occupations. The method and form of delivery is preferably in their native language which expresses the depth of their thinking. Thoughts and words are not delivered in lectures or limited to sermons but include different types of cultural modes of communication including songs, proverbs, stories and a vast array of different cultural traditional and contemporary art-works. Christological and theological reflection is not a private individual pursuit; the whole community participates in the reflection process as it belongs to the community. The welfare of the community is the paramount goal, not individual salvation. It is highly debateable when Jesus Christ first arrived in Aotearoa New Zealand. There are three schools of thought that are openly talked about and debated. The first stream of thought says that Jesus Christ was present in this country since the beginning of creation. This places Jesus in this country long before any humans. This type of theology says that Jesus Christ was always present in this land as the creator God. If this statement is correct then serious research is needed to determine if Māori as the first people resident in this land had knowledge or experience of this Christ. A second version of Jesus Christ arriving in this country is from the east coast of the North Island. The tohunga (spiritual leader) Te Toiroa from Nukutaurua on the Mahia peninsula received a vision about a new God that was coming to this land. The words of his prophetic statement even named this new God: Tiwha tiwha te po, tiwha tiwha te po, ka haere mai he Atua nui o te rangi Hei u mai ki tēnei whenua, ko te ingoa o tēnei Atua hou, ko Tama i rorokutia. 2 Gloom and sorrow prevail the night, a great God of the heavens is coming to this land. the name of this new God is, Son who died.1 Te Toiroa went on to describe this new God as a good God but that the people would still be lost. After his vision Te Toiroa moved from Mahia peninsula to Tūranga-nui-a-Kiwa where two years after his vision he witnessed the arrival of Cook and Europeans to the country in 1769. This is a seminal story to the Ringatū Church2 and the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints who both acknowledge the vision and predictions of Te Toiroa as the beginning of their respective Churches in this country and also the beginning of knowledge of Jesus Christ in this country. The third and final version of Jesus Christ arriving in this country centres on Christmas Day 1814. This is the day when Samuel Marsden, a Sydney based missionary of the Church Missionary Society arrived at Oihi in the Bay of Islands and conducted the first known Christian service in this country. For the past two hundred years that is how the story has been told with Marsden the hero of the story. Since the bicentenary in 2014 the narrative of Christianity and Marsden has changed to include the Ngā Puhi3 leader Ruatara as the person responsible for inviting Marsden to bring Christianity to his people. Marsden is the missionary who brought the message of Christianity and Ruatara is the gateway for Marsden and Christianity into this country. Regardless of which version you accept and identify with, Māori have developed a range of views concerning Jesus Christ. When engaging in conversations about Jesus Christ, Māori claim their own distinctive voice speaking in ways that are compelling and culturally appropriate for them. Literature by Māori expressing an opinion about Jesus Christ is presented in a manner that is genuinely centred in their cultural and spiritual reality and brings new thinking that is beneficial to the welfare of the people. Christological reflection is important in communities where Māori are tangata whenua (people of the land). In these communities they are on their tūrangawaewae, which is understood as a person’s own unique place to stand in the world. This type of Christology will speak of Christ in relation to the land and to the ancestors, to lived cultural practices, the effects of the New Zealand Land Wars and the recovery from this experience. When people leave their 1 There are different versions of this prediction. This particular version was told to me by Rikirangi Gage, secretary of the Ringatū Church in 2017. For a full description see: Judith Binney, “Redemption Songs, A Life of Te Kooti Arikirangi Te Turuki” (Auckland: Auckland University Press and Bridget Williams Books, 1995), 11-12. 2 An indigenous Māori Church created in the 1860s by the prophetic figure Te Kooti during the New Zealand Land Wars. 3 A Māori tribe of the northern North Island. 3 historical home community and enter the wider world their status changes from being tangata whenua to being a minority. This new status as a minority places them in the margins of someone else’s world. Theologically, being on the margins presents an opportunity to create another tūrangawaewae as a location to stand and speak into the key aspects of understanding the relevance of Jesus Christ. Theology is never neutral; it always emerges from a particular point of view and in this marginal context, Jesus Christ is spoken of in terms of justice and equity, of the lack of housing, unemployment and other social needs. The New Testament presents Christological insights from at least two different points of view. One point of view expresses the security of being Jewish and a second point of view is evident from the perspective of people who were domiciled to the margins of Jewish society. The view that expresses security contains themes of being a chosen people, maintaining faithfulness to the law and the restoration of the Kingdom to Israel. Throughout the Old Testament are exhortations to be faithful to the law. When Israel was punished for being unfaithful the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah gave hope that they would become a great Kingdom again.4 This helped to foster the belief that the messiah would restore Israel to its former glory under David and Solomon. This belief was evident when the disciples questioned Jesus about when he was going to restore the Kingdom back to Israel.5 Christology from the margins is a motif in the Gospel of Matthew that presents at least five examples of people who speak with and about Jesus Christ from the outer edges of society. The first example is when a Roman centurion approaches Jesus addressing him as ‘Lord’ while requesting his help to heal an ill servant.6 When Jesus is in Capernaum preparing to go on a teaching and preaching tour of cities and villages, two blind men follow Jesus and are healed after they get his attention by shouting, ‘have mercy on us, Son of David.7 When Jesus travels to Tyre and Sidon a Canaanite woman encounters Jesus and starts shouting the same words as the two blind men because her daughter is tormented by a demon.8 In another scenario, as Jesus was leaving Jericho to continue his journey to Jerusalem another two blind men are healed after they shout the same words as the previous two blind men in Capernaum and the Canaanite woman.9 When Jesus arrives in Jerusalem he visits the Temple and clears it of people who are using it as a market place for their business. When the chief priests investigate the disturbance, 4 Isa 2: 21-26; Jer 23:5-8, 33:14-18. Acts 1:6. 6 Matt 8:6. 7 Matt 9:27. 8 Matt 15:22. 9 Matt 20:30. 5 4 they become angry when they find children calling ‘Hosanna to the Son of David.’10 Matthew presents these five narratives as Christology from those who were outside the accepted norms of society. Being in your natural and cultural tūrangawaewae provides a location in which to do Christology. I describe this as mana motuhake (independent) theology that reflects Māori as rangatira (chiefs) in control of their own theology for the benefit of their community and not subject to any other outside influences including the Church or State. Living on the margins of a different world also provides another social location and an equally important tūrangawaewae from which emerges a lens of disenfranchisement through which to view Jesus Christ. The task of Christology is to engage with Māori reflections on Jesus Christ that are articulated and voiced in both locations. These different ways and locations provide the Christian tradition with new ways of viewing and understanding Jesus Christ. Christology concerns the central doctrine of Christianity and articulates the significance of Jesus Christ for the Christian faith. Throughout history the person and nature of Jesus Christ has been the subject of vigorous theological debates. The sources of Christology are three-fold beginning with the New Testament as the primary source document about Jesus Christ. The secondary sources are the Creeds and theological reflections. The Creeds have been developed and debated by the Church especially in the first five centuries by Ecumenical Church Councils. The development of Creeds is not limited solely to history. My own Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand has developed its own faith statement Te Kupu Whakapono (Words of Truth that reflect our Faith).11 Te Kupu Whakapono restates the historical Creeds but also says something about who we are as a multi-cultural Church in a bi-cultural Treaty relationship. It also expresses our point of view as Presbyterians about who Jesus Christ is for us today in our context. The wealth of theological reflections of what people explicitly understood to be the meaning of the New Testament text and the Creeds of the Church is not static and are continuously being added to. Theological reflections were generally limited historically to the Western and Eastern Orthodox traditions. With the global spread of Christianity reflections are now more wide spread covering most of the world. This thesis stands in the tradition of theological reflection but collates written reflections by Māori about the significance of Jesus Christ for their communities. From reading the reflections in line with the Biblical text, several 10 Matt 21:12-16. To access Te Kupu Whakapono in the English and Māori languages and the commentary see (accessed 19 October 2017), https://www.presbyterian.org.nz/for-ministers/worship-resources/confession-of-faith 11 5 creeds or faith statements are developed in some chapters that utilise new Christological images, motifs and thoughts. The central question of Christology revolves around the questions posed by Jesus to his disciples concerning his identity.12 The synoptic Gospels show some consistencies and variances in relating this narrative. The Gospels of Mark and Matthew locate this narrative in Caesarea Philippi while the Gospel of Luke locates the narrative as taking place in Bethsaida. The geography location of narratives is important to consider and chapter seven of this thesis analyses the significance of the geography to Christology. The wording of the question first posed by Jesus to his disciples is recorded by both Mark and Matthew as, ‘who do the people say I am’? Luke changes the ‘people’ in the question to the ‘crowd’. In his Gospel, Luke always emphasizes the crowd, its size, placement, movement and role in any narrative and so emphasises the public dimension of Jesus’ ministry.13 The synoptic Gospels give variations to the responses by the disciples. Mark gives the disciples’ response as John the Baptist, Elijah or one of the other prophets. Matthew has the same reply but adds the name of Jeremiah to the two named prophets while Luke describes the prophets as ancient prophets. All three synoptic Gospels have the same flow of events and the same wording for the second question posed by Jesus; ‘who do you say that I am? Variations also exist in the response given by Peter. The Gospel of Mark has Peter responding with ‘you are the messiah.’14 The Gospel of Luke ties the messiah to God adding ‘the messiah of God.’15 The Gospel of Matthew also extends on Mark’s version agreeing that Jesus is the messiah and in addition describes God in more detail saying ‘the son of the living God.’16 These similarities and variances show that right from the very beginning when Jesus posed the question of his significance, there was agreement that he was the messiah. Each of the synoptic Gospels presents the dialogue from their perspective to highlight their own theological view. These variances show that when these questions were first posed although there was uniformity there was also room for creative discernment about the person of Jesus Christ. 12 Mark 8:27-30; Matt 16: 13-20; Luke 9:18-21. For reference to the crowd in Luke see: 4:30, 32; 5:1, 3, 15, 19; 6:17 19,31: 7:24; 8:4,19, 40, 42, 45; 9:11, 38; 11:14, 27; 12:1, 13, 54; 13:17; 14:25; 18:43; 19:39; 20:45; 21:38. 14 Mark 8:30. 15 Luke 9:20. 16 Matt 16:16. 13 6 Variations are also evident in reflections by Māori about Jesus Christ as there is no one definitive view that represents how all Māori think and believe. Nor is there one definitive Māori response to the message of Jesus Christ. The task of Christology is to investigate what lies beneath the surface of those reflections. Christological reflection is shaped by the context in which the reflection takes place. The way in which reflections are made is not limited to written academic pieces of work but also includes rituals, liturgy, song, metaphor and stories that reflect the believer’s own Christological position. These are cultural affirmations of Māori identity that indigenise the Christian faith to the context. This allows those engaging with Jesus Christ to develop their tradition and faith statements in ways that are consistent with the accepted Creeds of the Church. The strengths and weaknesses of Māori Christological reflections are discussed and then applied to selected texts. The implications for a more inclusive understanding of Jesus Christ taking into consideration Māori thoughts, reflections and world views are then explored. Where possible at the end of a chapter a faith statement or a symbol is created from the content within the chapter. This faith statement is in the form of a waiata (song) or haka (ceremonial posture dance or challenge) while the symbol reflects imagery and symbolism from Māori art. Outline of Thesis: The central argument of this thesis is that Māori theology has much to offer Christology. A tangata whenua reading of scripture enhances the role of land, people and genealogy and the significance they play as the message of Jesus unfolds in the Gospels. Genealogy, land and people are emotive issues in the contemporary context where land is contested and racism is often experienced by people who are on the margins and ghettos of society. Genealogy, land and people viewed through a Christological lens provides an opportunity for Jesus Christ to engage in the contemporary context with a liberating message of hope for those experiencing disenfranchisement. In this section I will give an outline of the central argument of this thesis as it develops in each chapter. Chapter Two: This thesis begins in chapter two by focusing on the first part of the Christological question posed by Jesus to his disciples in the synoptic Gospels.17 In this question Jesus asks his disciples ‘who do people say I am?’ The disciples respond with a range of answers. This is a question 17 Mark 8: 27-30: Matthew 16: 13-20; Luke 9: 18-21. 7 that involves the person who answers the question engaging in self-reflection, examining what factors have influenced the formation of the own Christology. Once these influences have been identified the person is then free to claim their own voice as Simon Peter successfully does in the second part of the question. In this chapter I examine my own social location in order to identify the factors that have influenced the formation of my own Christological views. An important factor in conducting research is to be aware of the external factors that have influenced how you see Jesus Christ. This self-analysis identifies three factors that have influenced not only my Christological views but my whole life as being; whakapapa (genealogy), cultural and tribal history, and religious affiliations. After Jesus has listened to the disciples explaining what others are saying about him, he then invites the disciples to claim their own voice inviting them to say who they think he is. While examining my own background and the influences, I am claiming my own voice that allows me to move forward and explore Christology through a specific lens of enquiry. Chapter Three: While I claim my own voice in the previous chapter, in chapter three the Māori Christological voice is established and heard. Chapter three showcases the depth and breadth of Christological reflection that is grounded here in Aotearoa New Zealand. This chapter contains a survey of Christological reflections by Māori academics who have successfully captured what their communities have said concerning Jesus Christ. Their valuable research captures conversations that have taken place in both the historical and contemporary context. The conversations about Jesus Christ are expressed in the language, proverbs, carvings, metaphors, symbols, stories, imagery, songs and liturgies that are unique to the people of this land and can be termed ‘tangata whenua Christology.’ The unique of these Christological reflections is that they take an outsider from a different land and endeavour to make him relevant to this land by exploring the depths of relatedness. In Church history when church leaders meet in Chalcedon and Nicaea to discuss issue pertaining to belief in Jesus Christ authoritative statements or creeds were composed. The council of Nicaea repudiated Arianism clearly stating that Jesus Christ was begotten of the same substance as the Father, coeternal, true God from true God. The Chalcedon creed formulated in 451 CE resolved the issue of the ‘distinct natures’ in Christ. The council resolved that Jesus Christ had two distinct natures, one human and the other divine within the one person. At the conclusion of this chapter a bi-lingual creedal statement is composed that is based on 8 statements made by the thirteen Māori theologians concerning Jesus Christ and how he is understood by their community. Chapter Four: In chapter four I analyse the Christological reflections in the previous chapter to draw out some of the major themes within their writings. Two main themes emerge being; whakapapa (genealogy), and whenua (land) and tangata whenua (people of the land) in relationship to God. These connections establish a tripartite relationship that is central to the Biblical story. This chapter explores the depth of whakapapa within its own context to determine if it has any value for providing new knowledge to Christology. The tripartite relationship is explored with the conclusion that the three entities cannot be separated from each other. The inseparability of the three offers another level of conversation in which to engage in Christological reflection. Chapter Five: In chapter five a Māori epistemology of whakapapa is applied to the genealogy of Jesus as recorded in the Gospel of Matthew. I begin by providing an outline of genealogy in the Old Testament and some of the hermeneutical principles involved in interpreting biblical genealogies. Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus is then analysed using various commentators who highlight the irregularity of including the women in the genealogy. A Māori epistemology of whakapapa is then applied to the women which shows that a commonality between them is that their status is as ‘indigenous women of the land of Canaan.’ This is a new perspective as previously they have been viewed as Gentiles or sinners based on sexuality. Chapter Six: This chapter continues to apply a Māori epistemology of whakapapa to the genealogy of Jesus as recorded in the Gospel of Luke. The Lukan genealogy is rich in insights, knowledge and meaning. A technique of Māori whakapapa is noting the connections and associations that go with names. A root word in the word ‘whakapapa’ is Papatūānuku, the land. The insertion of Adam into the genealogy makes land an issue in the genealogy. This chapter briefly examines the Adam – Jesus typology and finds that the land as a commonality is omitted from this typology. When applying a Māori analysis to whakapapa there is always a connection between the human names and the land. The inclusion of Adam in the genealogy widens the scope of understanding the genealogy to include the events in the Garden of Eden narrative. In this 9 narrative the land has its own character and persona and is an active participant in the divine – human drama as it is played out. Other significant names mentioned in the Lukan genealogy are Noah and Abraham. In both narratives land again is central and covenants are introduced and developed. The covenant is not just between God and humans but also includes the land as an active participant in the covenant. In the Books of, Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Numbers the land is expected to observe the covenant obligations such as keeping the Sabbath. The land agenda is set in the creation story with Adam and Eve. It is reset in the narrative of Noah. It is again reset in the narrative of Abraham as ‘promised land’ with covenantal obligations.’ Jesus resets the land agenda placing himself as the central figure in the relationship. Unlike the previous two chapters there is no faith statement or song to end the chapter but I offer a diagram using Māori imagery that expresses the tripartite relation between God, land and people. Chapter Seven: This chapter continues the theme of land from the previous chapter. A Māori epistemology is applied to how the land is understood and interpreted in the Bible. This chapter establishes that the land is more than a geographic backdrop to the story but has theological and Christological significance to understanding Jesus Christ. Land is layered with associations and narratives. A base word for whakapapa is Papatūānuku, the earth which in the Māori context is understood as feminine. Whakapapa is a layering of names, stories, events and proverbs, that begins from the earth as the first layer. Statements by Walter Brueggemann and Hans Conzelmann concerning the relationship of the land to faith and having Christological significance are explored in depth. Chapter Eight: The final chapter draws on Māori experiences and insights of being tangata whenua and explores Christology from a tangata whenua biblical perspective. In the Book of Genesis, a specific people are acknowledged as ‘people of the land.’ The people of the land also acknowledge the status and rights of the stranger amongst them. The God of the stranger also exists in the land that belongs to the people of the land. As the Old Testament develops the people of the land become negatively stereotyped as the right to live in the land is contested. In the New Testament the people of the land are written out of the story becoming a forgotten people until a Canaanite woman appears requesting that Jesus heal her ill daughter. Jesus is 10 faced with having to address not only the woman’s request but also has to address the inherited racism that both he and his disciples display to the Canaanite woman of the land. Definition of the topic Defining terminology is extremely important as words have different meanings in different contexts and words used out of their natural context leads to confusion. Words communicate thoughts, ideas, values, visions, emotions and worldviews. One word can have several definitions and one definition may correspond to several words. Words precisely defined will be understood in the way that was intended by the person using those words. The more precise the word is communicated the more likely it is that the point of view of the person communicating the words will be understood. Words have objective and subjective meanings and defining the terms correctly allows for greater productivity. The terminology to be defined in this chapter are the words contained in the topic of this doctoral thesis: re-visioning, Christology, Māori, lens, and mātauranga Māori. Re-visioning: The word revision has a meaning of ‘reviewing something that is in need of correction or alteration.’18 Revision is the process of changing something like a plan, a system, a law or public policy in order to improve it or to correct mistakes that have been identified. The act of revision also includes updating or modifying what is being revised so that it contains the most recent information and data. Associated with revision are the following words; adaptation, editing, reworking or redrafting. The origin of the word revision is from the French word révision and the Latin revisionem meaning ‘a seeing again’.19 As a verb this means ‘to perceive with the eyes or the mind.’20 As a verb phrase it means, to investigate or inquire about something. In the definition the word ‘again’ means to repeat an action once more. The interpretation adopted in this thesis for ‘revision’ is: to see again. This re-visioning is the action of investigating or inquiring into the subject of Christology with a fresh pair of eyes which in the context of this thesis is a pair of tangata whenua eyes that are shaped by a Māori context. As this doctoral research is in the area of Christology the above definition would suggest that something in Christology has been identified as being not quite right and in need 18 Collins Paperback Dictionary and Thesaurus (Glasgow: HarperCollins Publishers, 2002), 653. Roget’s 21st Century Thesaurus, 3rd Edition, 2013. 20 Collins Paperback Dictionary and Thesaurus, 684. 19 11 of correction. The purpose of seeing again is to investigate and contest Christological theory with Māori theory and knowledge where land, people and cultural practices and customs are to the forefront of the conversation. The end result will be to add new content to how Jesus Christ is perceived and understood. Revisionism is often practised by those who are on the margins such as feminist and ethnic minorities and those working outside the mainstream in lesser known areas. If the status quo is challenged successfully then our Christology may be enriched and we are all beneficiaries. At the very least, challenges to the status quo can lead to new insights and at the best challenges can result in a paradigm shift in Christology. ‘Paradigm shifts arise when the dominant paradigm under which normal science operates is rendered incompatible with the new phenomena, facilitating the adoption of a new theory or paradigm.’21 If successful the orthodox views surrounding the nature and person of Jesus Christ and his role in salvation will need to be re-interpreted to incorporate new discoveries, evidence and interpretation. Christology: Christology is the Christian study of and reflection on the nature and work of Jesus Christ and his significance for salvation. Theological discourse on the nature of Jesus Christ has centred on the relationship between the humanity and divinity of Jesus Christ as they exist within the one person. The theological term that describes this is hypostasis or the hypostatic union. This is a term that comes from Greek philosophy, primarily stoicism. Hypostasis entered into Christological discourse in the late fourth century when Apollinaris of Laodicea used the term as he tried to understand the Incarnation. He came up with the term hypostasis to describe the union of divine and human natures of Jesus Christ in a single nature and essence. While Apollinarius’ conception of the matter was eventually rejected the co-existence of two natures in a single hypostasis was debated in successive ecumenical Church councils in the fourth and fifth centuries. The work of Jesus Christ equates to the role that he has as the agent or saviour who mediates salvation in delivering the human soul from sin and its consequences. Words associated with salvation include; atonement, forgiveness, reconciliation, redemption and liberation. Christians believe that salvation is brought about by faith in Jesus Christ who died on the cross at Calvary as the final sacrifice to atone for the sin of humanity. Although salvation 21 Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), 54. 12 has an important place in Christian doctrine it is not an exclusive Christian concept as it also exists in other non-Christian religions like Islam and Judaism. Christology has often taken one of two forms known as high and low Christology. High Christology is also known as Christology from above as it begins with a conception of God and works its way down to earth. This type of Christology emphasises the divinity of Jesus and examines issues pertaining to the pre-existence of Christ as the Logos, the Lordship of Christ and his relationship to other members of the trinity. Low Christology or Christology from below begins with earthly categories and works its way to heaven. This type of Christology emphasises the human aspects of Jesus and his earthly ministry including his miracles, parables and teachings. The essential question of Christology is the question posed by Jesus to his disciples in the synoptic Gospels, ‘Who do you say that I am?’ This has become the most enduring question of Christian intellectual discourse and is positioned as the central question of the whole panorama of theology. A tangata whenua reading of Christology must attempt to address this question in an appropriate and genuine way that affirms and mirrors what tangata whenua have said and are saying about who Jesus Christ is today. The context and language Māori use to express how they understand Jesus Christ produces different metaphors, images, nuances and symbols. Contextual demands prompt sketches of Jesus Christ intuitively and imaginatively that may be outside the norms of orthodox theologies that prefer to find Jesus solely and safely embedded in scripture, tradition and reason. How scripture is interpreted and understood by Māori will also differ from orthodox methods and may have flow on effects into other areas of theology. Christological discourse is not about the repetition of preconceived notions or the engrafting of orthodox thoughts onto the deliberations of those engaging in Christological discourse. It is about engaging the local context and allowing space for the contextual voices to speak. The conscious understanding of Jesus Christ flows from the experience of struggle and survival as people assert the hermeneutical significance of being tangata whenua against their marginalisation as a dependant minority community. Māori: Māori are the indigenous people of Aotearoa New Zealand. Indigenous in this context means original people of this country. Some Māori iwi (tribes) like Tūhoe from the Eastern Bay of Plenty, have a creation story in which their original ancestor was created from this land. Other iwi, trace their origins to settlers who immigrated here from various parts of Polynesia. 13 Migration from Polynesia begins with Maui-tikitiki-a-Taranga who is accredited as the first person from Polynesia to discover this country. Others who followed after Maui included his grandson Tiwakawaka and later explorers like Kupe, Rākaihautū, Toi-te-huatahi and Hape. Following these illustrious ancestors were further migrants from the Pacific who journeyed in double-hulled waka (canoe) and further populated the country and intermarried with the descendants of the original people and the first explorers. The collective self-descriptive term by Māori is tangata whenua. The words tangata and whenua have their origins in the Māori language and world. They are two unique Māori words that have a simple yet complex meaning. Tangata means, an individual person, alternatively spelt with a macron (tāngata) it has a plural meaning as in a collective group of people. The importance of tangata is best captured in a proverb: Ki mai ki ahau, he aha te mea nui o te ao? maku e kī atu he tangata, he tangata, he tangata. Ask me, what is the most important thing in the world? I will respond It is people, people, people.22 Whenua has a double meaning, firstly it can mean, land, the ground or a territory. Whenua in this instance refers to Papatūānuku who in pūrākau23 is the earth mother who sustains all who are born of the earth. These epistemological narratives were part of the oral tradition that explained how the world was created and shaped. In these pūrākau are narratives of Atua who strive against each other as the personified forces of nature. Pūrākau also contain narratives of mountains, rivers, trees, lakes, insects, birds and fish as they secure their places in the created order. Humans emerge in the pūrākau and take their place in the created order in relationship to the rest of creation. In the Māori language whenua has a double meaning as land and also as the placenta in child birth. Whenua as placenta refers to the organ that connects the developing baby via the umbilical cord to the uterine wall of the mother. There is a physical link between whenua as This proverb is claimed by the Te Aupōuri iwi of the far North of the North Island. See: J Metge and S Jones, He Taonga Tuku Iho Nō Ngā Tūpuna Māori, Proverbial Sayings, a Literary Treasure. New Zealand Studies No 5 Issue 2, 3-7. For an alternative version see: Hirini Moko Mead, Neil Grove, Ngā Pepeha a ngā Tupuna, The Sayings of the Ancestors (Wellington: Victoria University Press, 2001), 311; 23 Māori creation narratives that explain the origins of things. For further information see: Jennifer Lee, Māori cultural regeneration, Pūrākau as pedagogy. Paper presented as part of a symposium Indigenous (Māori) pedagogies, towards community and cultural regeneration. Centre for Research in lifelong learning international conference, Stirling, Scotland, 2005. 22 14 placenta and whenua as land. In Māori society after a child is born it is customary to bury their whenua as placenta in the whenua that is the land. The placenta is buried or deposited in a special place that has ancestral connections. This demonstrates the spiritual and physical connection between the new born baby and the land. As the baby grows and matures into adulthood they are seen as being ‘of the land’ and ‘as the land.’ As a descendant of Papatūānuku the earth mother, the land is the source of human identity. Whenua then has a dual meaning as placenta which supports and nourishes the baby in the womb during pregnancy and also the land which is the origin that connects and supports all people. This unique relationship between whenua as land and whenua as placenta is captured in the proverb: Ma te wahine ka tupu ai te hanga nei; te tangata, ma te whenua ka whai oranga ai. Woman alone gives birth to humankind; land alone gives humans their sustenance.24 As a complete word, tangata whenua can mean, people born of the placenta and of the land where the people have lived in an unbroken sequence for many generations. Tangata whenua represents knowledge, experience and genealogical links to the land. The term is unique to Māori people who claim to be the original native human inhabitants of Aotearoa New Zealand. Tangata whenua can be referenced as original settlers to an area. Te Rangihīroa gives this definition applying it to the first settlers in Taranaki.25 As the people settled on the land their interaction with the land included; naming parts of the landscape, burying the placenta and burying their dead. As the interaction became inter-generational this became part of the culture of the land. The application of this status of tangata whenua is not limited to the first settlers as some hapū are acknowledged as tangata whenua of a particular area but are not the original inhabitants of that area. They have won the right to be called tangata whenua through a number of means such as inter-marriage or conquest. Tangata whenua theory is about the land and people in relationship. It includes the interaction between land and people where the land is allowed to speak and the people respond in various ways that expresses their identity in relation to the land. The idea and claims of tangata whenua also have legal status in New Zealand law and are acknowledged by many 24 Whenua to Whenua in Home Birth Matters, Published by Home Birth in Aotearoa, Issue 1.3, Spring 2014 (accessed 14 November 2018), https://homebirth.org.nz/magazine/ 25 Te Rangihīroa, The Coming of the Māori. (Wellington: Māori Purposes Fund Board, 1949), 10. 15 central and local government agencies and non-government organisations. In academia tangata whenua theory is considered to be part of the growing body of knowledge known as mātauranga Māori. Hirini Moko Mead says that ‘mātauranga Māori encompasses all branches of Māori knowledge, past, present and still developing.’26 Mead links mātauranga Māori to the creation narratives and the whare wānanga of the tohunga which were the traditional schools of learning. These schools of learning included religion that was elevated above the ordinary pursuits of the community. Entwined with this knowledge is tikanga (the right way of practice) that ties the knowledge firmly to how people acquire and practice this knowledge. The knowledge base of mātauranga Māori is not static or a fossil frozen in the past. As a critical tool in academia it continues to rapidly expand as it is adopted into different academic disciplines. It has the potential to transform the way Christological theory is researched and written about in this country. In Christology and more broadly in the theological academy in this country, mātauranga Māori is still searching for a Māori friendly theoretical space in which to exist and contribute to Christological reflection and inquiry. This doctoral thesis is part of seeking that space in which to rightfully claim a voice and in which to proudly stand. Lens: In scientific study a lens is a transparent device which magnifies an object in focus and allows it to be viewed in more detail. In this thesis the lens that is employed follows similar principles allowing the subject of Christology to be explored in greater detail. The lens is a particular way of viewing something which in this case is centred on one person, Jesus Christ his nature and work, and his significance to salvation. Christology also functions as a distinct subject within the wider discipline of theology. Christology is not merely one of many doctrines within Christianity, ‘it is the lens that all of Christian theology is viewed through.’27 Karl Barth in his Church Dogmatics provides an example of employing a Christological lens where Christ is the lens through which to examine Christian theology as Christ stands at the centre. Another example of a theologian testing their theology against the reality of Christ was Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Christology is at the heart of Bonhoeffer’s theology as he seeks to investigate ‘who Christ really is for us today.’ The question of who ‘Christ is for us today’ was central to much of Bonhoeffer’s theological career Hirini Moko Mead, Tikanga Māori, Living by Māori Values. (Wellington: Huia Publishers, 2016), 337. James Romance, Linda Startford (ed), Revisioning: Critical methods of seeing Christianity in the history of Art (Oregon: Casade Books, 2013), 206. 26 27 16 and was posed again in a letter of 30 April 1944 which inaugurated his reflections on the ‘nonreligious interpretation.’28 Christ as the centre of Christology operates as a lens through which the whole panorama of human existence is viewed and studied in detail. But, as William A Dembski, points out ‘when Christ is the lens through which we survey the world and the various disciplines that try to understand the world, we should expect the Christological lens to focus on Christ as well’.29 It is important to acknowledge, however, that our efforts to view Christ and to focus on him, are never independent of the lenses of our own context and culture. These may be distorting at times, but they may also help us to see things that have been overlooked or obscured when looking through the lenses of the dominant Western culture A Māori lens is a critical analytical tool that has been shaped and developed by the people of the land to take into account what is important to them. The lens identifies, explores and examines the dynamic of cultural practices and knowledge within the biblical text relating to the land and people in relationship to each other and how this relates to Jesus Christ. In addition, the lens can help bring about better awareness and integration of the underlying cultural dimensions within the text. The task in using this critical tool is to view Jesus Christ, from the perspective of land and people and see what new insights emerge. This specific type of lens can be applied to all of theology in areas that deal with the topic of indigeneity and that includes land rights, customs and traditions in relation to land and culture, along with issues of identity and belonging. When interacting with the text, it is important not to assume that the text will be viewed in the same way as it has always been viewed and understood. A Māori lens approaches Christology out of a new framework with new language that evokes new images and new inspirations. This changes the way Jesus Christ is seen and expressed. My hope is that future interactions in theology will include mātauranga Māori methodology and theory as a foundational component of Christology rather than as an extra curricula activity. A Māori lens constitutes a framework of analysis that begins with the soft skills of empathy and understanding as it often reveals the painful subjects of human suffering, land loss, and alienation from the land of inheritance, colonisation, and genocide. The framework is then organised on the basis of themes. This thematic approach allows for a structured analysis of the biblical text. General thematic areas include; the land as an entity in its own right in the 28 Russell W Palmer, The Christology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. The Evangelical Quarterly, vol 49 issue 3 (JulySept 1977). London School of Theology. 132-140. 29 William A Dembski, Intelligent Design, The Bible between Science and theology, (Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 1999), 207. 17 text, the role and significance that the land and its geographic features have in the text, mapping of indigenous knowledge systems within the text, and of cultural landscapes. Specific thematic areas include; cultural practices and attitudes concerning the land, the relationship of people to the land, the role of genealogy in land practices, issues of inheritance and succession, gender equality, cultural economics, the exercise of political power, and tangible cultural heritage. A lens that provides a Māori reading of a Biblical text perceives both the diversity of cultures and specific cultures that exist in the world of the text. It has a simple premise that people and their relationship with the land are important. This generates a lens for exploring who Jesus Christ is for people of the land in the world of the Biblical text. This type of methodology is most helpful to those who have suffered oppression and colonisation and seek the assistance of the Biblical text to find comparisons with their own experience. A lack of cultural variation results in deficient lenses being employed in the context of communities who differ from the cultural norms. The lens through which your brain sees the world shapes your reality. If you change the lens, not only can you change the way you perceive what you are examining, you can also allow yourself to be examined. The central question that the lens of this inquiry will be applied to is the question posed by Jesus to his disciples, who do you say I am? In asking this question, Jesus is allowing himself to be seen and understood through someone else’s eyes. While the scriptures supply the answer, the question also involved the disciples in self-examination. At some point the lens of inquiry also focusses on the reader who engages in Christological reflection. Methodology The methodology used in this thesis is mātauranga Māori and is also referred to as kaupapa Māori theory. Mātauranga Māori is a Māori way of thinking critically that includes a critique of non-Māori constructions and definitions while affirming the importance of Māori selfdefinitions and self-valuations. Mātauranga Māori theory is not a new phenomenon nor is it dressing western theories and methodologies in Māori clothing. As a body of knowledge, it has distinct epistemological and metaphysical foundations that date back to the beginning of time.30 Distinguished professor Graham Smith describes mātauranga Māori research as: • • Related to being Māori Connected to Māori philosophy and principles Nepe T.M, Te Toi Huarewa, kaupapa Māori, an educational intervention system. (Masters diss, The University of Auckland, 1991). 30 18 • • • Taking for granted the validity and legitimacy of Māori Taking for granted the importance of Māori language and culture Concerned with the struggle for autonomy over our own cultural well-being.31 A mātauranga Māori research paradigm is utilised by Māori, with Māori, for the benefit of Māori and understands and represents the multiple ways of being Māori today. There is no one definitive view of being Māori; views range from a traditional rural based marae upbringing to a pan-tribal urban Māori reality to an international diaspora view that articulates being Māori in another country. An important aspect of mātauranga Māori based theory is the provision of a structural analysis of the historical, political, social and economic determinants (enablers and barriers) of Māori well-being. Those engaging with Mātauranga Māori theory and methodology have two roles: 1. To affirm the importance of Māori self-definitions and self-evaluations, and 2. To critique colonial constructions and definitions of Māori and articulate solutions to Māori concerns in terms of Māori knowledge.32 These dual agenda are intertwined and make space for expressions of an alternative knowledge that has a political aspect that works towards actualising social transformation with a fair and equitable redistribution of resources. Essentially, mātauranga Māori is about reclaiming power where historically Māori have been assigned to the margins of invisibility. This has led to a lack of trust within Māori communities towards anything that looks suspiciously like officialdom. Educationally, Māori have responded by establishing their own educational institutions like the kohanga reo (Māori language early childhood education centres), Kura kaupapa (Māori language schools) and whare wānanga (Māori based universities). Māori Churches have also established their own theological schools which were short lived and were always having to compete for funding against the traditional Church theological and ministry training centres.33 In reclaiming power, mātauranga Māori is for Māori by Māori. Perceptions of Māori in research has historically focussed on the negative aspects of being Māori. Examples of these Graham Smith, “The Dialectic Relation of Theory and Practice in the Development of Kaupapa Māori Praxis,” in A Kaupapa Māori Reader: A collection of readings from the Kaupapa Rangahau Workshop Series, 2nd edition, ed. Leonie Pīhama, Sarah-Jane Tiakiwai and Kim Southey (Hamilton: Te Kotahi Research Institute, 2015), 18-27. 32 Cram F, “Marginalisation, Talking Ourselves Up”, in Alternative: an international journal of indigenous scholarship. Special supplement, 2006, 28-45. 33 Two examples were the Anglican based Te Whare Wānanga and the Presbyterian Wānanga a Rangi that I was Director of for thirteen years. 31 19 are the focus on the high rate of crime and the high incarceration rate of Māori. The reclamation of power includes engaging the participants as active members of the research from its inception through to the dissemination of the results. The over-arching question is ‘how will the community I am researching benefit from this research?’ This concern goes a long way towards gaining the trust and confidence of Māori communities, many of whom have been damaged by research that took and gave little in return. As mātauranga Māori theory and methodology has developed over the last twenty years it has become the preferred methodology amongst Māori scholars across a vast range of disciplines. Results have shown that it does not compromise academic rigour instead it allows the scholar to articulate their own cultural truths and realities within the western dominant academic institutions. Mātauranga Māori advocates academic excellence while acknowledging that people have fundamentally different ways of seeing and thinking that are valid and different to that which is considered to be normal in the institution. This thesis will apply a Mātauranga Māori methodology to key biblical texts about Jesus Christ and draw out new insights that can contribute to the rich tradition of Christological reflections about Jesus Christ. Conclusion In this chapter I have outlined some personal goals in this three-year doctoral journey as part of the overall purpose of this research project and thesis. I have also defined the research question as the re-visioning of Christology through a Māori lens. At the conclusion of the definition of terms I have explained the methodology that is used in this thesis as mātauranga Māori in theory and in application. Chapter two examines the social location of the researcher and writer of this thesis in order to lay out the influences in the formation of my own Christological views. An important factor to be aware of is that my own particular perspective and commitments influence how Jesus Christ is seen. This self-analysis looks at specific areas of my interest in Christology and concludes that the driving factors that influence my Christological views are whakapapa, an awareness of tribal history, and cultural and religious affiliations. 20 CHAPTER TWO Theology and Social Location Introduction One of the central premises of this thesis is that while the work of Christian theology involves, first and foremost, attentiveness to the Word of God revealed in Jesus Christ and witnessed to in Scripture, it is also profoundly shaped by the particular location of those undertaking the task. In this chapter I will describe my own social location and identify those factors that influence the Christology to be developed later in the thesis. Determining factors of social location include but are not limited to ethnicity, gender, social class, age, ability, religion, sexual orientation, and geographic location. These factors confer a certain set of ways of being, power, status and privilege (or lack of) which influence a person’s identity and how they perceive and interact with the topic under research. Cultural Influences I am the whāngai (adopted by customary practices) child of Hepeta and Millie Amiria Te Kaawa QSM. Whāngai means to feed or be fed, as a mother feeds her child on her breast. I am the second son and the pōtiki (youngest child) of their three whāngai children. My birth mother is the younger sister of Millie Amiria. In 1963 Hepeta and Millie’s son Charles passed away at the age of four years and three months later I was born. To ease their mourning, I was gifted to them as their replacement son. I was raised in the eastern Bay of Plenty settlement of Onepu which has a population of about 200 people. The sole iwi (tribe) in Onepu is Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau, who are the descendants of the ancestor Tūwharetoa who lived in Kawerau during the late 16th century. This ancestor had an illustrious genealogy and was a warrior of repute but it is his diplomatic skills that he is remembered for. His best-known titles that describe his personality and quality include: Tūwharetoa waewae rakau: Wooden legged Tūwharetoa as he never rested when on a war party. Tūwharetoa kai tangata: The man-eater, a reference to his prowess as a warrior undefeated in battle. Tūwharetoa i te Aupōuri: Tūwharetoa who felt the pain of his father Māwake-taupo who was struck down in battle. 21 The tribal pepeha (proverb) of Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau is expressed thus: Pūtauaki te maunga Takanga i o Apa te wai Tūwharetoa te tipuna Tūwharetoa te iwi Ko Te Aotahi te tangata Pūtauaki is the mountain Takanga i o Apa is the sacred waters Tūwharetoa is the ancestor Tūwharetoa are the people Te Aotahi is the person Today there are an estimated 44,000 people throughout the world who claim descent from the ancestor Tūwharetoa. My secondary iwi includes Ngāti Awa and Ngāi Tūhoe both of the eastern Bay of Plenty. I have a whakapapa (genealogical) connection to two Ngāti Awa hapū (sub-tribes) in Te Teko, Ngā Maihi and Te Pahipoto. They are close relations of Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau genealogically and geographically. I have further whakapapa connections to the iwi Ngāi Tūhoe of the Urewera and a special relationship to the 19th century messianic Māori prophet Rua Kenana. Finally, I have a whakapapa connection to Ngāti Kahungunu through the wellknown ancestor Te Whatu i a piti who lived in the Hawkes Bay during the 16th century. I acknowledge that my early teachers were my parents Hepeta Te Kaawa and Millie Amiria Te Kaawa QSM. From Hepeta I learned the art of whaikōrero (public speech making) and from Millie I learned the practice of whakapapa. Hepeta was acknowledged as the rangatira (leader) and mauri korero (lead orator) of Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau in the 1980s and 1990s.1 He was also an acknowledged orator for Te Pahipoto hapū of Ngāti Awa and Ngāi Tūhoe. Hepeta also had an illustrious whakapapa and history that connects to the prophet Rua Kenana of Ngāi Tūhoe. Te Rua2 rose to prominence in the Urewera and came to national attention when he claimed to be the messiah, the Holy Spirit and the brother of Jesus Christ. He built a township on the slopes of Maungapōhatu the sacred mountain of Ngāi Tūhoe. The township consisted of between one thousand and fifteen hundred people. This township, complete with bank and temple, was modelled, according to the interpretation of Te Rua, on what the New Jerusalem referred to in the book of Revelation would look like in this country. Politically this was an Jim Irwin in his memorial minute for his former Te Wānanga a Rangi Ministry student Hepeta Te Kaawa wrote that as paramount chief he was also mauri-korero of his iwi that when he spoke you were left with no doubt that his ancestors had spoken through him in his words, his stance and in his actions, he was the physical embodiment of his ancestors in this world. Memorial minute, Presbyterian General Assembly, 1994. 2 Rua Kenana is always referred to in the first reference by his full name. Subsequent references refer to him as Te Rua. Among his hapū of Tamakaimoana he is referred as Tai. 1 22 attempt by Te Rua to live outside of state control and intervention in order to shield his people from colonisation. To attract more followers to his cause Te Rua arranged a marriage between his second son Toko and Tawhakirangi the daughter of Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau leader Awa Horomona o Rau and Pareake from the influential Pahipoto hapū of Ngāti Awa. I am a product of this union as the whakapapa shows: Genealogy 1: Whakapapa of Rev Wayne Te Kaawa: Awa Horomona o Rau = Pareake Rua Kenana = Pinepine Kiira Te Kaawa = Tawhakirangi = Toko Rua Hepeta Horomona Wayne Te Kaawa Toko and Tawhakirangi were married and had one son, Horomona. In April 1916 armed constabulary arrived in Maungapōhatu to arrest Rua Kenana on charges of sedition and illegally supplying alcohol. In the melee that followed four police officers were critically wounded and two followers of Te Rua were shot and killed, including his son Toko. This left Tawhakirangi widowed and a solo mother at the age of twenty. Tawhakirangi remarried Kiira Te Kaawa of Ruatāhuna and amongst her children is Hepeta Te Kaawa who became the leading rangatira of Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau in the 1980-1990 period. After Hepeta died I succeeded him and took up my father’s position as one of the tribal orators for Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau. Since the death of Tawhakirangi in 1980 and her son Hepeta in 1994 I have had a pastoral role in supporting the Tamakaimoana hapū of Maungapōhatu in their pursuit of recognition and justice from the Crown following the day that the ‘Kings Crown’3 arrived at Maungapōhatu. This is the way that the people of Maungapōhatu refer to the Crown invasion of Maungapōhatu on Sunday April 2nd, 1916, and to the day of Te Rua’s arrest. One-hundred and three years later the Crown acknowledged their wrong doing by passing into legislation an official pardon to Rua Kenana. This was followed by an apology delivered by the Governor General three days later in Maungapōhatu to the descendants and followers of Te Rua. In 2011 Millie was awarded a Queens Service Medal in acknowledgement of her services to Te Aka Puaho, the Māori Synod of the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand. For over sixty years she was an elder of the Church and became the second Māori 3 See: Judith Binney, Gillian Chaplin and Craig Wallace, The Prophet Rua Kenana and his Community at Maungapōhatu. (Wellington: Oxford University Press, 1979), 84; Judith Binney, Encircled Lands, Te Urewera, 1820-1921. (Wellington: Bridget Williams Books, 2009), 572. 23 woman to become Moderator of Synod. She explained to me that the kaitiaki (guardians, holders, keepers and teachers) of whakapapa and histories often captured in mōteatea (tribal songs) in our iwi are women, not men. At her funeral in January 2018 I delivered her eulogy based on Proverbs 1: 8: Whakarongo, e taku tama ki te ako a tōu pāpā, kaua e whakarērea te ture a tōu whaea. Listen my son to the teachings of your father, do not forsake the law of your mother. The eulogy was dedicated to highlighting some of the laws that she modelled in her life, karanga (call of welcome), whakapapa (genealogy) and whāngai (customary adoption) which are all important components in whakapapa. As a kaikaranga she had forty-eight years of practical lived experience of karanga. Her first experience of karanga was at her home marae, Te Ahi-inanga, in Onepu during the tangihanga (funeral) of her Uncle Sam Savage in 1972. She was taught the art of karanga by her mother, Merehira Hūnia. After the death of her mother in 1971 her aunties Pohoira and Hineira Manuera4 of Ngāti Awa, and Puhi Tatu5 of Tūhoe from Waimana encouraged her. She was acknowledged as a master Kaikaranga rongonui by her peers6 and when her peers began dying, she personally selected and taught a younger generation of kaikaranga from many different marae. She taught that karanga was about weaving relationships between the people you represent, both living and dead and the visitors who arrive at your marae. As the host she would extend the welcome to the visitors to enter onto the marae which would be responded by the visiting kaikaranga. Between the two kaikaranga they would start weaving the genealogical relationships between host and visitor by identifying who their respective tupuna (ancestors), hapū (sub-tribe) and marae (gathering place) were. The identified connections would be further developed by the male orators where common ancestors and histories would be elaborated on. As a pair my parents were nationally recognised as a dynamic duo; one wove the first strand of relationship in the karanga, the other elaborated and delved deeper into the Pohoira and Hineira are sisters to Eruera Manuera paramount chief of Ngāti Awa. The movie: Rain of the Children, by Vincent Ward is based on the relationship between Puhi Tatu, her son Niki and Vincent Ward. The movie tells the life story of Puhi Tatu. 6 Some of her peers included: Katarina Waiari of Kōkōhīnau marae, Te Teko; Mere Moses of Tuteao marae, Te Teko; Mona Riini, of Ruatāhuna and Ruātoki; Hokimoana Te Rika-Hekerangi, of Uwhiarae marae, Ruatāhuna; Mere Walker of Rautahi marae, Kawerau. 4 5 24 connections in oratory. Together they solidified those connections in singing the appropriate mōteatea that made it possible to keep those historic relationships alive in this generation. Since her husband died in 1994, it has been observed on many occasions that the orators who succeeded him did not have sufficient depth of knowledge concerning whakapapa connections. My mother would sit behind the orators giving them the names of common ancestors and histories to enable the orators to acknowledge publicly the historic connections when they spoke. Failure to do this would have been deemed an insult to the visitors. This was an example of her teaching that women in her iwi were the holders, keepers and teachers of whakapapa and the histories captured in mōteatea. On many occasions with my mother I would travel to out of the way places, to hills and valleys throughout the country to attend various gatherings. Often the purpose was unknown to me and I would ask, ‘what is the purpose?’ In response, my mother would explain by providing the connections to the people of that place through a common ancestor and history. When in certain areas our identity as Ngāti Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau would be set aside. Due to common ancestry and history we would be at an event as the descendants of Titoko Taiepa and Urukeiha of Ngāti Tama of Matahi. On other occasions we would attend gatherings as the descendants of Rutu Haruru and Parekohai of Ngāi Tatua in Waimana, as the daughter-in-law and mokopuna (grandchild) of Kiira Te Kaawa of the Tamakaimoana hapū of Ruatāhuna and Maungapōhatu. When in Te Teko we would attend events as the descendants of Hāmiora Pio of Ngā Maihi or as descendants of Pareake and Awa Horomona o Rau, of Te Pahipoto hapū of Ngāti Awa. In Rotorua amongst Te Arawa we were there as Ngāti Whakaue, descendants of Heeni Pirihongo and Kirihi Renata. In the Hawkes Bay province, we would attend events as Ngāti Kahungunu and Te Whatu i a Piti as descendants of Te Moana. When amongst these iwi, we moved, lived, spoke and with every fibre of our beings, we would breathe as Ngāti Awa, Ngāi Tūhoe, Ngāti Whakaue, Ngāti Kahungunu and Te Whatu i a Piti as appropriate to the occasion. Whakapapa is about keeping those historic connections alive not for our personal benefit but for the benefit of generations not yet born. Religious Influences: My religious identity is that of a fourth generation Presbyterian. My ancestor Hāmiora Pio IX (1814-1901) began the family’s journey with Christianity when he took his whanau from belief in Io and Atua Māori7 to the Roman Catholic Church in the 1860s. Pio became a travelling 7 These two terms are a Māori pre-Christian understanding of God. 25 catechist with the Roman Catholic Church in the Bay of Plenty. At his baptism he took the name Samuel (Hāmiora) from the Old Testament book of Samuel. When he became a catechist, he took the name of the reigning Pope Pius IX (Pio IX). His children and grandchildren were baptised by the Catholic Fathers on the 23rd December 1880 at St Joseph’s parish in Matata. After thirty years of being a catechist and working with various Priests, Pio became disillusioned with the practice of the Priest’s due to their constant petitioning of their parishioners for money. Pio chose to leave the Roman Catholic Church stating to his Priest: I have an ancestor of my own, you keep to your ancestor and I will keep to mine; Rangi is my ancestor, the origin of the Māori people, your ancestor is money, you go about preaching in order to make money.8 Pio returned to the Io tradition becoming a noted practising traditional tohunga officiating at the opening of the significantly carved meeting house Rauru in Rotorua in 1901.9 It was considered to be very significant as every aspect of the house was carved at a time when many carved houses were being dismantled due to missionary beliefs that the carving symbolised idols. He believed that traditional Māori religion was more beneficial and held more hope and vitality than Christianity for his people. While he was still involved as a Roman Catholic teacher, Hāmiora publicly opposed the Ringatū prophet Te Kooti, suggesting that the God of Te Kooti was different to the God of the true prophet Jesus Christ.10 In spite of this opposition Eru Tumutara the third child of Hāmiora Pio became a devout follower of the Ringatū Church. Eru appeared on the Ringatū Church list of practising tohunga in 1923. The following year at the Church’s General Assembly Eru was elected the leader of the Ringatū church. Rather than taking the title of Poutikanga which his predecessor had taken Eru took the title of Bishop, the first Māori to become a Bishop in any denomination. He held this position and title until his death in 1929. Under his leadership a number of important developments were made by Ringatū including the legal registration of Ringatū as a Christian Church. In 1921 Tahu Pōtiki Wiremu Ratana made a visit to Te Teko during his first evangelistic national tour. Some members of the Pio whanau attended the visit and became followers of the Elsdon Best, Tūhoe, Children of the Mist. (Wellington: Reed Publisher, 1972), 1032. A description of this event is included in, Maui Pomare and James Cowan, Legends of the Māori. (Auckland: Southern Reprints, 1987), 259-271; See also: Nicholas Thomas, Mark Adams, James Schuster and Lionel Grant, Rauru, Tene Waitere, Māori Carving, Colonial History. (Dunedin: Otago University Print, 2009). A photo of Hāmiora Pio in a group photo is on the front cover. 10 Judith Binney, Redemption Songs, A life of Te Kooti Arikirangi Te Turuki. (Auckland: Auckland University Press and Bridget Williams Books, 1995), 350. 8 9 26 new prophet. The new followers included Renata Hapimana, nephew of Eru. From 1921, Ratana became an accepted Church along with Ringatū in Onepu. The whakapapa below shows the link between Hāmiora Pio, Eru Tumutara and me: Genealogy 2: Whakapapa of Hāmiora and Te Whakahoro to Rev Wayne Te Kaawa Hamiora Pio Huhana (f) Te Wharangi (m) Renata Merehira Millie Amiria Wayne Te Kaawa11 = Te Whakahoro Te Akaurangi Eru Tumutara (m) Hoani Karekare (m) In 1928 an even more remarkable encounter occurred between the Bishop and a Presbyterian missionary, Rev John Laughton. This encounter resulted in Eru Tumutara, the Ringatū Bishop and leader of his iwi12 gifting the children and grandchildren of his iwi to the Presbyterian Church who would provide a school for them. This added a third Christian Church to our growing tribal ecumenism, a reality expressed in an often-quoted proverb by Eru Tumutara: E toru ngā Haahi o Tūwharetoa, ko te Ringatū, ko te Ratana me te Perehipitiriana There are three accepted Churches of Tūwharetoa, Ringatū, Ratana and Presbyterian. This proverb is based on a kupu whakaari (prophetic saying) of Te Kooti from the 1890s who instructed the Tūwharetoa iwi to move from Matata to Onepu as the land in Onepu possessed three taonga (treasures) one of which is gold. These three taonga found in the land would bring benefits for future descendants. Forty years after Te Kooti uttered the words of his kupu Whakaari, Eru interpreted the three taonga as the three Churches, Ringatū, Ratana and Presbyterian who all had a church base in Onepu. The gold he interpreted as, faith in Jesus Christ, which is the common faith expressed by the three Churches. This ecumenical understanding was also expressed by Eru when he officiated at a function in Poroporo near Whakatane when he uttered another proverb: 11 12 Genealogy supplied by W Te Kaawa. By this time Eru Tumutara had become the paramount chief of his Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau. 27 He huna tā te tangata, he kimi, he rapu i ēnei ra, e te iwi e, awhinatia te kotahitanga. The thing that we search for that is hidden from us today is unity. 13 As an iwi, Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau, having gifted people and land to the various Churches, have remained loyal to the Ringatū Church since the 1890s, the Ratana Church since 1921 and the Presbyterian Church since 1928. Each of the three denominations had a relevant message and mission that brought benefits to the iwi at the time they came into contact with each other. Ringatū brought a message of seeking justice against the injustice of land confiscations; Ratana brought a mission of spiritual and physical healing in a time of epidemics; and the Presbyterians brought the benefits of a school that provided a religious based education. My Current Location I am a licensed and ordained minister of word and sacrament of the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand. I graduated from the Dunedin based, Presbyterian School of Ministry in 2002 and from then until 2017 my ministry practice was within Te Aka Puaho, the Presbyterian Māori Synod. From 2002 to 2017 I served in both rural and urban Māori pastorates of Pūtauaki, Rotorua and Opotiki which are all located within the eastern Bay of Plenty region. From 2005 to 2017, I was the Director of Te Wānanga a Rangi14 and the Director of Amorangi ministry training, an indigenous model of self-supporting ministry. From 2011 to 2017 I was also the Moderator of the Māori Synod. Currently I am the minister of St Mark’s Presbyterian Church in Pinehill, Dunedin, a small church of twenty-five people. The ethnic make-up of the congregation is mainly Pākehā but now includes four Māori families, one Tuvalu family and one Philippine family. Christological Influences The goal of positioning myself in a social location is to acknowledge the link between my own location and the topic of my research. This connection helps to identify the influences, values and attitudes I bring to my research and may also expose some prejudices. I wish to be clear about how my own experiences and worldview shapes my approach to the topic. 13 Eru Tumutara, Poroporo, 1927. Te Wānanga a Rangi is the training institution for members of Te Aka Puaho who wish to become Amorangi ministers. 14 28 As the only fulltime paid Māori ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church, I have travelled widely and have taken a special interest in how Jesus Christ is understood and expressed in Māori communities. Four experiences have deepened my interest in Christology. The first was a conversation with tohunga Hohepa Kereopa, and the second was attending the tangi and funeral of the Rev Kori Kātene-Hill in Te Hāroto. The third experience arose from discussions during weekly Sunday services in the Pūtauaki Māori pastorate. The final experience was my role as Director of Amorangi ministry training for the Presbyterian Māori Synod. Hohepa Kereopa was an Iharaira15 tohunga and an Elder in the Presbyterian Church; he was also a noted and respected practitioner of rongoa.16 I had known him since 1983. During Easter of April 1995 I was sitting in Takatūtahi Church in Whakatane with Hohepa Kereopa, Millie Te Kaawa, and Marina Rakuraku. I asked the question, who is Jesus Christ for Ngāi Tūhoe? Hohepa immediately responded with the words, Ko Tāne te Karaiti (Tāne is Jesus Christ). In the Māori creation stories, Tāne became the dominant figure and created the tree, plants, shrubs, bird life and the stars. Hohepa explained to me that the world of Tūhoe consists of the Urewera, a remote, rugged and immense primeval forestland and lakes. It was the home of the Tūhoe people who did not have a migration story of coming in waka from the Pacific but maintained a creation story in which the origin ancestor of Pōtiki-tiketike was born of the land of the Urewera. This was the world of Tūhoe that originated with Tāne the creator God. My second experience that sharpened my Christological awareness was attending and participating in the tangi and funeral service for the Rev Kori Kātene-Hill in Te Hāroto.17 The hapū at Te Hāroto are Ngāti Hineuru. After the funeral service the leader of the Ratana brass band explained to me the significance of the names of the wharenui (meeting house) and wharekai (house for eating / dining room). The wharenui was named Te Rongopai by Te Kooti and the wharekai was named Piriwiritua by the Māori prophet, Tahu Pōtiki Wiremu Ratana. The band leader explained to me that both names expressed how each of the prophets understood Jesus Christ. The word Rongopai is understood as the Gospel and was used by Te Kooti with this interpretation and understanding to name the house Rongopai in the community of Waituhi near Gisborne. The word Gospel comes from the Old English gōdspel meaning good news, 15 Iharaira meaning Israelites are the followers of Rua Kenana a 19th centuryMāori prophetic figure. Herbal remedies. For further information see: Paul Moon, A Tohunga’s Natural World, Plants, gardening and food. (Auckland: David Ling Publishing Limited, 2005). 17 Te Hāroto is situated on the Napier-Taupō highway and is the midway point on this road. 16 29 which in turn translated evangelium in Latin and the Greek euangelion. Te Kooti used Rongopai with the understanding that Jesus Christ is the bringer of the good news and the message of good news. In the context of Te Hāroto, Rongopai means peace. The naming of the wharenui Rongopai as peace was a statement of Jesus as the messenger who both brings the message and embodies the message of peace. Piriwiritua was an important part of the mission of Tahu Pōtiki Wiremu Ratana. After his national evangelistic tours, international tours and the building of his Temple, Ratana focussed his mission on social justice. He took the name Piriwiritua, the treaty campaigner.18 Piriwiritua was an incarnational ministry in which Jesus Christ was fleshed out in the physical world by the ministry of Ratana. Jesus Christ in the work of Ratana was the campaigner for human rights that focussed on three aspects; statutory recognition of the Treaty of Waitangi, righting the wrongs of the land confiscations, and political representation by capturing the Māori seats in parliament. In the context of Te Hāroto the political landscape shaped theological reflection. The vehicle for communicating Christological reflection was the building of elaborately carved houses as a statement of identity, belief and intent. Despite their context of land loss, the people were still able to produce finely decorated houses that signalled their inner strength and resolve not to be a defeated people. The artwork in wharenui associated with Te Kooti was an interplay between the old world and the contemporary world often with theological messages embedded within it. In the midst of land loss and colonisation in Te Hāroto Jesus was the embodiment of peace and a campaigner for human rights. My third experience was the weekly discussions during my Sunday sermons in Te Teko, Onepu, Waiōhau, Ruatāhuna and Maungapōhatu. These were all intensely Māori speaking communities. The discussions gave me a glimpse into how the people in these communities perceived and understood Jesus Christ. Church became the place where biblical passages were exegeted and theories were publicly debated by the congregation. An example of this was the section of the Gospels known as the ‘road to Jerusalem’.19 The majority view of my congregation when reading it from their worldview was that the journey to Jerusalem was a protest ‘hīkoi’. A hīkoi is a term that has become synonymous with protest marches usually implying a long journey taking several days or weeks. The nature and methodology of the journey by Jesus mirrored some of the principles of the Māori land march 18 19 Keith Newman, Ratana Revisited, An Unfinished Legacy. (Auckland: Reed Publishing Ltd, 2006), 234. Matt 16 - 21; Mark 10 – 11; Luke 9 – 19. 30 of 1975, the hīkoi to Waitangi in 1984 and the Foreshore and Seabed hīkoi in 2004, and to a lesser degree the hīkoi of hope from the 1990s. Many of those in my congregations were participants in these hīkoi and the story of Jesus on the road to Jerusalem resonated with their experiences of their protest hīkoi to Wellington. With the reflections of those who went on the Foreshore and Seabed hīkoi to Wellington, in comparison the journey by Jesus to Jerusalem became a well organised and supported protest march of Jesus to Jerusalem to confront the leaders of the nation over their policies of exclusion. This will be discussed in chapter eight which examines the people of the land and Jesus. The final week of Jesus in the Jerusalem Temple mirrors the land occupations at Bastion point (1977-1978), the Raglan Golf course (1978), the Pākaitore occupation in Whanganui (1995) and currently the Ihumātao occupation in Auckland (2019). When Jesus arrives in Jerusalem, he makes a point of heading directly to the Temple where he creates a public disturbance by clearing the Temple of money changers and traders. In that week he occupies the Temple and its surrounds as his base of operations which sees him eventually arrested at the end of the week, put on trial and publicly executed. Similarities between the Jesus story and the issues engaged by people in the pastorate of Pūtauaki saw images of a radical Jesus emerge. From those in the congregation who occupied and blockaded their historic lands in Kawerau in the mid-1990s, Jesus was the protestor who stood up for the rights of those who were being threatened with further land loss. For those in the Pūtauaki congregation who marched to Wellington in the 2004 Foreshore and Seabed hīkoi Jesus was the protector of those seeking justice for the denial of their legal rights. In the context of protests and occupations the purpose of theology is to give hope and direction in difficult times when people’s inherited land rights were placed at risk. Christology had to relate to the issues confronted by people or risk being dismissed as being out of step with the people and the issues of the day. The fourth experience came as Director of Amorangi ministry training from 2005 to 2017. During that tenure it was painfully obvious that there were few books, articles or research available from a Māori theological perspective to draw upon. The only way to fill that void was to create your own resources. Students would be given a five-thousand-word essay to answer the Christological question posed by Jesus; who do you say I am? Students were all Māori with an age range of between 25 to 73 years and there was an equal ratio of male and female students. Some students were tribally based while others lived outside their tribal areas in urban situations but maintained their tribal identity. Over my thirteen years as Director only two of the forty students were not tribally based and lacked fluency in the Māori language. 31 Culture and life experience framed many of the answers in the assignment. Initially there was resistance as the cultural appropriateness and integrity of the question was immediately questioned. Within the cultural context of the students the question posed by Jesus was culturally offensive as in Māori society the correct question was, nō hea koe (where do you say I come from). The question was then reframed in their language with the appropriate cultural nuances so as not to be offensive. Only then could the question be engaged with. Some answered the question by drawing on significant features of their tribal landscape such as a mountain, a river or a piece of land. Others drew on pūrākau (legends), mōteatea (chants), whakatauāki / whakatauākī (proverbs), and waiata (songs) to answer the question, while others chose artistic expressions of the koru.20 Some explored the question through the meaning and application of the Māori values of aroha (love), manaaki (care/hospitality) and rangimārie (peace). The dual purpose of the assignment was firstly, to introduce the student to Christological reflection and secondly, to fill a void in the lack of written material by Māori in the area of Christology. Their formal classes on Christology involved study of the conventional content on the nature and work of Jesus Christ and his significance for salvation. At no time did any student attempt to answer the question using traditional or orthodox Christological methods. The preference was to engage through a different methodology of culture and context. The environment and context shaped not only their worldview but also their Christological views. The public spaces and places in which theology is usually done and the approach taken differs from the spaces and the modes in which theology is done in the non-Māori world. The assignments submitted by students became valuable teaching resources for future courses. Conclusion: As the person engaged in this Doctoral research, I have a social location that is primarily defined by ethnicity, religion and gender all of which inform and shape my Christological views. In the account given above of my social location I focussed particularly on ethnicity, religion and ministry experience. The impetus for completing a doctorate in Christology is to add to the resource material on Christological reflection by Māori. Ethnicity is provided by birth into a specific culture, in this case the Māori culture of Aotearoa New Zealand from 1964 to the present day. Ethnicity is expressed in this context as being tangata whenua (people of the land). By population Māori are a minority ethnic group but this label is rejected by Māori who contend that tangata whenua better captures the notion 20 A koru refers to the unfurling leaf of the koru plant and is interpreted as symbol of life. 32 of belonging and identity. The right to be tangata whenua comes from ancestral descent and is experienced and lived in my own life in both a rural based tribal setting and in a pan-tribal urban setting. From my ethnic background comes an interest in whakapapa and land connections that will be often quoted in this thesis. The position and status that I have within my own cultural community is that of orator and Presbyterian minister. The status of orator and the practice of oratory within my own tribal setting belongs solely to males. Due to the influence of a number of elderly female tribal and religious figures I am aware, however, of the importance of including the voices of Māori women in this research and writing. The second influence upon me is my history with the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand as an ordained minister. Religiosity like culture comes with a whakapapa and is layered with stories of generations of interaction with specific Churches. The whakapapa of religiosity begins for me with Io and Atua Māori who are considered internal to my iwi and do not come from some outside influence. Then comes a whanau (extended family) journey involving the following of three different prophetic figures before a final commitment was made to the Presbyterians. As a parish minister and Director of Amorangi ministry training, Christology has been quite central and has involved different ways of doing Christological reflection. This has given me a sharpened awareness of Christology that has grown out of the encounter between historical and contemporary Māori culture, and Christianity. An area of future research identified in this chapter is Atua Māori and how this relates to the Christian concept of God. The Christian God is understood in scriptures as the revelation of Jesus Christ. The challenge would be to explore if Atua Māori could extend to fully embrace an understanding of Jesus Christ. While Atua Māori is part of this thesis its significance deserves more focussed in-depth attention as an independent subject of investigation. 33 CHAPTER THREE The talking house of Māori Christological reflection. Introduction In the previous chapter I examined my social location to identify factors that have influenced and shaped my own Christology. Self-awareness of external and internal influences in formulating my own Christology is the first stage in this thesis. This has now been completed and provides a foundation on which to build further. The question posed by Jesus to his disciples asking ‘who do they say I am’? is extended in this chapter to include a survey of ‘other Māori voices’ as they articulate their response to the Christological question. Amongst Māori there is no one definitive or homogenous view of Christology. What exists is a rich variegated tradition of Māori reflection on the person of Jesus Christ and his significance for faith and salvation that is both diverse and complex. In this chapter I will critically engage and examine the Christological scholarship of a selected group of thirteen Māori theologians. Each of the theologians will be introduced with a brief biography followed by an outline of their Christological reflections. At the conclusion of each segment I will highlight different words and images that provide new insights into Christology. This chapter will conclude with a creedal statement based on the reflections in this chapter. Outline of the survey of Māori Christological reflections: The criteria for inclusion in this chapter is the respective writer’s completion of academic Masters and Doctoral degrees in either theology, religious studies, history or education (with theological or religious research topics). For those who have not attained academic degrees the publication of theological papers, articles and books is the standard. The majority of writers have attained post-graduate degrees. The two people who have not attained the academic qualifications have made a substantial contribution to theological scholarship in this country with the publication of papers on theology in a bi-cultural and cross-cultural context. Eleven of the thirteen theologians have a tertiary teaching background with seven of the theologians having specialised in teaching theology at various tertiary institutes. Another qualifying aspect of inclusion in this survey is that those selected must write from within the Māori culture based on their lived experience rather than writing as an outsider. The people who have been selected all maintain an active involvement in their own respective iwi (tribe) or hapū (subtribe). At the time of writing their pieces eight of the theologians were living outside their rural traditional tribal region in an urban setting. Alternatively, five of the 34 writers lived in their own tribal region during their research and writing. All except one of the theologians write from their own denominational viewpoint with the one exception writing from the position of reclaiming their pre-colonial hapū (sub-tribe) theology. Within this representative group, six denominations are represented and ten of the scholars are ordained clergy within their respective denomination. Eight iwi are represented amongst the writers with the geographical spread of iwi covering both the North and South Islands of Aotearoa New Zealand. The gender mix is two female and eleven male and with respect to age, six of the theologians were under the age of sixty years old at the time of completing their writings. Consistent with my own tribal custom,1 the voice of the female kaikaranga (caller) is always the first voice heard on a marae during the pōwhiri (welcoming) ceremony. No event can begin on a Marae (customary public place) until the female voice initiates the welcoming process. When a tangi (three-day mourning ceremony) is held on the marae the voice of the female kaikaranga is the last voice that is heard on the marae. The kaikaranga farewells the deceased from the marae as they begin their journey to burial or cremation. To avoid this thesis being androcentric the first and last voice heard in this chapter will be the voice of a Māori woman. He whare korero, the talking house: Dr Moeawa Callaghan has a tribal affiliation to Ngāti Kahungunu, Te Whanau a Apanui and Ngāti Porou iwi. These East Coast iwi from the North Island are closely related by whakapapa (genealogy). Callaghan studied and taught at the Anglican College of John the Evangelist in Auckland. She gained a Master’s Degree in Theology with honours at the Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, through the Church Divinity School of the Pacific. Callaghan is the first Māori woman to gain a doctorate in theology in Aotearoa New Zealand and has written extensively on the topic of Māori theology and church history. She completed her doctorate at the University of Auckland in 2011 with her doctoral research on contemporary post-colonial views of the identity and significant of Jesus Christ which underpins Christology. The focus of her research was a select group of Mihingare (Anglican) Māori women who employed subtle strategies to resist colonial Christianity, thereby shaping a Christology of empowerment.2 Callaghan concludes her thesis with the belief that a mana wahine (women’s empowerment) research framework of whakapapa is an appropriate framework for the development of a Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau, Ngāti Awa, Ngāi Tūhoe all of the Eastern Bay of Plenty. Moeawa Makere Callaghan, “Te Karaiti in Mihingare Spirituality: Women’s Perspective.” (PhD diss, University of Auckland, 2011), ii-iii. 1 2 35 Mihingare women’s Christology. Callaghan was the co-ordinator of the Indigenous Programme at Laidlaw College in Auckland until the end of 2019. Currently Dr Callaghan is in a senior role in the Hawkes Bay with Te Ara Poutama (Ministry of Corrections). This survey analyses the Christology in Callaghan’s Doctoral Research. In her doctoral research, Dr Moeawa Callaghan examined colonial missionary models of Christology in the Wairoa area of the East Coast of the North Island and how they influenced Māori in their understanding of Christology. Callaghan examined letters between missionary James Hamlin and Toha, a prominent Ngāti Kahungunu leader from Wairoa. Callaghan found that the themes of salvation, atonement and resurrection were common in Hamlin’s letters. Also common was a repetition of the words sin, hell and fire. To describe Jesus Christ, Hamlin used the words Christ, and Son of God, Son of Man and the Word. These names he used interchangeably depending on the pastoral situation. Toha replied in writing to Hamlin with his language and imagery differing from that of the missionary; there is a notable absence of the words sin, hell and fire. Toha chose to base his responses to Hamlin on the love of God and Christ.3 A select group of Māori women Priests in the Wairoa area were interviewed to investigate whether the terms used by Hamlin were influential in shaping their own Christology. The results were conclusive that of the three missionary terms, two were still in circulation. The term ‘Son’ was the most commonly used term still in use today. This term they learnt in Sunday school when they were children. What was of interest is that the term ‘tipua’ was used equally as a term to describe Jesus Christ. The Reed Pocket Dictionary of Modern Māori describes tipua as, devil, foreign, strange, guardian spirit.4 The Te Aka dictionary describes tipua in similar terms as abnormal, terrifying, goblin, object of fear, strange being and a superhero.5 Lieutenant Colonel Gudeon described tipua as a type of differing shaped demon or uncanny thing.6 These descriptions of tipua are limiting and do not capture the essence of Māori whakaaro (thought) or mātauranga (knowledge) and limit a full understanding of the significance of the word tipua. A tipua could also be a mortal living human being with extraordinary achievements. This is illustrated by examining the life and achievements of the late Sir Apirana Ngata who was a person of such extraordinary intelligence, energy, vision and foresight that among his 3 Callaghan, Te Karaiti in Mihingare Spirituality, 93. P. M Ryan, The Reed Pocket Dictionary of Modern Māori (Auckland: Reed Publishing Ltd, 1999), 142. 5 Māori Dictionary Online (accessed 27 June 2017), https://maoridictionary.co.nz/ 6 W G Gudeon, “Te Tipua-Kura and other manifestations of the spirit world,” Journal of the Polynesia Society vol. 15, 1906, 27-29. 4 36 own iwi of Nāti Porou he was esteemed as a tipua. His official biography is entitled He Tipua and pays tribute to him as a nationally recognised leader of Māori and Pākehā. His position and status were based on his remarkable achievements rather than the traditional ascribed status of a hereditary chief.7 Since his era no individual person or collective organisation has been able to equal or surpass his astonishing achievements that include; student reformer, scholar, author, farmer, churchman, businessman, politician, teacher, poet, land reformer, developer of Māori farming, builder of meeting houses, instigator of the 28th Māori Battalion, supporter of Māori sports, promoter of Māori cultural revival, pioneer of sound recording Māori music, promoter of Māori broadcasting, supporter of education and fund-raiser extraordinaire.8 Callaghan describes Jesus Christ as: he tipua, te ngākau aroha o te Atua, a human person with extraordinary achievements who reveals the compassionate heart of God. As a tipua, Jesus becomes the presence of God as healer and reconciler.9 Jesus was human but in his short lifespan he made extraordinary achievements; he fed thousands of hungry people, he healed the sick, he gave sight to the blind, he drove out demons, he raised the dead, he walked on water, he changed water into wine, he calmed the winds and waves, he was an expert on interpreting the law, he was a religious and social reformer, he was an advocate for the rights of the poor and oppressed, he was a teacher who established his own community of followers who lived out his ethical teachings and he strove to unite the fragmented tribes of Israel. In the end Jesus was rejected by his people, was put to a gruesome death by crucifixion, but was then raised from death by God. A statement that captures the essence of the Christological reflections of Dr Moeawa Callaghan in her own words is; Jesus Christ is, he tipua, te ngākau aroha o te Atua, the presence of God as healer and reconciler.10 The late Rev Māori Marsden from the northern iwi of Ngāi Takoto was selected by his elders to train in the Whare Wānanga, a dedicated tribal school of higher esoteric learning. With the outbreak of World War II, he served overseas with the 28th Māori Battalion. The son of a Mihingare Priest he entered the College of St John the Evangelist in Auckland and was priested in 1957 one year after graduating from the University of Auckland with a Bachelor of 7 Ranginui, Walker, He Tipua: The Life and Times of Sir Apirana Ngata (Auckland: Penguin Books, 2001), 392. Walker, He Tipua, 12. 9 See, Callaghan, “Te Karaiti in Mihingare Spirituality, 240-250. 10 Callaghan, “Te Karaiti in Mihingare Spirituality, 240-250. 8 37 Theology.11 As a returned serviceman he kept his contacts with the Defence Forces and served as chaplain to the Navy until 1974. By invitation Marsden was a valued speaker in various government departments educating officials on how government policies implemented by their respective departments impacted upon Māori. After his death in 1993 a selection of his most well-known papers was compiled and published as a book The Woven Universe. This book is widely used in every University in Aotearoa New Zealand today and is perhaps one of the most important quoted publications to emerge from the academy in this country. This survey analyses the Christology in The Woven Universe. In his Christological reflection upon the nature, identity and significance of Jesus Christ for salvation, Marsden’s response is that Jesus is, ‘he reo’, the voice of Io the supreme Māori deity, who is immanent in creation.12 Marsden finds comparisons between a Christian understanding and a pre-colonial Māori understanding of God that are both sacramental and consecrational. He describes the created universe as te kahu o te ao, the fabric of the universe that was woven by Io, the grand weaver of creation. Marsden describes this ‘reo’ as a tohunga whakapapa, an expert genealogist who through the spoken reo weaves all things in creation into a vast fabric of relationships. Weaving relationships is an ethical act to prevent the fabric of the universe from being fragmented and severed. Marsden continues his pūrākau (creation narrative or origin story) with Io the creator summoning and commissioning the Atua (original ancestor) named Tāne to continue the task of completing creation. Io laid the foundations of creation then delegated the finishing details through Tāne to his brothers who included, Tāwhirimātea, Tangaroa, Tūmatauenga, Haumia tiketike, Rongo and Rūaumoko. Tane claimed two areas of responsibility, the forest and the birds, and the creation of people. Hohepa Kereopa of the Tūhoe iwi has a similar creation narrative describing Tāne as the creator God through whom Io both started and completed creation. Once creation was completed Io dissolved back into a spiritual state and Tāne became human.13 The creation narratives provided by Marsden contain differences and similarities to the Old Testament creation narratives. In the book of Genesis, Yahweh externally constructs the world but remains transcendent off creation maintaining a distinction between Creator and creation. This claim is made by Te Ahukaramū Royal but Auckland University did not award Bachelor of Theology degrees until 1990. See page xi of, Marsden, Māori, The Woven Universe: Selected Writings of Rev Māori Marsden. Te Ahukaramū Charles Royal, (ed.) Masterton: Published by the Estate of Rev Māori Marsden, 2003 12 Marsden, Māori, The Woven Universe: Selected Writings of Rev Māori Marsden. Te Ahukaramū Charles Royal, ed, (Otaki: Estate of Rev Māori Marsden, 2003), xiv. 13 Personal conversations, Takatūtahi Church Centre, Whakatane, April 1995. 11 38 The Gospel of John retells the creation event using Greek philosophical thought that reveals Jesus as the Logos, the Word of God. The New Dictionary of Christian Theology says that the word Logos is a noun derived from the Greek language that implies making a significant statement as opposed to mere opinion or story-telling.14 Three examples of Logos in Greek philosophical thought can refer to a ‘rational account’ of the world and human life, a ‘controlling principle’ as the universe evolved and as a ‘law’ which governed changes in the world.15 The Gospel of John begins by proclaiming that Jesus Christ is the Logos in person; as he is the human incarnation of the Word of God. A te reo Māori translation of John 1:1-8 gives the term ‘kupu’ for word which brings a new dimension to understanding Jesus Christ as Logos. According to the Reed Pocket Dictionary, reo can mean voice or language.16 Other words associated with reo are kupu (word) and korero (speak or talk). When combined and put into action they are a powerful agency. Māori society has many aphorisms capturing the power of the spoken word. Examples that I have heard and used over the years in various gatherings include: • • • • • he mana te kupu (the power of the spoken word which can be binding), te ōhākī (the last words of a dying person of a particular status which are also binding), te reo me ōna tikanga (the language and its customs), ko te kai a te rangatira, ko te korero (the food of chiefs is to talk), iti te kupu nui te korero17 (a small word can have so much meaning). Tied to these three words of reo, kupu and korero is a certain mana (authority). A prime example of this is when the Māori King speaks his words are considered binding on his followers and must be adhered to without question. The power of the spoken word is shown in the Old Testament creation stories, when Yahweh speaks the results are immediate. Describing Jesus Christ as a ‘reo’ is quite significant for Aotearoa New Zealand which acknowledges te reo Māori as one of its three official languages along with English and New Zealand sign language. However the language is under threat and fighting for its survival with only 3.7% of the population able to hold a conversation in te reo Māori.18 If the language is 14 Alan Richardson, John Bowden, A New Dictionary of Christian Theology. (London: SCM Press, 1983), 339. Alan Richardson, John Bowden, A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, 339. 16 Ryan, The Reed Pocket Dictionary of Modern Māori, 122. 17 This saying was used effectively by the Rev Mākarini Tēmara as the Chairperson of the Ātaarangi movement (a Māori language learning movement). Tēmara was asked to make a public statement as chairperson of the Ātaarangi movement and quoted this aphorism that the Ātaarangi movement developed into a song and sang at their major gatherings. 18 Māori Language Speakers, Statistics New Zealand, 2013, (accessed 15 November 2017), http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/snapshots-of-nz/nz-social-indicators/home 15 39 endangered and Jesus Christ is linked to the language then Jesus Christ becomes an advocate for the survival of the language lest he also becomes extinct with the language. There are a number of concepts that Marsden highlights that provide a new perspective from which to develop a Christology. These include the terms Io, Atua Māori, tohunga, whakapapa and reo. Io, is a stand-alone unique figure amongst Atua Māori. The Ryan Pocket Dictionary defines Atua as God.19 This is not a definition I fully agree with. Analysis of the word Atua suggests that it cannot simply be translated as God in the Christian sense, that is in the sense of the God revealed in Jesus Christ. Atua is a compound word consisting of atu meaning away from and tua, meaning the other side. A definition of Atua in my own tribal understanding is, ‘not from here, from another place.’ In my own tribal understanding Atua were not from this physical world but came to this world from another realm that was not physical. Humans were able to connect to these Atua through whakapapa (genealogy) so Atua could also mean original ancestor. Io is the first or original cause of creation and is the source of Atua. While Marsden argues for Io being a genuine pre-Christian God, distinguished scholar, Te Rangihīroa (Sir Peter Buck) questions the validity of the Io tradition. The Io traditions were first publicised by S Percy Smith in his 1913 The Lore of the Whare Wananga which contained the teachings of Te Mātorohanga, Te Whatahoro Jury and Nēpia Pōhūhū all of the Wairarapa region. Te Rangihīroa claimed that these learned men were converts to Christianity and worked Christian elements into the Io tradition before the detailed story of Io was committed to manuscript.20 The thirteen writers surveyed in this chapter have differing opinions on the validity of the Io-supreme God tradition. In classical Māori society tohunga (experts) held esteemed positions and were considered by the communities that they belonged to, to be experts in a wide range of different disciplines from navigation to building, the arts, medicines, healing, history and genealogy. Tohunga were also part of the political and social fabric of society, teaching their knowledge in whare wānanga, special schools of learning. From 1860 another type of tohunga arose who preyed on the superstitions of people with dubious methods of diagnosis and healing while earning a financial living from plying their trade. Sir Apirana Ngata described them as a bastardised version of the traditional healer while Te Rangihīroa described the modern day Ryan, The Reed Pocket Dictionary of Modern Māori, 28. Tate, Henare, He Puna Iti i Te Ao Marama: A Little Spring in the World of Light (Auckland: Libro International, 2012), 237. 19 20 40 tohunga as a fraud and a quack.21 Both these esteemed leaders helped pass into legislation the Tohunga Suppression Act in 1907 to outlaw the fraudulent practitioners who used questionable methods. Currently the only churches who apply the term tohunga to their ministers are the Ringatū church and both the Iharaira faith and Pai Mārire faith. This is under challenge by some Ringatū tohunga who prefer the title of minister which they believe to be a more correct description for their designated role in the Church.22 Marsden draws on the pre-colonial understanding of the tohunga as an expert in a certain discipline and describes the ‘reo’ as a tohunga whakapapa who weaves creation into relationships. The biblical basis for Marsden’s claim is Luke 18:10-14, the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector. As a teacher and authority on Mosaic Law the Pharisee thought that his status and achievements justified him in the sight of God while the sinner made no claims concerning his own merit in the sight of God. The sinner who humbled himself was justified before God while the Pharisee was humbled. Marsden reflects on this text saying that: The Crucified One did not claim any special privileges on the basis of who he was or what he had achieved. He let God justify him in the face of the defenders of pious works. Jesus is God’s sign that the decision depends not on man, but on God who expects an unshakable trust from man in his own passion.23 The relationships woven by Jesus the tohunga whakapapa during the creation event have been distorted and broken by sin which necessitates the return of Jesus in human form. The Gospels capture Jesus beginning to repair and reconcile the fractured relationship between humans and God. A statement that captures the essence of the Christological reflections of the late Rev Māori Marsden is, Jesus Christ is, te tohunga whakapapa, the expert weaver of relationships.24 Peter Buck, “Medicine amongst the Māori in Ancient and Modern Times.” (A Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Medicine, University of Otago, 1910), 109. 22 Rangitukehu Paul, Ringatū tohunga, Uiraroa marae, Te Teko, 2010. When I was the Presbyterian minister based in Te Teko the arrangement was that I would conduct funeral service on the marae while the Ringatū tohunga would conduct the burial service in the cemetery. During one particular service the Ringatū tohunga spoke after my service stating that he no longer wanted to carry the title of tohunga as what he did differed to what tohunga originally did and he appealed to his church to change their title to minister which was more consistent with the role they exercised. 23 Marsden, The Woven Universe, 91. 24 Marsden, The Woven Universe, xiv. 21 41 The late Rev Dr Henare Tate of Ngāti Manawa and Te Rarawa iwi of the Hokianga region was a priest of the Roman Catholic Church with over fifty years of experience in ordained ministry. He was a lecturer at the Catholic Institute of Theology in Auckland for twenty-two years and also lectured in the School of Theology at the University of Auckland. In retirement he earned a doctorate from the Melbourne College of Divinity with his doctoral research focussing upon contextual theology. In his doctoral research Tate developed a systematic theology based on a series of concepts that are deeply rooted in Māori culture. His doctorate was published in 2012 entitled, He Puna Iti i te Ao Marama: A Little Spring in the World of Light. This survey will analyse the Christology in his book which is recognised as a valuable theological publication that comes from this country. For Pā Henare Tate Jesus Christ is Te Mātāmua, the first born of creation. This idea is based upon Tate’s reading of Colossians 1:15-20: 15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16for in him all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers, all things have been created through him and for him. 17he himself is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18He is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that he might come to have first place in everything. 19 For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, 20and through him God was pleased to reconcile to himself all things whether on earth or in heaven, by making peace through the blood of the cross. In Māori society, the mātāmua is the first born in the whānau (extended family) and by right of primogeniture is also the head of the whānau. According to Tate, the role of the first born is to address, enhance and restore the tapu and mana of the whānau and within the whānau.25 Membership of the whanau of Jesus Christ is through baptism where you are grafted into a salvific structure that is based on whanaungatanga in Christ. The mātāmua defines whānau relationships and responsibilities allowing people to have the ability to move beyond the human limitations of whakapapa that restrict relationships to descent lines. This makes it possible to engage meaningfully with people from other genealogical descent lines. By accepting and acknowledging Jesus Christ as mātāmua all are inextricably linked as his whānau. Based on Romans 8:15-17: 15 For you did not receive a spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received a spirit of adoption. When we cry, “Abba! Father!” 16it is that very 25 Tate, He Puna Iti i te Ao Marama, 55. 42 Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if in fact, we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him. Tate explains that the specific role of the mātāmua is to assist his whānau members in crying out, Matua, Abba, Father.26 Jesus Christ as mātāmua is the self-revelation of Atua expressed as pono, tika, mana, tapu and Hohourongo. These are foundational principles of what Tate calls indigenous Māori theology that are couched in concepts, imagery, language, theology and liturgy that speak to people in this land in contemporary society and in terms of their relationships.27 The purpose of Tate’s book is to develop a kaupapa Māori theory and practice for doing theology. His summation is that Christianity has come up short and Māori are crying out for a theology that is for Māori by Māori and sourced in Māori religious and cultural experience. To achieve this, Māori must determine their own theological reflections utilising their own cultural forms from within the culture rather than as outsiders on the margins of the discussion. A unique style of Tate’s writing is that he capitalises the ‘A’ for Atua, regardless of whether referring to the Christian Atua or Atua Māori. The convention has always been to distinguish between the two by capitalising the ‘A’ when referring to the Christian God and using lower case ‘a’ for Atua Māori. This writing convention is traceable to early missionary writings, but for Tate reversing this convention helps to reclaim an understanding of God as Atua. Tate raises the issue of the inculturation of Jesus Christ into Māori culture and thought. Inculturation is a term used widely in the Roman Catholic Church while Protestant Churches commonly use the term Contextual Theology. Inculturation is the gradual acquisition and adaptation of Church teachings when presented to non-Christian cultures and in turn the influence of those cultures on the evolution of those teachings. The Biblical basis for inculturation is found in the great commission in the Gospels of Matthew 28:18 and Mark 16:15 where Jesus commissions his disciples to: ‘go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. 26 27 Tate, He Puna Iti i Te Ao Marama, 55. Tate, He Puna Iti i Te Ao Marama, 13. 43 Making disciples of all nations requires that the Gospel be presented in ways that can be understood in each nation. Inculturation becomes an issue in Galatians when opponents of the Apostle Paul teach salvation through legalism and demand that the Christian community in Galatia maintain obedience to Mosaic Law and become circumcised. Paul rejected this view and began the process of distinguishing Christian discipleship from traditional Jewish legal obligations. He taught salvation through faith rather than through obedience to Mosaic Law. In his Epistles, Paul taught, that to become Christian, Gentiles did not have to convert first to Judaism. This was a major contrast to the position of fellow Apostle James, brother of Jesus, whose Jerusalem community-maintained obedience to the Mosaic Law. Tate highlights that when the missionaries arrived in Aotearoa New Zealand the Christian faith was already enculturated in the culture of the missionaries. Some of the missionaries operated according to the policy, civilise first then Christianise second; they believed that their European culture equated to Christian culture. The damage caused to the target culture was great; Tate described this encounter as deculturation and argued that the original culture is now irretrievable.28 Some concepts did survive the deculturation process and were not completely decimated. The concept of Atua as God survived but was broadened and connection to the Christian God of the bible. Tate categories the Māori Atua into four types; supreme, departmental, tribal, and family. The Atua are grounded in the creator who brought them into being and in Tate’s view they may be regarded as an expression of what in Christian theology is called providence, God’s providential action in creation.29 In developing a Māori systematic theology Tate draws out some central aspects of Tikanga Māori (the Māori way of being) as a basis for expressing Christianity. The concepts of mana (power or authority), tapu (sacred or state of restriction), pono (truth), tika, (right way of doing things), aroha (love ), Hohourongo (reconciliation) and te wā (concept of time) have a common source in the Atua who is the fullness of these concepts. Jesus as the self-revelation of Atua is also the revelation and fulfilment of these concepts. Jesus integrates these concepts into his mission revealing them to the world in his life, death and resurrection. Biblical references to support the claims by Tate are derived from a reading of Timothy 2:13 that shows the faithfulness (pono) of Jesus in contrast to human faithlessness. Based on 2 28 29 Tate, He Puna Iti i Te Ao Marama, 19. Tate, He Puna Iti i Te Ao Marama, 39. 44 Peter 3:8, te wā has an eschatological aspect that provides a glimpse of time in eternity, while 2 Corinthians 6:2 provides te wā with the grace of salvation. The Gospel of Mark 1:15 gives te wā fulfilment when the moment of God’s grace occurs to challenge people to repentance and faith. A decisive impetus to act in a way that breaks with past patterns is drawn from the Gospel of Luke 19:44. When pono, tika and aroha are combined Jesus expresses these as God’s love poured out as outlined in Romans 5.5: and hope does not disappoint us, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit that has been given to us. In his earthly ministry Jesus actively restored and enhanced the tapu and mana of the people he met as it was their inheritance as children of God and co-heirs with Christ. Tate has a strong biblical base for his systematic theology and shares from his personal wealth of tribal stories and proverbs in his Christological reflection. The methodology of starting with a proverb is a common practice amongst Māori elders and leads into a story that illustrates the proverb and highlights certain teaching points that the elders wish to emphasise. A Christological statement expressing the Christology of the late Rev Dr Henare Tate is, Jesus Christ is te Mātāmua, the first born of all creation.30 The late Rev Canon Dr Hone Kaa is of Nāti Porou iwi of the East Coast of the North Island. He was ordained in 1965 in St Mary’s Church in Tikitiki while his father was Priest in charge of the pastorate. Kaa had a long and varied ministry in many parts of the country. His ministry extended to television and radio where he hosted his own show Te Tēpu that explored contemporary issues of national importance. He was a Commissioner in the Program to combat racism of the World Council of Churches and was a central figure in the Rūnanga Whakawhanaunga i ngā Hāhi o Aotearoa.31 Until his retirement he held the position of lecturer in Māori and Cross-cultural studies at Te Rau Kahikatea at the College of Saint John the Evangelist in Auckland. In 2003 he graduated with a Doctorate in Ministry from the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge. His articles on Māori theology have been published by various journals including the First Peoples Theology Journal which is a publication devoted to the study and expression of theology amongst Anglicans who are recognised as being indigenous people in their own country. This survey will analyse the Christology in one of his journal 30 31 Tate, He Puna Iti i Te Ao Marama, 55. Council of Māori Churches. 45 publications on the significance of a stained-glass window in St Mary’s Church in his home town of Tikitiki. The Venerable Dr Hone Kaa when reflecting on who Jesus Christ is for today refers to the significance of the stained-glass window in St Mary’s church in Tikitiki and describes Jesus Christ as a whāngai or adopted child of Nāti Porou. Christianity was introduced to his East Coast iwi not by European missionaries, but by one of their own people, Piripi Taumata-akura. In the 1820s at the age of twelve he was captured by the northern Ngā Puhi iwi on one of their East Coast raids and taken as a slave to the Bay of Islands. Later with the introduction of Christianity to the Bay of Islands his owners adopted Christianity and in response to the Gospel message liberated their slaves. Taumata-a-Kura became a Christian due to the influence of Christianity as the catalyst in gaining his freedom. Eventually he returned home to the East Coast in late 1833 and introduced to his people this new religion, thus initiating a transformation of their values, attitudes and practices. In the siege of Te Toka ā Kūkū, Taumata-a-kura introduced a chivalric code of conduct that showed respect for your fallen enemies by not stripping their bodies of clothes, jewellery, ammunition or weapons. Another change implemented by Taumata-a-Kura was the forbidding of cannibalism. Taumata-a-kura exhorted his people to follow these instructions as it would be pleasing to God.32 Their victory in battle was attributed to following the rules of the new God of Taumata-a-kura and the fame of Taumata-a-kura and his Christian God spread as far south as the Wairarapa. Taumata-a-kura and his Christian God were immortalised in song and dance such as Tihei Tāruke and Te Pārekereke and also celebrated in the artwork that adorns St Mary’s Church in Tikitiki. Not only were values, customs and practices transformed, but the understanding of Atua as God was given new life and brought to fullness as Atua Māori were reinterpreted in relation to the new Christian God of Taumata-a-kura. To illustrate this transformation Kaa draws on Matthew 5:17 to explain how the old Gods where given new life in Jesus Christ. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says that he has come to fulfil the Law, not abolish it. In the same way the God of Taumata-a-kura had arrived not to abolish the understanding of Atua as God but to facilitate its fulfilment in Christ. In 1868 Taumata-a-kura delivered his Easter Day sermon Hirini Kaa, “He Ngākau Hou: Te Hāhi Mihingare and the Renegotiation of Mātauranga, c.1800-1992.” (PhD diss, University of Auckland, 2014), 50. 32 46 showing the Atua working together in mutual unison when he stated that “Christ was sent to us by Hinenui te po.”33 Kaa speaks of this juxtaposition of Atua and the Christian God as: “adding to the fullness of my humanity in the pursuit of Christian ideals that broadens my Māori ideals because they open me to other possibilities of the power and nature of the Divine.”34 Transformation meant reinterpreting the significance and role that the Atua had in daily life in the light of the person and message of Jesus Christ which not only transformed the understanding of Atua as God but also granted Jesus Christ status as Atua. In other tribal areas such as Tūhoe of the Waimana valley when Christianity was accepted their Atua were put to sleep.35 Although they were put to sleep their renaissance became evident to Te Waaka Melbourne when he was challenged by a group of people who rejected Christianity. One of the allegations was that Christianity carried too much historical baggage. The group of people who laid the challenge believed that their salvation would come by returning to the Māori Gods.36 Their sharply-held rejection of Christianity was due to the colonial legacy that robbed people of their resources and their ability to be self-sufficient, leading to a life of deprived dependency. After spending time with the Māori section of the National Council of Churches in New Zealand, A Gnanasunderam a visiting Sri Lankan theologian addressed the Council on the topic of Atua as God saying: If Māori Gods die, they die very slowly. I believe that we have a duty not to allow our Gods to die because if they do die something dear to the Māori heart and mind dies. There is a place for these Gods in the life of the Māori Christian. To deny them is to deny our own history, our literature and our ancestors.37 Jubilee Turi Hollis, “Te Atuatanga: Holding Te Karaitianatanga and Te Maoritanga Together Going Forward.” (PhD diss, University of Canterbury, 2013), 227. 34 Hone Kaa, “A Journey of Hope and Liberation” First Peoples Theology Journal. vol 1 no 1, (July 2000), 48. 35 Tame Takao: Ohope marae, 2004. The Very Rev Tame Takao QSM was a former Moderator of both the Māori Synod and General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand. His great grand-uncle Tu Rakuraku petitioned the Presbyterian Māori Missions to build a school in the Waimana valley in 1924. Rakuraku responded to criticisms from some of the Waimana leaders at his request with the words: Waiho ngā Atua tawhito ki a matou hei haria ki te urupā hei wātea te huarahi pai mō aku tamariki, mokopuna, ara ko te Karaitiana me te mātauranga. (Leave the old Gods to us to take to the cemetery when we die freeing our children and grandchildren for the future). Tanatana marae, 1924. 36 Te Waaka Melbourne, “Māori Spirituality in the New Millenium’, in First Peoples Theology Journal, vol 1, no 3, (January 2005): 101. 37 A Gnanasunderam, “Māori Theology and Black Theology or a Theology of Liberation.” Paper presented to the National Council of Churches in New Zealand, Church and Society Commission, Auckland, 1966. 33 47 As a liberation theologian, Gnanasunderam encouraged the development of a distinctive Māori theology that incorporated the understanding of Atua as God. Kāhautu Maxwell gives an example of the Atua and their customs and practices given new life by being Christianised and becoming a stable feature of the Ringatū Church calendar. The appearance of Matariki or Pleiades on the early morning horizon signalled the beginning of the New Year and preparations were begun for the communal gardens. The gardens were under the designated care of the Atua, Rongo. The ‘pure’38 ceremony took place, removing the tapu (restrictions) from the gardens in order for planting preparations to begin. In the 1860s the New Zealand Land Wars introduced the Scorched Earth Policy where homes were burnt and crops including tubers were destroyed. As their gardens, crops and tubers were destroyed by Colonial forces the importance of Matariki, Rongo and the preparations of the gardens was soon discarded as various iwi went into survival mode. The Ringatū leader Te Kooti kept the rites, ritual and ceremonies associated with Mātāriki and gardening alive by giving them a Christian meaning and interpretation, Rongo was replaced with Ihowā (Jehovah) and the seeds and tubers likened to Jesus Christ. Rua Rakena adds another dimension to understanding Atua as God in light of Jesus Christ. Atua he says were acknowledged and invoked according to the needs of the moment.39 In pre-colonial times the emphasis was upon the direct relationship between the people and their Atua but this was soon replaced by missionaries who placed the church and their mission at the centre. This change replaced the people-God-people cycle of encounter with an ecclesiastical, hierarchical and ethno-patriarchal model of Church-Pākehā-civilisation-people model. This disenfranchised Atua as God which were reduced to being spelt with a small ‘a’ in atua while the Christian God was spelt with a capital ‘A’ in Atua. With the adoption of the new Atua of Taumata-a-kura, churches were soon built in the Waiapu valley and were endowed with Māori names reinforcing their tribal identity. Kaa says that these churches became pou-whenua, markers signifying identity and ownership.40 Pouwhenua were large carved posts placed prominently and permanently in the ground signifying ownership of a specific piece of land by a natural kinship grouping of people who claimed jurisdiction over that particular piece of land. This tribal practice demonstrated that Nāti Porou 38 A ceremony to lift restrictions. Rua Rakena, “The Māori Response to the Gospel.” (Auckland: Wesley Historical Society 1971), 36. 40 Hone Kaa, “A Stained-Glass Window: What do you see when you look through it?” First Peoples Theology Journal, vol 1 no 3, (January 2005), 12. 39 48 were primarily in control of their engagement with Christianity as they developed their own unique brand of tribal Christianity. St Mary’s Church in Tikitiki was built in 1926 as a memorial to the soldiers of Nāti Porou who died overseas on active duty during World War I. As they fell in battle, they were buried in war cemeteries throughout the European continent. One of the intentions of Apirana Ngata, the person who initiated the building of St Mary’s was to tell the stories of Nāti Porou through decorative tribal art forms that captured a pre-Christian understanding of Atua as God. Incorporated into this world of Atua is Jesus Christ who brought about its transformation and fulfilment. The intricate artwork in St Mary’s depicts important ancestors, events and stories of the local iwi in both pre-colonial and colonial times which Kaa describes as a living theological Nāti Porou statement.41 The only non-Nāti Porou figure expressed in the artwork appears in the stained-glass window depicting Jesus Christ upon the Cross with two Nāti Porou soldiers at his feet, both of whom died in World War I. The non-Nāti Porou observer would say that Jesus is out of place but in their tribal theology Jesus has become one of them, a Nāti Porou by the ancient process of whāngai (adoption). Jesus has joined their ancestors resulting in his incorporation into Nāti Porou genealogies and history. Illustration 1: Stained-glass window, St Mary’s Church, Tikitiki.42 41 Kaa, A Stained-Glass Window, 14. Photograph taken by Ngarino Ellis and printed in: Kaa, Hone, “A Stained-Glass Window: What do you see when you look through it?” First Peoples Theology Journal, vol 1 no 3, (January 2005), 15. 42 49 The word whāngai means to feed. In the case of a young child it means to feed from the breast (te wai-u). Whāngai in terms of adoption means to feed a child born of other parents from your own breast. The concept of whāngai is an important institution in the Māori world dating back to the Maui cycle of stories. Maui was the original whāngai and set the pattern of adoption in Polynesian culture. Maui was an aborted birth and his foetus was thrown into the sea. The foetus survived and was nurtured by the sea and birds and was eventually found by Tamanui te ra who raised him as his son whereby he learnt much of his knowledge and supernatural powers. Finding his birth parents Maui was faced with a choice of belonging to either his birth family or his adopted family. He chooses to identify with his birth family. One of the many values of this story is that it is the child who makes the ultimate decision about who to identify with and belong to. In the stained-glass window, Jesus is neither a stranger nor foreigner but is presented as a whāngai of Nāti Porou. The stained-glass window reinterprets what it means to be the family of Jesus Christ, based upon their interpretation of Matthew 12:49-50. In this text Jesus defines his family not on genealogical kinship ties but on the principle of obedience to the Father’s will. This new understanding of family is expressed in liturgy in the order of service Te Hākari Tapu commonly called the 476 in the Anglican New Zealand Prayer Book which begins with the words ‘e te whānau a te Karaiti.’ The whānau are those who gather to worship in the name of Jesus Christ and become the physical body of Christ present in the world. In analysing the word whānau, two understandings become evident. The first is related to whakapapa or genealogy that traces a person’s heritage back to their grandparents on both sides of the family. This gives a person four (whā) sets of grandparents from whom they trace their genealogy. In cases where there have been intertribal marriages people can trace their genealogy to four different hapū or subtribes. Anyone who descends from their grandparents is considered whānau or family. Once the genealogy extends beyond three generations the realm of hapū (subtribe) is entered and the further back the genealogy extends it eventually emerges into the realm of iwi (tribe) and nation. The second analysis of the word whānau is to examine the word which is a compound word of whā (four) and nau (yours). Whānau in this understanding means that each person is born with four particular taonga (gifts) that belong uniquely to you. The four gifts freely given to each individual are Atua (God), whenua (land, the environment), tupuna (your ancestors) and mana (your own authority). 50 Kaa completes his Christological reflection with the question, how closely does Jesus identify with those he encounters?43 In the context of Aotearoa New Zealand, Jesus Christ has no genealogical kinship ties on which to base his relationship with the people or the land. In Māori society the encounter is where the relationship is based, created and developed even if there are no genealogical kinship ties. Encounter leads to the ancient custom of pūrākau or, story-telling which, according to Judith Binney is: An art deep within human nature. Good narratives not only tell us about ourselves, they tell us about the belief of others. Stories are the essential way by which we expand our empathy and our imaginations; stories are the means by which we communicate across time and across cultures. The art of oral storytelling is one of the oldest communicative skills that we possess, it follows that the art of transmitting the ‘histories that matter to successive generations is as old as human existence.44 A Christological reflection on Jesus Christ in the context of Nāti Porou involves the art of storytelling which is communicated using the mediums of genealogy, proverbs, song, dance, poetry and art. In the case of Nāti Porou Jesus Christ is associated with Taumata-a-kura. Both are remembered in songs and dances like Tihei Tāruke and Te Pārekereke. They were acknowledged beyond their own tribal boundaries, and both are acknowledged in the artwork of St Mary’s Church in Tikitiki. Jesus Christ identifies with those he encounters on the East Coast of the North Island by becoming one of them, a whāngai of Nāti Porou. A Christological statement that describes Jesus Christ in this article by the Rev Dr Hone Kaa is, Jesus Christ as, te whāngai o Nāti Porou, is one of us by adoption.45 The late Rev Ruawai Rakena of the northern Ngā Puhi iwi is an ordained minister of the Methodist Church and former Tumuaki (President) of the Hāhi Weteriana (Māori Division of the Methodist Church of New Zealand). Rev Rakena was a central figure in the ecumenical movement from the 1970s and was a visionary leader of the Rūnanga Whakawhanaunga i ngā Hāhi o Aotearoa (Council of Māori Churches). He represented the Rūnanga to the World Council of Churches on many occasions. Prior to his death during Easter 2019 he had continued to work well into his eighties as the administrator for the Rūnanga Whakawhanaunga i ngā Hāhi o Aotearoa. This survey analyses the Christology in his 1971 series of lectures entitled: The Māori Response to the Gospel. This was delivered to staff and students at Trinity College, 43 Kaa, A Stained-Glass Window, 10. Binney, Judith, Stories Without End: Essays 1975-2010. (Wellington: Bridget Williams Books, 2010), 368. 45 Kaa, A Stained-Glass Window, 12 44 51 the Methodist Ministry Training College in Auckland. This series of lectures was considered ground breaking at the time and was published by the Methodist Church. The publication is considered a classic text and is still quoted within academic and Church circles fifty years after its presentation. Since the end of World War II, New Zealand had promoted itself internationally as a model society of good race relations. Yet under the surface dissatisfaction was brewing. When Rakena delivered his lectures, the country was transitioning itself from a policy of assimilation to embracing a new policy of integration. The urban migration of Māori people from rural areas to cities had diversified what it meant to be Māori making it impossible to draw any generalisations about being Māori. With the influx of people from the Pacific, the country was moving rapidly away from being a Pākehā–Māori based society towards multi-racialism. A number of pan-tribal pressure groups had emerged by the 1970s that had the goal of making the Treaty of Waitangi more relevant and applicable in this decade. Te Roopu o te Matakite focussed on organising the 1975 Māori land march with the aim of halting further alienation of Māori owned land. Ngā Tamatoa was gathering signatures for a petition calling for the Māori language to be taught in schools. The Te Kotahitanga Movement continued to try and unify people on a pan-tribal basis. Other pressure groups with similar objectives included The Waitangi Action Committee, Māori Peoples Liberation Movement of Aotearoa, the Māori Organisation on Human Rights and the Te Reo Māori Society. Politically the country was deconstructing an old order of racialism and trying to construct a new order. Alongside this political change Māori sought a reconstruction of theology. There still remained a paucity of Māori expressions of the Christian faith; the Gospel remained clothed in its denominational clothing and churches were generally unable to separate the Gospel from its Western packaging. This limited authentic expressions of the Gospel by and for Māori as it was easier to simply replicate models from Europe and the United State of America. These models Rakena found to be paternalistic and reduced non-western people to states of dependency. Rakena acknowledged that the historical roots of this paucity lay in the missionary era and sought to correct some historical assumptions. The first correction was to acknowledge the significant role that the Māori missionaries had in successfully advancing Christianity in many parts of the country sometimes years before European missionaries arrived in the area. After the New Zealand Land Wars many iwi remained loyal to Christianity but discarded the European wrapping. Attempts were made to remove Christianity from its European 52 entrapments and reset it within the spirituality of the people. This resulted in the rise of syncretic religious movements like Pai Mārire. When articulating the Māori response to the Gospel, Rua Rakena describes Jesus Christ as Te Tangata hou, the New Man who realises his own selfhood and provides a model for achieving selfhood.46 For Māori to achieve selfhood they must be free to meet Christ as Māori without any restraints and respond in their own authentic way. When Rakena delivered his lectures, the government was implementing its policy of integration of Māori into society. Rakena saw similarities between integration and fellowship which he described as being part of koinonia. When expressed in the Māori language the words tātou, tātou meaning unity. Koinonia expressed as tātou, tātou becomes a life centred system in Jesus Christ that provides people with the potential to realise their selfhood. The definition by Rakena of Jesus Christ as, te tangata hou recaptures some of the former tangata – Atua (human–God) transformational model that underpinned pre-colonial Māori theology. Atua were invoked according to the needs of the moment in the context of people’s daily life situation. People worshipped wherever they were gathered rather than gathering to worship at a select day, time and place. Colonisation replaced this model with a different dynamic of placing the church in the middle of the human-God relationship so it becomes, human-church-God. The church becomes the mediator of the relationship and moves the focus away from the needs of the community to church laden language of sin, repentance, atonement, redemption, forgiveness and salvation. A Christological statement that describes Jesus Christ in this series of lectures by the Rev Rua Rakena is, Jesus Christ, te tangata hou, the new man.47 The Rev Dr Te Waaka Melbourne of the Tūhoe iwi and Te Mahurehure hapū of Ruātoki was ordained a priest in the Mihingare Church in 1967 and is currently Arch-Deacon of the Eastern Bay of Plenty. He has an extensive teaching background in theology having taught Māori language and perspectives at Te Rau Kahikatea the College of Saint John the Evangelist in Auckland. He was also chaplain at the University of Waikato before being appointed Dean of Ministry Studies at Te Manawa o te Wheke, the Rotorua campus for the tertiary institution Te Whare Wānanga o te Pihopatanga o Aotearoa (The Māori Bishopric of Aotearoa). Melbourne gained his Doctorate from Massey University in 2011. His doctoral research examined the adaptability of Māori spirituality to Christianity within the Mihingare Church. This survey 46 47 Rakena, Rua, “The Māori Response to the Gospel.” (Auckland: Wesley Historical Society, 1971), 10. Rakena, The Māori Response to the Gospel, 10. 53 takes into account an article that he wrote concerning the relevance of Māori spirituality in the new Millennium. Te Waaka Melbourne utilises a tribal proverb as a methodology to express Christological doctrine. He uses a proverb from his own Tūhoe tribe to describe Jesus Christ: ‘Koeau, ko au, ko koe, ko tāua (You me, me you, the two of us).48 This particular proverb signifies the closeness of relationships based on a genealogical connection between two people or peoples. The use of a tribal proverb by Melbourne to explain the identity of Jesus Christ, is an eclectic blend of Christian doctrine and Māori values. At one end of the spectrum it reflects Christian doctrine while at the other end it incorporates Maori values and spirituality. This combination provides a rich fertile ground for contemporary Christological reflection in which it is possible to integrate your own worldview and experience with your understanding of Jesus Christ. This compact proverb contains important themes that ground Melbourne’s Christology deep within his Tūhoe roots. Themes within the proverb include wairuatanga (spirituality), whakapapa (genealogy), whakataukī (proverbs), whanaungatanga (relationships) and kaitiaki (guardian). These combinations of Māori values with Christian values involves indigenisation and contextualisation and provides a range of different images and symbols for articulating faith in Christ. This particular proverb that Melbourne uses has its origins in tribal identity and genealogy and expresses the values of connectedness, relationships and obligations. Using this proverb, Melbourne advocates going beyond the current boundaries of eurocentrism that limits key aspects of Christology. Melbourne utilises a kaupapa Māori theoretical analysis to gain a clearer and more relevant picture of who Jesus is for a Tūhoe context. This methodology shapes Christological understanding with the potential to add something new and unique to hermeneutical interpretation. This methodology is consistent with a biblical reading of the messianic question posed by Jesus to his disciples in the synoptic Gospels. The question is in two stages and involves Jesus asking his disciples to define who he is in relation to others and then in relation to themselves as his disciples. The declaration by Peter defines Jesus in relation to their historical hope and expectation of a Jewish messiah. 48 Melbourne, Te Waaka, “Māori Spirituality in the New Millenium’, in First Peoples Theology Journal, vol 1 no 3, (January 2005), 109. 54 The tribal proverb quoted by Melbourne draws on the theme of Jesus being defined in relation to others, in this context to the people of Tūhoe. The tribal proverb defines Jesus not as an outsider or a stranger but as being part of the people whom he encounters. Being a follower of Jesus means being incorporated into the Body of Christ. The arrangement is reciprocal with Jesus Christ engrafting the person into his very own being so that the two are not seen as separate but as the one entity. A statement that describes Jesus Christ as presented in the article by the Rev Dr Melbourne is, Jesus Christ is, koeau, ko au, ko koe, ko tāua, you me, me you, the two of us.49 Graham Cameron is of the Pirirakau hapū of Tauranga based iwi Ngāti Ranginui. He is an acknowledged leader and orator for both his hapū and Iwi and possesses a strong ethic of social justice. He is a social commentator on issues that impact his Tauranga Iwi. His religious affiliations are Roman Catholic, Seventh Day Adventist, Anglican and Pai Mārire. In 2016 he graduated with a Master of Theology degree having completed his Master’s research on the development of a Pirirakau theology. He is a doctoral candidate in theology with the University of Otago. He is researching Pai Mārire as the first indigenous Christian faith of Aotearoa New Zealand. This survey analyses the Christology in his Masters Research. Graham Cameron takes the question posed by Jesus to his disciples concerning his Christological identity as an opportunity for his hapū to speak into Christianity rather than the reverse of Christianity speaking to his hapū inundating them with Christian doctrine and dogma. Cameron says that his hapū of Pirirakau can and will speak for their own faith, not as an outsider of the church, but as a legitimate expression of a tribal Christianity. The tribe not the Church is the legitimate interpreter of the message and intent of the Gospel as it was the tribe who collectively decided to engage with Christianity. In essence the tribe is the Church, the Body of Christ is distinct from an outside institution that seeks to impose its will. There is, he says, no implicit moral authority derived from having resources and power and enabling others to dictate who the Christ is and how we are to follow him.50 Prior to the Pirirakau hapū answering the question, who is Jesus for them, it is important for them first to re-discover what theology and religion consisted of prior to colonisation. This informs them of how God was understood in this land by their ancestors. In the colonisation process this theological knowledge was under threat and termed pagan, barbaric and uncivilised Melbourne, Māori Spirituality in the New Millenium, 109. Graham Cameron, “That you might stand here on the roof of the clouds: The development of Pirirākau theology from encounter to the end of conflict.” (MTheol thesis, University of Otago, 2015), 47. 49 50 55 and was hidden away or lost. It is therefore necessary to recover lost religious worldviews and practices as the first step to integrating Jesus Christ into tribal cosmology and theology. In the historic journey of Pirirakau, from pre-colonial theology to engagement with Roman Catholic missionaries and later with Pai Mārire missionaries, they found that the journey was laced with loss and grief. Somewhere in the New Zealand Land Wars that manifested in the battle of Pukehinahina (Gate Pā) and in the aftermath of that battle the Pirirakau hapū encountered Jesus Christ on their journey. In understanding the encounter between Christ and the iwi of Tauranga the pain of betrayal and possibly anger towards the church and State that must be acknowledged. A proverbial saying that defines Cameron’s Pirirakau hapū is ‘te mōrehu kore tuohu’ the un-surrendered who interact with and learn from the one who surrendered himself upon the Cross at Calvary.51 Cameron introduces some important aspects of doing Christology and theology in a context where the encounter with Christianity was not beneficial to the host people. In Cameron’s writings is a challenge to allow his people the right to claim their own voice and rediscover their former theological and religious beliefs and practises that were decimated by the brutal reality of colonisation. Claiming the right to speak also means exposing historical and contemporary trauma that led to the systematic dehumanisation of Pirirakau as humans. Christological reflection comes with a certain degree of pain for people of the land as they appropriate the truth and relevancy of the Christian faith for them. Conceptualising the right action as they move forward begins with a clear memory of how they got to their present situation. If Christ has any relevancy for them the collective re-visioning of who they were and who they are now also leads to a prophetic imagining of who they would like to be in Christ. The question posed by Jesus to his disciples in Caesarea Philippi is a question that is posed to his disciples and to them alone at that historic moment. They and they alone were expected to claim their own voice and provide an answer which Peter effectively does. The disciples were given the right to think with their own mind and speak with their own voice. This is something Cameron believes was denied to his hapū. Pirirakau Cameron believes were denied the opportunity of articulating for themselves who the Jesus of the bible and of faith is and were simply told by missionaries what to think and say or have someone else do the thinking and talking on their behalf. Cameron claims the freedom of thought and speech for his people to interpret Christianity for themselves in light of their history and assert a Pirirakau hermeneutic that is beneficial to their wellbeing for the present and into the future. 51 Cameron, “That you might stand here on the roof of the clouds,” 5. 56 A statement that expresses who Jesus Christ is for the Pirirakau hapū of Tauranga Moana expressed by Graham Cameron is, te tuohu hei tūtaki i te mōrehu e kore tuohu, Jesus Christ, the surrendered one who encounters the un-surrendered.52 Kāhautu Maxwell is a renowned leader of the Eastern Bay of Plenty iwi, Te Whakatōhea and is a senior tohunga and leader of the Ringatū church having been mentored by the late Sir Monita Delamare.53 He is also an acknowledged expert in Māori performing arts and is an advisor to the Māori King, Tuheitia Pōtatau Te Wherowhero VII. Currently Maxwell is an Associate Professor in the School of Māori and Pacific Development at the University of Waikato and was Head of Department in 2009. Among his achievements he is a licensed translator and interpreter and has eloquent English and Māori language skills. He has written and published many papers and articles on Te Whakatōhea history, education and the Ringatū Church. In 1998 he graduated from the University of Waikato with a Master of Arts with his Master’s research focussed upon the Christological themes within the Ringatū Church practice of maintaining the 1st of July as a sacred day within their Church calendar. Of all the writers surveyed in this chapter, Maxwell is the only person to write totally in the Māori language without any translations, due to his belief that Māori theology must be conducted within its own native language first. This survey analyses the Christology in his Masters Research. For Kāhautu Maxwell, Jesus Christ is Te Kōpura, the seed of new life that sprouts from the old seed.54 This Christology has both a biblical basis in the resurrection of Jesus Christ and a philosophical basis from deep within Māori traditions associated with the appearance of the constellation of stars known as Matariki. In Māori creation stories, Tāwhirimātea disagreed with his brother’ decision to separate their parents Rangi and Papatūānuku and engaged in a series of battles with his siblings that are known as te pakanga o ngā Atua (the war of the Atua). Defeated by his brother Tūmatauenga, Tāwhirimātea fled skyward to his father Rangi. Tāwhirimātea tore out his own eyes and flung them skywards as a sign of his aroha from son to father.55 This constellation of nine stars became known as ngā mata o te ariki Tāwhirimātea, the eyes of the chief Tāwhirimātea. The constellation appears in the night sky during the months of June and July in southern skies over Aotearoa New Zealand. The constellation is also known Cameron, “That you might stand here on the roof of the clouds,” 5. Sir Monita Delamare was a senior leader of the Ringatū Church and senior leader of Te Whakatōhea and Te Whanau a Apanui iwi. 54 Kāhautu Maxwell, “Te Kōpura”, (MA diss, University of Waikato, 1998), 35. 55 Rangi, Matamua, Matariki, The Star of the Year. (Wellington: Huia Publishers, 2017), 20. 52 53 57 throughout the Pacific with variations on the name Matariki.56 Stories, traditions and practices that have become associated with the Matariki story include offering ceremonial food to the Atua, thanksgiving festivals, and the ceremonial blessing and planting of seeds. The significance of Matariki has been revived in modern times as the Māori New Year with an emphasis on commemoration, unity and goodwill. The government provides some funding to support community groups wishing to celebrate Matariki. In 1879 the prophet leader, Te Kooti adapted aspects of these ancient Matariki traditions and applied a Christian theological interpretation and ethic. Pre-colonial vegetable gardens were dedicated to the protection of Rongo a brother of Tāwhirimātea. Te Kooti changed the theology and dedicated the gardens to the Christian God rather than to Rongo while the kumara tubers and seeds of other vegetables were likened to Jesus Christ. In the germination process the old tubers would sprout new tubers before they died. This was likened to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ as he arose from death to a new life. The marae that has continued observing these Ringatū practices is Whitianga on the East Coast of the North Island amongst the Whanau a Apanui Iwi who have carried much of the leadership of the Ringatū church since the death of Te Kooti. Today, people still arrive at Whitianga with their tubers and seeds from kumara, potatoes, cabbage, corn, kamokamo, watermelons and other root crops to have them blessed in a three-day religious ceremony. For Paora Delamare, the Poutikanga57 of the Ringatū church, Te Kooti was essentially the conservator of things Māori while adapting them to a Christian ethic.58 Delamare became Poutikanga in 1938 and held the leadership of the church for forty-three years and became known as a reformist. Through his friendship with former Presbyterian Moderator, Sir Norman Perry, Delamare moved the Ringatū church from an emphasis on Old Testament theology to incorporating the New Testament into their theology especially in accepting Jesus Christ as the Son of God. His daughter Maaka Jones explained his reforms: Dad broke away from a lot of things that were not required because of Christ. Not long before he died (in 1981) he did away with some of the old practices as the people could not live up to it. It’s better that we got rid of all that and let our children grow up in the understanding that you are in Christ. He taught us about Christ and that is where we are now.59 Mataali’ (Samoa), Matali’i (Tonga), Matari’i (Tahiti), Mata-ariki (Tuamotu), Matai’i or Mata-iki (Marquesas), Makali’i (Hawaii), Matariki (Aotearoa New Zealand, Rapanui, Cook Islands) 57 Title for Titular Head of the Ringatū church. 58 Binney, Judith, Gillian Chaplin, Ngā Mōrehu The Survivors: The Life Histories of Eight Māori Women. (Wellington: Bridget Williams Books, 1986), 73. 59 Binney, Judith, Gillian Chaplin, Ngā Mōrehu The Survivors, 81. 56 58 Belief in Jesus Christ as the divinely risen Lord became the crucial tenet of Delamare’s theological reforms. The former Matariki customs adapted by Te Kooti were further expanded by Delamare who gave a Christological meaning and explained that the blessing of the seeds and the mingling of the old and new seeds were symbolic of people’s growth and the type of Christ.60 Delamare believed that Isaac and Moses were pre-Jesus types of Christ and that the old seeds in the ceremony represented the pre-resurrection Jesus and the new seed represented the resurrected Jesus. Christology had become firmly embedded as a central doctrine of the Ringatū church. Previously their Church taught that Jesus was only a prophet in the line of Israelite prophets and no more. Through Delamare’s hermeneutic of the seeds and tubers, Jesus Christ became understood and accepted as, Te Kōpura, new life from old life. A Christological statement that captures the essence of Ringatū belief in Jesus Christ as researched by Kāhautu Maxwell is; Jesus Christ, te kōpura, new life from old life.61 The Rev Dr Peter Wensor is of the Ngā Puhi Iwi in the far north of the North Island. A former teacher he entered the College of Saint John the Evangelist in Auckland at the age of forty-nine and became an ordained priest in the Hāhi Mihingare. He is now the mission enabler for the Hauraki region in the Hui Amorangi o te Manawa o te Wheke. After leaving St John’s College he continued studying and in 2010 he graduated from the University of Auckland with a PhD in Theology. His doctoral research was on the theological impact of word changes in te reo Māori liturgical texts of Te Pīhopatanga ō Aotearoa. This survey analyses the Christology in his Doctoral Research. For Dr Peter Wensor, Christological reflection is expressed in liturgy that captures imagery and metaphor. Māori concepts are often expressed in whakataukī / whakatauāki (proverbs) which layer the image with various insights. The original Māori name of the area where Auckland city is built is Tāmaki-makau-rau. Tamaki is the ancestor who was sought after by many suitors. The herenga waka refers to the many different canoes that landed in Tamaki including the Te Arawa, Tainui, Mātaatua and Aotea before continuing their journey to other places in the country. In Auckland there is a well-known proverb: Tamaki herenga waka, Tamaki the resting place of the canoes. The proverb is a reference to the many different layers of tribal associations with the Auckland area.62 This tribal proverb is expressed in Mihingare liturgy as ‘ko te Karaiti Binney, Judith, Gillian Chaplin, Ngā Mōrehu The Survivors, 89. Maxwell, Te Kōpura, 35. 62 Patterson, Malcolm, Ngāti Whatua o Orakei Heritage Report. Auckland: Ngāti Whatua o Orakei Corporate Ltd, 2014. 60 61 59 te pou herenga waka meaning, Christ is the mooring stake to which the canoes are tied.’63 The proverb used in liturgy for Christ is a metaphor for the centrality of Christ.64 It is also the name of the Mihingare Church in Mangere. By adapting tribal proverbs, Christology can be fully explored and expressed in another culture’s knowledge base while remaining connected to foundational Christological texts that describe the person of Jesus and his mission. Key texts are the seven ‘I Am’ statements of Jesus in the Gospel of John65 along with the response to the ‘who am I’ question posed by Jesus to his disciples in the synoptic Gospels.66 This type of methodology exposes a rich source for doing Christology. A warning must be sounded that challenges the use of such proverbs in Christological and theological reflection. Proverbs come with a history and often serious injustices have been experienced by the people who own such proverbs. In pursuing Christology, we must not ignore these injustices but must acknowledge that they exist within the Body of Christ. Christology may thus be given an opportunity to speak a liberating word into such injustices. In 2020 at Ihumātao a historic Māori community in Auckland, there is a long running land occupation by descendants of the ancestor Tamaki. The protest and occupation concern the confiscation of lands that belonged to their original ancestor Tamaki. This occupation has been in progress since 2017 and in 2019 tensions escalated and came to national prominence when hundreds of protestors moved onto the land to prevent its commercial development as a housing area. Ihumātao is the oldest known settlement in Auckland city dating back close to the beginning of the last Millennium. It has played a significant role in the history of Auckland and many well-known ancestors are associated with Ihumātao including, Tamaki, Hape and Pōtatau Te Wherowhero the first Māori King. In the area are many archaeological sites including the Ōtuataua stone fields which were the country’s first commercial market gardens in the 19th century and from which local hapū supplied settlers in the region. During the New Zealand land wars, particularly during the Crown invasion of Waikato, Ihumātao was confiscated by proclamation under the New Zealand Settlements Act of 1863. The land was sold by the Crown into the private ownership of a settler family who sold it to commercial developers in 2015 for a housing estate. 63 A New Zealand Prayer Book, (Auckland: William Collins Publishers Ltd, 1989), 479. Peter Wensor, “Te Pīhopatanga ō Aotearoa Liturgical Theologies, The theological impact of ‘word changes’ in te reo Māori liturgical texts of Te Pīhopatanga ō Aotearoa. (PhD diss, University of Auckland, 2010), 68. 65 John: 6:35, 8:12, 10:9, 10:11, 11:25, 14:6, 15:1. 66 Matt 16: 13-18, Mark 8: 17-30, Luke 9:18-21. 64 60 Christological reflection should not be about appropriating others people’s knowledge and wisdom. Nor should it be about exploiting the history of people for peculiar gain. As a descendant of the ancestors who originally owned Tamaki and as a mission enabler to the Hauraki region Dr Wensor is within his rights to use the proverb from his ancestors. The use of this proverb with its uncomfortable history and current protest occupation introduces a theme of activism against injustice into Christology. The proverb coming from a context of land loss and protest against injustice is expressive of Jesus and the Christian faith in solidarity with people seeking justice. A Christological statement that captures the essence of the writings of Dr Wensor is, Jesus Christ as, Te Karaiti te pou herenga waka, Christ the mooring stake to which the canoes are tied.67 The Rev Dr Jubilee Turi Hollis of Nāti Porou is an Arch-Deacon within the Hāhi Mihingare and is currently based in Melbourne, Australia. Prior to his move overseas he was an active leader in the Hui Amorangi o te Waipounamu (Anglican Māori Diocesan of the South Island) where he held many responsibilities. Education has been central to Hollis who was an advisor to the Whare Wānanga o Te Pīhopatanga on the design and implementation of education programmes. While studying at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch he became chaplain to the University. He graduated from the University of Canterbury in 2014 with his doctoral research concerning the significant role Atuatanga has in holding together the Christian faith and Māori ways of being moving into the future. He has written a number of articles that have been published in the subject areas of theology and education. This survey analyses the Christology in his Doctoral Research. Rev Dr Turi Hollis sees his ministry praxis as a reflection of his own personal understanding of Christ as written in ngā Rongopai (the canonical Gospels) in Te Paipera Tapu (the Holy Bible). For Hollis, Jesus challenges his audience to review their worldview and practices in relation to how they treat themselves, and how they relate to the world.68 Hollis sees an advantage in being able to read and understand the bible in both English and te reo Māori that stems from living as a Māori speaking person in a predominately Pākehā world. This bilingualism shapes how Christ is viewed, experienced and proclaimed in life and liturgy. If you read the bible in the English language you will see an English speaking and looking Wensor, “Te Pīhopatanga ō Aotearoa Liturgical Theologies, 68. Jubilee Turi Hollis, “Te Atuatanga: Holding Te Karaitianatanga and Te Maoritanga Together Going Forward.” (PhD diss, University of Canterbury, 2013), 188. 67 68 61 Jesus Christ, if you read the bible in te reo Māori you will see a Māori looking and speaking Jesus Christ. In the context of Aotearoa New Zealand Jesus Christ must be fully immersed in ngā puna o te ao Māori (the well-springs of the Māori world).69 Immersing Christ in the well-springs of the Māori world was a practice that early Māori converts employed to capture the significance of Christ before incorporating him into their context as a universal rather than local Atua. Piripi Taumata-a-kura preached a sermon on Easter Day 1868 where he proclaimed that Christ was sent to us by Hinenui te po.70 In Māori pūrākau (Māori origin stories) Maui tried to abolish death and gain immortality by reversing the birth process but failed in the process. Where Maui failed Christ succeeded and was sent by Hinenui te po as an exemplar of immortality achieved. Hollis uses the structure of a carved Māori wharenui (traditional large decorated house) as a model to visualise Christology. In this house, Jesus Christ is the pou-tuarongo, the centre post on the back-wall of the wharenui.71 Master Carver, Moni Taumaunu of Nāti Porou, explains that the tuarongo is where tapu and noa, the divine and profane came together in te pou-tuarongo.72 The following illustration shows the position of the pou-tuarongo in a wharenui: Illustration 2: The structure of a wharenui showing the pou-tuarongo.73 For Hollis, this Karaiti (Christ), te pou-tuarongo is the same Karaiti that is expressed in the various creeds as Christ, Jesus Christ, Son of Man and Son of God. After Christ has bathed in 69 Hollis, Te Atuatanga, 10. Hollis, Te Atuatanga, 227. 71 Hollis, Te Atuatanga, 259-281. 72 Hollis, Te Atuatanga, 264. 73 Images of Māori wharenui (accessed 21 September 2017), http://www.quizlot.com/1025943/nga-wahanga-ote-wharenui-parts-of-wharenui-flash-cards/alphabetical. 70 62 the well-springs of the Māori world, whatever emerges must still be consistent with the creedal statements of the church. These statements reflect the substance of the Christian faith, what people believe and proclaim in liturgy. New words and concepts like ‘pou-tuarongo’ and ‘bathed in the well-springs of the Māori world’ should be able to be incorporate into other people’s Christian worship. Tuarongo is a compound word; tua means ‘in addition to’ while the word Rongo opens a range of possibilities. Rongo is the name of an Atua in pūrākau (origin stories). Rongo is an offspring of Ranginui (sky) and Papatūānuku (earth) who are considered the primal parents. As one of their children Rongo is an Atua of kumara (sweet potato) with three distinct names, Rongo-mā-Tāne, Rongo-hīrea and Rongo-marae-roa. Rongo is also a word denoting peace expressed as maungārongo (state of peace), hohou i te rongo (to confirm peace) and Rongotaketake (lasting peace). Rongo in another context means to hear or listen. The canonical Gospels are called ‘Rongopai’ to hear the good news. These definitions of the word Rongo used in association with Jesus open a number of exciting possibilities for how Jesus can be fully immersed with Rongo in the well-springs of the Māori world. A statement that captures the essence of the Christological reflection of Rev Dr Hollis is, Jesus Christ, te pou-tuarongo, the centre post of the back wall of a wharenui where the sacred and the profane come together.74 The Rev Hone Te Rire is of the Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau iwi in the Eastern Bay of Plenty. He is a third generation Amorangi (self-supporting) minister of the Māori Synod of the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand. Te Rire comes from an educational background having lectured at Te Wānanga o Raukawa in Ōtaki and Te Wānanga o Aotearoa in Te Awamutu specialising in curriculum development and design. From 2017-2018 he became an intern training for the National Ordained Ministry of the Presbyterian Church with the Knox Centre for Ministry and Leadership. In his internship he was based in a bicultural setting with the Nawton parish in Hamilton. He is the thirteenth person from the Māori Synod to graduate from the Presbyterian ministry school in the School’s one-hundred and forty-four-year history. He has had a number of papers published on aspects of the church history of Te Aka Puaho. Currently he is studying towards a doctorate with Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiarangi. This survey will examine the Christology in his Master of Indigenous Studies dissertation which was completed at the University of Otago and was a study of the dissipation of indigeneity 74 Hollis, Te Atuatanga, 259-281. 63 through religion. His hypothesis was that a factor in the disintegration of Māori society was that the missionary view of God supplanted the Māori view of God. Inculturation and enculturation are significant factors in Christology for Hone Te Rire. These concepts allow insight into belief systems in their historical context and help to explain why Christian faith is lived out the way it is in the modern context.75 Inculturation in a Christian context is the adaptation of Christian teachings, values and ethics that in turn assist in shaping those teachings, values and ethics. Enculturation in the Christian context is the process by which people learn the traditional content of Christianity through experience, observation and instruction. Te Rire argues that to understand Jesus as Māori you must engage with how Māori understood God as Atua Māori in the pre-colonial context. Te Mātorohanga and Nepia Pōhūhū categorically state that there is a supreme God named Io. This is not a Christian concept borrowed from the Holy Bible, but an Atua born of te ao Māori.76 Knowledge of Io was limited to the tohunga class as it was considered extremely tapu (sacred or restricted). Io was the source of Atua Māori who were the agents of Io completing creation at the direction of Io. The final act of creation was the gifting of the three baskets of knowledge by Io to his Atua agent, Tane for the benefit of humans. Te Rire says that humans derived their blueprint of life from the life experiences of Atua.77 He provides a quote from Dr Ranginui Walker to illustrate his point saying that the demi-God Maui was an exemplar for natural human behaviour, because through his actions he set a precedent for all humans to follow.78 Christianity also provided a blueprint for daily living which was interpreted by Māori on their own terms, and was not too dissimilar to their own religious beliefs. Jesus Christ becomes he tauira o te Atua, an exemplar of God similar to Atua becoming agents of Io and Maui becoming an exemplar for human behaviour. In his earthly life Jesus taught in parables, giving examples of ethical behaviours and decisions that were consistent with how they are worked out in the Kingdom of God. As the fulfilment of the law, Jesus reinterpreted the law in terms of social responsibility and obligations rather than in legalistic terminology. He teaches and gives personal examples of faith, prayer, forgiveness, reconciliation and divine love. By example Jesus provided personal illustrations of how to Jonathan Te Rire, “The Dissipation of Indigeneity Through Religion.” (MIS diss, University of Otago, 2009), 32. 76 Percy, Smith, Te Kauae-Runga, Ngā korero a Te Mātorohanga rāua ko Nepia Pōhūhū. Translated by Percy Smith. Memoirs of the Polynesian Society, vol 3, (New Plymouth: Thomas Avery, 1913), 110. 77 Te Rire, The Dissipation of Indigeneity Through Religion, 33. 78 Ranginui, Walker, The relevance of Māori myth and tradition. In Tihei Mauriora, Aspects of Māoritanga, ed. Michael King, (New Zealand: Muthuen, 1978), 8. 75 64 overcome temptation and the sin that often causes harm to others. He teaches and then demonstrates how to make friends of enemies in the story of the Good Samaritan, the SyroPhoenician woman, Zacchaeus, the tax collector and the Roman Officer. Where Maui failed in his quest to gain immortality Jesus succeeds providing a model through his own resurrection. A statement that captures the Christology in the dissertation of the Rev Hone Te Rire is, Jesus Christ is; he tauira o te Atua, an exemplar of God.79 Rev Dr Hirini Kaa of Nāti Porou and son of the late Rev Dr Hone Kaa is a lecturer in the History Department at the University of Auckland. He lectures on the Treaty of Waitangi and religious resistance to Empire. Dr Kaa has served the Mihingare Church extensively in youth ministry and social justice. He has worked in television researching, co-writing and presenting the documentary The Prophets a seven-part series examining the Māori prophets. He is a social and religious commentator on issues affecting Māori especially in the areas of health, education and theology. He graduated from the University of Auckland with a PhD in 2014 having undertaken his doctoral research on the renegotiation of traditional Māori knowledge and ways of knowing within the Anglican Church. He has published a number of papers, presented at conferences and has engaged in social media on contemporary theological issues. This survey analyses the Christology in his Doctoral Research. For Dr Hirini Kaa Jesus Christ is te ngākau hou, the new heart, a biblical concept revealed by God that denotes a sense of transformation based on belief.80 This concept of the new heart of God is sung in the popular hymn E Te Atua Kua Ruia Nei. This simple hymn consists of three short verses and is considered by Māori as the Magna Carta of the Church.81 The first verse proclaims that the good seed has been sown and implores God to give the believer who is also the singer a new heart so that the good seed may take root and grow within the believer. Kaa explores who Jesus Christ is within the context of Anglican liturgy in Aotearoa New Zealand. Liturgy is one of the foundations of the church that creates its own liturgical language and identity. The 1989 A New Zealand Prayer Book published by the Anglican Church expresses what, who and how they believe. It also expresses who the Anglican 79 Te Rire, The Dissipation of Indigeneity Through Religion, 34. Hirini Kaa, “He Ngākau Hou: Te Hāhi Mihingare and the Renegotiation of Mātauranga, c.1800-1992.” (PhD diss, University of Auckland, 2014), 2. 81 Rev Rangiora Rakuraku. Māori Synod meeting, Ohope Marae, November 2003. 80 65 Communion is in this context as a multitude of voices from the Province of New Zealand, Te Pihopatanga o Aotearoa and the Diocese of Polynesia.82 The constantly changing nature of Aotearoa New Zealand culturally, socially, politically and economically precipitated the twenty-year journey towards the prayer book. Bringing all the different facets of the Church together to create a liturgical book that was acceptable to all parts of the Church was like a pilgrimage. The journey reflected changes within the Anglican liturgical tradition. Anglican identity in this part of the world was evolving rapidly with constitutional changes being discussed and negotiated at the same time. The creation of the prayer book provided an opportunity for Anglicans in Aotearoa New Zealand to reinvigorate their own sense of cultural development and identity distinct from that of Britain. The language was modified from the Victorian English of ‘Thee and Thou’ and was made more meaningful and inclusive through bilingual and te reo Māori liturgies. In creating Māori liturgy, it is important to enunciate a cultural framework that takes ownership of liturgy by weaving Māori thoughts, language and customs, idioms, nuances, images and metaphors into the liturgy rather than merely translating the English language order of service. This lifts it from the realm of the mundane that limits its potential and elevates it to a unique and distinctive state that gives a voice to Māori Christians who are gathered in the name of Jesus Christ. This enables Māori to encounter Christ in worship and a beneficial positive transformation of the person and community takes place. Through participation in this liturgy Māori people are enabled to negotiate a new way of being in the world. A statement that captures the Christological reflections of the Dr Kaa is, Jesus Christ is; he ngākau hou, a new heart that denotes a sense of transformation.83 Dr Jenny Te Paa Daniel of the far north Te Rarawa iwi is the first Māori person to gain an academic degree in theology from the University of Auckland. Dr Te Paa Daniel is a former Ahorangi (Dean) of Te Rau Kahikatea at the College of Saint John the Evangelist in Auckland. Significantly as the Ahorangi she is the first indigenous lay woman to be appointed head of an Anglican Theological College anywhere in the world. In 2011 she completed her PhD through the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley writing on the topic of race politics and theological education. Before gaining her doctorate, she was awarded an Honorary Doctorate from the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge for her outstanding contribution to peace and justice in the global community. She has written many theological articles that have been 82 83 A New Zealand Prayer Book (Auckland: Collins Publishers Ltd, 1989), X. Kaa, He Ngākau Hou, 2. 66 published internationally in a variety of theological and educational journals and is a much sought-after conference speaker and consultant. This survey analyses the Christology in her Doctoral Research. Highly respected international academic and theologian Dr Jenny Te Paa Daniel sounds a warning that in developing theologies they must first be critiqued in the public square with rigorous public contested debate. Failure to engage in this process in theological and religious matters increases the risk of replicating theologies that exclude others based upon difference. Rigorous public theological debate is a critical opportunity to design a radically new paradigm that liberates people from the margins of society and Church. In the last twenty years kaupapa Māori theory and methodology has advanced and in spite of its good intentions it also has pitfalls in setting Māori against Māori, the very people it sets out to liberate. Equality and equity require Māori to contest the meagre resources and funding that churches provide as a demonstration of the ecclesial commitment to biculturalism and the Treaty of Waitangi. Contestation between the same ethnic peoples can deteriorate into questionable constructions of racial identity that reject all aspects of the previous dominant group’s structures while replicating the very structures that they reject. If racial or ethnic selfconsciousness is allowed to flourish the qualities of tolerance, curiosity and civility will be lost. Christology must have the capacity to build bridges of loyalty across ethnic or racial difference to understand the suffering of others and share in their joy.84 Today there is a wealth of material available on Christology from feminist, liberation, black, contextual, Asian and indigenous theologies. These theologies often portray Jesus as an activist with a radical political message for those looking for inspiration in overcoming policies, practices and attitudes that dehumanise them. These theologies express a common humanity that has often been neglected and abused by the politics of church, state, society and Māori themselves. Daniel places critical race theory high on the agenda of Christology as it critically examines race, law and power as it intersects with society and culture and pursues the goal of racial transformation and emancipation. While it originates from the social and legal sciences during the civil rights movements in America in the 1960s that challenged white supremacy it also has implications for the Christological agenda. Daniel references Fumitaka Matsuoka, bell hooks and Cornel West, three key modern-day intellectuals and scholars of critical race theory. Jenny Te Paa Daniel, “Contestations: Bicultural Theological Education in Aotearoa New Zealand, (PhD diss, Graduate Theological Union, Berkley, 2001), 294. 84 67 Matsuoka is a constructive theologian who reflects on theological perspectives of alienation, shifting race lines, race and justice within a multiracial church and society and forges a new vision of communal relatedness. The focus of bell hooks writings has been on the intersection between race, capitalism and gender and the perpetual systems of oppression and class domination that they produce. Cornel West, the son of a Baptist pastor is a philosopher, activist and social critic of American politics. His focus is on race, gender and class and how people act and react to their radical conditioning. Critical race theory can be an effective lens through which to view Christology. It encourages us: to look at the world through the eyes of its victims and the Christocentric perspective which requires that one sees through the lens of the Cross and thereby see our relative victimising and our relative victimisation.85 In dealing with its own injustice the parameters of Christology need to be redefined to allow for its victims to be emancipated into a new political community of equal citizens. The tandem task of deconstructing and reconstructing is the priority challenge still crying out for scholarly attention.86 A statement that captures the Christology in the writings of Dr Te Paa Daniel is: Jesus Christ is; a new paradigm who publicly contests old and new ideas. Kupu Whakapono - Creedal Statement: A creed is a statement of the shared beliefs of a community of believers. It is a fixed formula summarising their core beliefs. ‘Creed’ is taken from the Latin word credo meaning ‘I believe’. Christianity is a creedal religion having worked out its doctrines and confessions in ecumenical church councils in the first seven centuries of the early church. Creeds have a biblical basis and can be found in the New Testament. Both the Gospel of Mark and Matthew record the Christological declaration by Peter as an example of a confession of faith.87 Matthew develops this short one-line statement into a longer statement as Jesus ascends to heaven commissioning the disciples to: 85 Cornel West: Keeping faith: Philosophy and Religion in America (New York: Routledge, 1993), 133. Daniel, Contestations, 194. 87 Mark 8:28; Matt 16:16. 86 68 Go, therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.88 This verse has been incorporated into the creeds as it contains the Trinity, baptism and discipleship, essential elements stated in most Creeds. As Christian communities were established the creedal statements also developed from the life of the new Christian community. The creeds have a hermeneutical function that assists the church in the way scripture is read and understood. An example of this is found in Paul’s letter to the Christian community in Corinth where Paul writes: For, I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures.89 As Christianity moved into the second and third centuries the creedal statements became part of the tradition of the church. The process of working out the essential doctrines of belief was the responsibility of ecumenical church councils which used specific Church language and content. By the fifth century these became known as orthodox doctrines expressing what was considered the right opinion that called for conformity to the Christian faith as represented in the creeds of the early church.90 The most well-known Christian creedal statements are the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed. In the Protestant tradition a number of ‘Confession of Faith’ have been developed alongside the ecumenical Creeds. Among the most well-known of these Confessions is the Westminster Confession of Faith accepted by the Church of England and the Church of Scotland. This is also a foundational confessional document of the Presbyterian Church throughout the world. In Aotearoa New Zealand the Anglican and Presbyterian Churches have each composed their own Confession of Faith in both the English and Māori languages respectively. The Anglican Confession is called ‘He Tikanga Whakapono’ (The Affirmation of Faith) while the Presbyterian Confession is called ‘He Kupu Whakapono’ (Words of Faith).91 Both Confessions capture unique images in both languages that express faith in a Māori context. 88 Matt 28:19. 1 Cor 15:3. 90 Alan Richardson, John Bowden, A New Dictionary of Christian Theology. (London: SCM Press, 1983), pp131-132. 91 The name ‘kupu whakapono’ was given to the Presbyterian confession by Mrs Millie Amiria Te Kaawa. The Confession itself was translated into the Māori language by the Rev Wayne Te Kaawa. 89 69 Capturing the essence of the Christological reflections of the Māori theologians quoted in this chapter it is possible to compose a Confession of Faith which expresses who Jesus Christ is for Māori. A confessional statement could be as follows: KUPU WHAKAPONO – CREEDAL STATEMENT E whakapono ana matou ki a Ihu Karaiti, He tipua, he tangata, Te tohunga whakapapa, hei raranga tatou i te whanaungatanga Te mātāmua o ngā mea katoa, Te whāngai o te iwi Māori, Koeau, ko au, ko koe, ko taua, He tauira o te tuohu mō te mōrehu e kore e tuohu, Te pou-tuarongo o te whare whakapono, Te pou-herenga waka, herehere tangata, herenga whakapono, Te kōpura o te oranga hou, He tauira o Te Atua He ngākau hou hei whakawhitiwhiti whakaaro o te tirohanga puta noa o te ao Te tangata hou He tuhinga hou hei tautohetohe i ngā whakaaro tawhito me te whakaaro hou hoki We believe in Jesus Christ, A human person with extra-ordinary achievements; The master weaver who weaves all of creation into relationships; The first born through whom who all creation was created; The adopted person who is no longer a stranger or foreigner but one of us, You-me, me-you, the two of us; An example of surrendering to the will of God for the un-surrendered; The central pillar in the house of faith where the sacred and profane come together as one; The post who unites the people, the canoes and on who we tie our faith to; The seed of new life arising from old life; An exemplar of God; The new heart who negotiates a new worldview; The new person who creates a new paradigm that publicly contests the old and the new. 70 Apart from the first line all the succeeding lines are statements from the writings explored through the course of this chapter. Creedal statements begin with, I believe, which is a personal statement of belief. This kupu whakapono begins with, e whakapono ana matou, we believe, which is taken from the alternative confession of the Christian faith for baptismal services in the Ratana Church.92 The alternative confession expresses faith as a communal matter rather than as an individual matter of liberty. Conclusion: In this chapter I have captured a variety of Christological reflections provided by the scholarly works of thirteen Māori theologians. The written reflections have been the result of an interaction between Christian and Māori lived experience. From each of the writers, key themes and new insights have been identified that could be of interest and beneficial to Christological discourse. From these Christological reflections I have developed a confession of faith with themes and images unique to this country and context. In the next chapter the underlying themes and images will be examined and explored further. 92 J M Henderson, Ratana: The Man, the Church, the Political Movement, (Wellington: A H & A W Reed, Polynesia Society, 1972), 76. 71 CHAPTER FOUR Christological themes from chapter three Introduction: In this thesis I began by engaging with the Christological question posed by Jesus by firstly exploring the influences that have shaped my own Christology. In the following chapter I extended the research to include a select group of Māori theological and academic voices as they articulated their responses from within their own context to the Christological question. From those articulations a statement of faith has been designed to provide an example of Christological reflection that is couched in the language, imagery, symbols, stories and values of the communities that they originate from. In this chapter I will extend my Christological enquiry by outlining two of the main Christological themes from the survey of the thirteen Māori theologians in chapter three that can contribute new knowledge and insight into understanding the person and nature of Jesus Christ and his significance for salvation. The two prominent themes that are constantly repeated in the various reflections from chapter three are, whakapapa (genealogy) and the tripartite relationship between land, people and God. In this chapter I will introduce these two themes and discuss how the core theories behind these concepts may contribute something new to Christological discourse. Whakapapa: A constantly repeated theme among the writers in chapter three is whakapapa or genealogy. Five of the thirteen writers use whakapapa terminology as a foundation to develop their Christology. Māori Marsden refers to Jesus as a master tohunga whakapapa (expert genealogist) who weaves all parts of creation into relationship.93 According to Marsden the tohunga must fully understand and appreciate the intricate nature of whakapapa first before engaging with the whakapapa of another being, who maybe human or non-human. Whakapapa in te ao Māori (the Māori world) is not limited to humans, everything has a whakapapa, the winds, the seas, the stars and even Atua. In Marsden’s writings he applies a Christian theological lens to Māori traditions. In his reflections he finds similarities between tohunga and Jesus. Both the tohunga and Jesus were chosen from birth and consecrated by divine power and work for the welfare and benefit of the people. The specific class of tohunga that Marsden allocates to Jesus is that of tohunga 93 Marsden, The Woven Universe, xiv. 72 whakapapa whose central task was to keep the people connected with each other and with all parts of the world that they live in. Father Henare Tate defines Jesus as te mātāmua, the first born of creation.94 The term te mātāmua is a familial term used in whakapapa that defines consanguine ties and responsibility within whānau, hapū and iwi. Tate posits both a cultural and biblical analysis to the term mātāmua from Romans 8:17. In doing so Tate sees Jesus Christ as being enculturated into particular contexts such as that which Tate is writing from. The process of enculturation allows Christ to firmly take root in the culture of the people who are being engaged by the Christian message. Jesus Christ becomes meaningful for the people who are being engaged allowing them to respond comfortably in familiar terms. The term, whāngai, or a child adopted through customary practice is used by Hone Kaa to describe Jesus Christ.95 As a customary practice of adoption, whāngai dates back to Tamanui-te-ra and Maui-Tikitiki-a-Taranga and is still an accepted practice within Māori families tribally and inter-tribally. As a customary practise it is common to see a child raised by someone other than their birth parents. The most common type of whāngai is a child being raised by their grand-parents. This allows the child’s parents to work and provide for the welfare of the whanau. This also provides the grandparents with the opportunity to transmit to their grandchild the tribal traditions, customs and practices of their whanau, hapū and iwi. Other forms of whāngai include a child being raised by extended members of the whanau, an illegitimate child being taken in by whanau and inter-whanau or inter-tribal adoptions to strength genealogical links between whanau, hapū and iwi. Redefining the meaning of family is an aspect of the ministry of Jesus when he poses the question to his disciples concerning who is his family?96 The dual significance of the statement by Kaa is that values, customs and practises are similarly reinterpreted through the message of Jesus who in turn is accepted by the Nāti Porou iwi as one of them by adoption. Moeawa Callaghan describes Jesus as, he tipua, a person of extraordinary abilities and achievements.97 As whakapapa progresses back in time people are recognised as koroua and kuia98 (grandfather and grandmother). From the fourth generation and beyond people are referred to as tupuna (ancestors) whether they are living or dead. If they are still alive they are 94 Tate, He Puna Iti i Te Ao Marama, 55. Kaa, “A Stained-Glass Window,9-15. 96 Matt 12: 46-50; Mark 3: 31-35; Luke 8: 19-21. 97 Callaghan, “Te Karaiti in Mihingare Spirituality,” 240-250. 98 There are tribal differences in referring to grandparents. In Tai tokerau iwi of the North Island the term is Karani papa and Karani mama (Grandmother and Grandfather). In the South Island iwi of Ngāi Tahu the word for Grandfather is Poua and Taua for Grandmother. 95 73 referred to as, tupuna kuia and tupuna koroua (great grand-parents) which signifies that they are living ancestors.99 The further back the genealogy goes people are referred to as mātua tupuna (foundational ancestors), kaitiaki (guardians), taniwha (shape changers),100 tipua (extraordinary beings) and Atua (ancestor at the creation of the universe). Atua is a Māori word that has become synonymous with God yet it has a far greater depth of meaning then a one-dimensional understanding. Although it is used to describe the Christian God this involves a misconception of its total meaning. My own definition of Atua is ‘an ancestor who was present at the creation of the universe and actively involved in completing the events of creation.’ Dr Aroha Yates-Smith found that the word Atua is not used in isolation and is associated with other words that include, ariki (hereditary chief), tipua extraordinary being), kaitiaki (guardian), ariā (physical emblem of an Atua), tapu (a state of restriction) and mana (prestige, authority).101 Yates-Smith also found that Atua were not restricted to supernatural beings in creation stories but found examples of people being elevated to Atua status. From my own study of karakia (prayer), waiata (song), whakapapa (genealogy) and pūrākau (origin stories) words associated with Atua also include, tupuna (ancestor), taniwha (water creatures), tohunga (expert) and kura (treasure). Pa Henare Tate considers Atua to be an expression of the Christian concept of providence. Each Atua has a specific sphere in creation and their unity is grounded in the Creator who brought them into being and delegated to them their spheres of influence. The missionaries Tate says, seized upon the pre-existent term ‘Atua’ to name the Christian God. This allowed Christianity to enculturate itself to the culture while Māori culture and philosophy had to extend its thinking of Atua and link it to the biblical God. Following on from Tate, six of the other writers surveyed in chapter three give their views on Atua. Hone Kaa says that the Māori Gods are given new life in Jesus Christ.102 Cameron posits that theology is about recovery of Atua.103 Rakena reflects on Atua as a life centred system where Atua were evoked according to the needs of the moment.104 Writing on Within my own iwi of Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau, my late mother as the oldest living person within the iwi was referred to as Tupuna Kuia by the grand-grandchildren of the iwi. 100 Within my iwi of Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau are two well-known taniwha, Irakewa and Tūpai. Both were human from the 1350-1400 CE period who changed their shape to accompany and assist one of their descendants, Waitahanui-ariki-kore during his migration from the Cook Islands to Aotearoa New Zealand. Today both taniwha exist as eels in the Tarawera River and act as guardians of the River and their present-day descendants. 101 Aroha Yates Smith, “Hine! E Hine! Rediscovering the Feminine in Māori Spirituality (PhD diss, University of Waikato, 1998), 7-9. 102 Kaa, “A Stained-Glass Window, 12. 103 Graham Cameron, “That you might stand here on the roof of the clouds,” 5. 104 Rakena, “The Māori Response to the Gospel,” 36. 99 74 the significance of te kōpura in the Ringatū Christian calendar Maxwell outlines how Christian theology is a mode for keeping alive Atua theology.105 Hollis advocates that in expressing Christian theology that Jesus Christ be immersed in the well-springs of the Māori world that belong to Atua.106 Te Rire draws on comparisons between Māori and Christian theology to understand Jesus Christ as Atua.107 The theological writings explored in chapter three advocate for the inculturation of Jesus Christ into Māori traditions to make Christian thought more acceptable and understandable. The issue of inculturation has existed in Christianity since the first century. The disciples were commissioned to make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.108 This meant communicating the Gospel message to cultures different from the apostles’ Jewish culture of origin. Adaptation and inculturation therefore became an issue very early on for the church. One of the first questions to be confronted was whether new converts to Christianity had to become Jewish and, in particular males had to be circumcised. To communicate the Gospel in Aotearoa New Zealand Christianity and culture adapted to each other.109 Te Waaka Melbourne uses a Tūhoe tribal proverb, Koeau, ko au ko koe ko taua (Youme, me, you, us), to describe the relationship with Jesus Christ.110 The proverb is owned by the tribe who are a collective of many people related by descent from a common ancestor yet the wording of the proverb suggests two individuals in common relationship. In the TūhoeChristian context the two people sharing in a common relationship are the iwi collective and Jesus Christ rather than the individual in relationship with Jesus Christ. Proverbial sayings in Māori society are memorable expressions developed from lived experiences that are expressed in poetic form as guidelines and reference points for daily living. Proverbs extend beyond the human realm to express the ties between humans and the environment in which they live. Te Ati Haunui a Paparangi who live alongside the Whanganui River have a similar proverb ‘Ko te awa ko au, ko au ko te awa’ (I am the River and the River is me), that expresses their relationship and identity with and as the Whanganui River. Other iwi like Waikato-Tainui who live on and alongside major Rivers have similar expressions that describe the relationship between their people and the River. Maxwell, “Te Kōpura,”35. Hollis, “Te Atuatanga: Holding Te Karaitianatanga and Te Maoritanga Together Going Forward,” 10. 107 Te Rire, “The Dissipation of Indigeneity Through Religion,” 32. 108 Matt 28:19. 109 Tate, He Puna Iti i Te Ao Marama, 39. 110 Melbourne, “Māori Spirituality in the New Millenium,’109. 105 106 75 In drawing on a Tūhoe proverb, Melbourne articulates a communal kinship tie that expresses a collective identity. This is contrary to the privatisation of faith where a relationship with Jesus Christ is often a personal private matter between the individual and Jesus. There is nothing private with whakapapa as it belongs to the community and is often quoted at community events. Published in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, the genealogy of Jesus is public property and therefore the privatising of faith in Jesus Christ is inappropriate. The exciting aspect of the proverb used by Melbourne is that it belongs to the tribe and so makes the relationship with Jesus a matter for the community. The proverb expresses Jesus and the tribe being engrafted into each other so they are indistinguishable from each other. The iwi or tribe becomes the Body of Christ at the local level rather than the church being a separate institutional organisation. Genealogy is an enduring organising principle for human life. It is a record of human ancestry that provides the lineage of a person from an ancestor. Genealogy is universal in nature touching the human experience regardless of race or language. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke present two written and distinctively different genealogies of Jesus. Genealogy in Christological discourse gives much space to explaining why the two lineages of Jesus are so different.111 A whakapapa methodology also examines the differences but does not limit itself to exploring those variances but considers the richness of the whakapapa in theological, cultural, historical, relational and identity categories that are inherent within the whakapapa. Whakapapa is at the core of the Māori world; it is the anchor that remains planted in the earth while the world around it is characterised by constant change. Whakapapa records, preserves, transmits and maps relationships between people and the world that they live in physically and spiritually. Jesus like every other human being has a human genealogy that is still to be fully understood in relation to his divinity and the messianic claims made in the genealogy. Matthew makes a messianic claim in the genealogy with; Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham.112 Luke traces the genealogy of Jesus to God with the genealogical section of the text in the NRSV version of the bible entitled, ‘The Ancestors of Jesus.’ This, in effect, makes God an ancestor of Jesus and provides God with a genealogy. A whakapapa methodology will be helpful in providing new insights into the human, divine and 111 For examples see: Raymond E Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, A commentary on the infancy narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. (New York: Doubleday, 1993); Warren Carter, Matthew and the Margins, A Socio-Political and Religious Reading. (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press Ltd, 2000); W D Davis and Dale C Allison, Matthew, The International Critical Commentary on Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1997); David E Garland, Reading Matthew, A Literacy and Theological Commentary on the First Gospel, (New York: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1993). 112 Matt 1:1 76 messianic claims made in the genealogy of Jesus as in whakapapa methodology, even Atua have a whakapapa. Sir Apirana Ngata of Nāti Porou defines whakapapa as, the process of laying one thing upon another. He says that if you visualise the foundering ancestors as the first generation, the next and succeeding ancestors are placed on them in layers.113 This methodology of layering creates a foundation giving the person or collective of people a solid base of meaning to build on in this world. Layering also helps to locate yourself in the world in relation to your ancestors and in relation to each other and to the environment. Examining the genealogy of Jesus in Matthews Gospel, New Zealand Pākehā theologian Warren Carter uses the same methodology of layering that Ngata articulates. According to Carter, genealogy locates Jesus within the biblical story associating him with some of the prestigious ancestors of biblical history. This defines his relationship to the ancestors where every name evokes a layer of stories.114 The potential of whakapapa for Christology is that in the layering of generations and narratives an interpretative framework is created clothed in names, stories, place and events that shape the biblical narrative and places the origins of Jesus at the beginning of God’s purposes. Pei Te Hurinui Jones of Tainui who was mentored by Sir Apirana Ngata and other leaders of the Ngata era says that, great emphasis was placed on the genealogical method of fixing the sequence of events therefore whakapapa lines should be examined in conjunction with the history.115 Whakapapa and history have to be studied in conjunction with each other as one flows from the other rationally explaining and interpreting the other. To study them in isolation would seriously compromise the greater picture. In studying the genealogies in the book of Genesis, Claus Westerman proposes a view similar to that of Jones proposing that genealogies reflect a view of history and provides a context and timeframe.116 The genealogy of Jesus presents history in the form of lists of successive generations. This type of methodology intentionally preserves the memory of the ancestors and their achievements. This type of methodology gives a Christological dimension to interpreting the genealogies of Jesus that provides a context and a timeframe for salvation history. 113 Apirana T Ngata, Rauru nui a Toi lectures and Ngati Kahungunu origin. (Wellington: Victoria University, 1972), 6. 114 Warren Carter, Matthew and the Margins, A Socio-Political and Religious Reading. (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2000), 53. 115 Pei Te Hurinui Jones, Māori genealogies. Journal of the Polynesian Society, Vol 62 No 2, June 1958. 162165. 116 Claus Westerman, Genesis 1-11, A Commentary. (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1990), 325. 77 A contemporary of A. T. Ngata, Te Rangihīroa (Sir Peter Buck) of Ngāti Mutunga descent in Taranaki believed whakapapa to be a living tradition. According to Buck, whakapapa contained the knowledge of the ancestors and was handed on from generation to generation by word of mouth in order that it might live.117 Esther Marie Menn from the Lutheran School of Theology in Chicago describes genealogy in similar terms describing it as a method of transmitting knowledge inter-generationally. This type of transmission is a fundamental structure in biblical literature that undergirds both the extended birth narratives and the skeletal genealogies that appears in the pages of scripture.118 As a fundamental core value of Māori belief every living being has a whakapapa. Professor Whatarangi Winiata of Ngāti Raukawa and founder of Te Wānanga o Ngāti Raukawa provides a succinct definition of whakapapa as, “having the ability to ground oneself.”119 He explains that ‘whaka’ means ‘to make’ and ‘papa’ means the ‘earth or ground’. Grounding oneself is fully expressed in the word tūrangawaewae meaning a place to stand which is an important concept within the Māori World. According to David Garland, genealogy sketches the contour of salvation history and highlights the fact that the time of Israel inaugurated by Abraham has reached its fulfilment with the birth of Jesus, the one called Christ in the genealogy.120 The genealogy attributed to Jesus has the similar effect of grounding him in the physical land of Israel, in his ancestors and in history that has salvation at its core. Whakapapa is the basis for the organisation of knowledge in all aspects of creation and the subsequent development of all things animate and inanimate, from Atua to humans to every aspect of nature including time. Well-known academic Dr Ranginui Walker says: Kia whakatōmuri te haere whakamua I walk backwards into the future with my eye fixed on the past.121 In this statement Walker is seeing genealogy as travelling backward in time to the future as it unfolds in the present as a continuum into the past. The past, present and future are held in creative tension. Genealogy is constantly evolving, Friis Plum says that the fluidity of genealogies leads to alterations concurrent with changes in points of view and ideology.122 The Te Rangihīroa, The Coming of the Māori. (Wellington: Whitcombe and Tombs, 1949), 408. Esther Marie Menn, Judah and Tamar (Genesis 38) in Ancient Jewish Exegesis, Studies in Literary and Hermeneutics. (Leiden: Brill Publishers, 1997), 15. 119 S Edwards, Nā te Mātauranga Māori ka Ora Tonu te Ao Māori: Through Māori Knowledge Te Ao Māori will Resonate, in Haemata Ltd, T Black, D Bean, W Collings, W Nuku (eds), Conversation in Mātauranga Māori (Wellington: New Zealand Qualifications Authority, 2012), 37-58. 120 Garland, Reading Matthew, 13. 121 Ranginui Walker, Ngā Pepa a Ranginui, The Walker Papers, (Auckland: Penguin Books, 1996), 14. 122 Karin Friis Plum, Genealogy as Theology. Scandinavian Journal of Theology, vol 3, issue 1 1989, 66-92. 117 118 78 genealogies contained in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke differ considerably, Matthew presents the genealogy in descending order while Luke presents his in ascending order. Matthew’s contains matriarchs while Luke’s is exclusively patriarchal. The differences show that the fluidity of the genealogies warrants careful examination. Creation narratives are termed pūrākau, pū meaning origins and rākau meaning tree. Speaking as a person of Ngāti Māhuta and Chinese heritage Dr Jenny Bol Jun Lee says that, pūrākau originate from oral traditions that preserved ancestral knowledge, reflected our worldviews and portrayed the lives of our tupuna (ancestors) in creative, diverse and engaging ways.123 Similarly, one of the other narrative forms for transmitting information and knowledge is whakapapa. Lee goes on to say that, pūrākau offer huge pedagogical potential that can cut across the regulatory confines of time and space. Pūrākau are used as a methodology to transmit stories in both the traditional and contemporary context. The parables of Jesus can be viewed, analysed and interpreted as pūrākau as they are origin stories that illustrate how things are lived in the kingdom of God. Whakapapa in the context of pūrākau can enrich the hermeneutics of how parables taught by Jesus can be understood and interpreted. Whakapapa is not limited to the recording and reciting of names. Other methods of recording whakapapa are through the visual arts of whakairo (carving), tāniko, raranga and tukutuku (weaving), kōwhaiwhai (painted scroll ornamentation) and tā moko (body tattooing). Another area in which whakapapa is a is haka and waiata (performing arts). A further area where whakapapa is important is in whaikōrero (formal speech making) and karanga (ceremonial call of welcome) where the most eloquent levels of the Māori language are heard. A whakapapa methodology applied to the biblical text involves reading beyond the written word and taking note of the artistic expressions, the genre, iconography and visual images alongside the reciting of ancestral names and their narratives. Those who have been charged with the responsibility of teaching whakapapa to future generations also define how the intergenerational knowledge is going to be transferred to the next generation and what parts of the whakapapa will be passed on. The transmission of whakapapa is defined by the person who possesses that knowledge. Elaine Wainwright says that this also says something about the person who holds and retells that knowledge.124 The Jenny Lee, Māori cultural regeneration: Pūrākau as pedagogy. Paper presented as part of a symposium ‘Indigenous (Māori) pedagogies: Towards community and cultural regeneration with Te Kawehau Hoskins and Wiremu Docherty. Centre for Research in Lifelong learning International Conference, Stirling, Scotland, 24th June 2005, 2-3. 124 Elaine Wainwright, Towards a Feminist Critical Reading of the Gospel According to Matthew. (New York: De Gruyter, 1991), 67. 123 79 authors and editors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke have chosen to include their versions of the genealogy of Jesus with specific names written in a specific way for a reason. In analysing the genealogy of Jesus, a whakapapa methodology will consider the politics behind the creation of the genealogy of Jesus. The two natures of the Person of Christ are significant to Christology. A crucial aspect of the Person of Christ is the subject of ‘incarnation’ which has been drawn from the Gospel of John and the word becoming flesh.125 The true nature of Jesus Christ refers to the prosopic and hypostatic union of the human and divine natures as they coexist within the one person, the one hypostasis of Jesus Christ. In the incarnation, the pre-existent divine being permanently incorporates human nature into the Godhead through the birth of Jesus. Knowledge of personhood and the two natures is not restricted to Western philosophy and theology. Other societies around the world also have their own knowledge on these subjects and should be given the opportunity to speak into the broad range of areas within Christology. Whakapapa can contribute to the discussions of the two natures of Christ through the concepts known as te ira Atua and te ira tangata. These two terms have been translated by Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori (Māori Language Commission) to mean genes.126 Each person possesses a pair of ira tangata or human genes inherited biologically from their parents. These genes are transmitted at conception and at birth, a new life is created and the new life is human. According to Professor Hirini Moko Mead the genes are more than biological elements. There is a godlike and spiritual quality to all of them because human beings, ira tangata descend from ira Atua therefore individuals are a beneficiary of ira tangata and ira Atua.127 An ira Atua, ira tangata reading of the genealogies of Jesus can shine new light on exegeting the two natures of Jesus well beyond the confines of rigid western theological academic thought. A final point on using a whakapapa methodology to exegete the genealogies of Jesus is in the area of human connections. According to Dr Te Ahukaramu Royal of Ngāti Raukawa, whakapapa is regarded as an analytical tool that has been employed as a means to understand the world and relationships.128 A feature of the genealogy of Jesus, is the inclusion of four women in Matthew’s version. Scholars such as Raymond E Brown and Elaine Wainwright survey varying theories on why they have been included. Theories range from the women 125 John 1: 1-14 Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori, Te Matariki, Rev. ed. (Auckland: Oxford University Press, 1996), 164. 127 Hirini Moko Mead, Tikanga Māori, Living by Māori Values, (Wellington: Huia Publishers, 20169, 46-47. 128 Ahukaramu Royal, Te Ao Mārama: A Research Paradigm in Te Pūmanawa Hauora. Proceedings of Te Oru Rangahau: Māori Research and Development Conference. Palmerston North, NZ: School of Māori Studies, Massey University, 1998, 78-86. 126 80 having been included as notable sinners or as departing from the purity of the Jewish race. The women are reputed, so the theory goes to have backgrounds as seductresses, prostitutes or adulteresses or as Gentile foreign women. This last category which fits with the Gentile friendly theology of the Gospel. The area of relationships still offers plenty of scope for further investigation and a whakapapa analysis holds potential for new discoveries as a basic component of whakapapa is being in a network of relationships. To conclude, the application of a whakapapa methodology to Christological reflection points to the humanness of Jesus. The plot of a good novel is usually sketched in the opening chapter which provides the framework for the remainder of the novel. The location of the genealogy as the opening chapter in Matthew and as chapter three in the prologue to the Gospel of Luke, and their respective identification of Jesus as son of God and Jesus the Christ reveal the plot for the remainder of the Gospels. The genealogies establish the structure and intent of the remaining sections of each Gospel to reveal how Jesus a human person who had a human birth is the son of God, the heir apparent to Abraham and the throne of David and also claim the title of, the Christ. Christological reflection must include the significance of the genealogy as it is so prominent in the opening of both Gospels. In chapter five I will examine the genealogy of Jesus recorded in the Gospel of Matthew using a whakapapa analysis to see what new insights can be added to Christological reflection. Similarly, in chapter six I will examine the genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke for new insights. It is my contention based on the whakapapa themes highlighted in the survey in chapter three that the genealogy of Jesus Christ as contained in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are the starting point of Christology. In the next section of this chapter I will examine a second theme that is evident in the Christological reflections in chapter three that is closely related to whakapapa. Te Whenua, te Iwi me te Atua - The Land, the People and God: The second theme that emerges strongly from the survey of Māori writers in chapter three is the importance of land and its relationship to the people who live on the land and the prominence of God in the relationship. Land, people and God are so interlinked that they will be taken together as one subject. God is the source or origin of the land while God and the land combined are the source or origin of people. According to Tui Cadigan, the levels of conversations to Christianity can be directly attributed to the way the writings of scripture engage with the natural features of creation including land as it speaks of the relationship 81 between God and people.129 The inseparability of God, land and people offer a numbers of levels that Christianity can engage in conversation about the relationship. Levels of conversation in the scriptures range from informal and formal arrangement about land, to the emotional attachment to the land and to the relational content that comes with the being associated to the land. The task is to work out the relevancy of Old Testament practices, beliefs and values concerning the environment and to reinterpret these to the Christian context. An example of the relationship between land, people and God that both Israelite and Māori culture share is the custom of burying the afterbirth of a new-born child in the land. The Jewish philosophy underlying this custom is to give the earth a pledge with the belief that this would warm the new-born baby. In southern Judea, a cedar tree is planted with the afterbirth of a son while an acacia tree is planted for a daughter. When a couple marry, the wedding canopy is constructed from branches and leaves from those trees.130 This custom of burying the afterbirth of a new-born child and planting a tree with the afterbirth is also a practice in Māori society. The levels of conversation for Israelite and Māori who have become Christian is to work out if this historical and cultural practice and associated meaning continues in the Christian context. In Aotearoa New Zealand the biblical account of various people’s relation to the land must be read in association with the history of the land in Aotearoa New Zealand. In both the contexts of Israel and Aotearoa New Zealand, land is an emotive issue. It involves the harsh realities of land loss and colonisation that has led to the marginalisation in economic, political, spiritual and social terms of the people who claim tangata whenua (people of the land) status. The people of the land lost their land, and have suffered serious demographic decline. This comparison allows for some base-lines for a Christian ethic to be established in regards to land and indigenous communities in the contemporary modern context. The development of base-line Christian ethics is to keep indigenous communities safe from narrow minded Christian communities who seek to impose their values, beliefs and attitudes. This prejudiced view creates more harm on indigenous communities that have already been damaged by Christianity. In the colonisation of Aotearoa New Zealand, Christianity has been implicated in the destruction of indigenous communities. Ranginui Walker gives examples of Māori – missionary engagements that were not beneficial to Māori: 129 Tui Cadigan, Tangata Whenua, People of the Land. In: Elaine Wainwright, Diego Irarrazaval and Dennis Gira, Oceania and Indigenous Theologies. (London: SCM Press, 2010), 60-65. 130 Charles R Page, Jesus and the Land. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995), 41. 82 The Anglican missionaries who arrived in New Zealand in 1814 were the advance party of cultural invasion. Their mission of converting Māori from ‘barbarism to civilisation’ was predicated on notions of racial and cultural superiority. They believed in a divine right to impose their world view on those whose culture they were displacing (Freire 1972). Rev Henry Williams thought Māori people were governed by the Prince of Darkness. Rev Robert Maunsell abhorred Māori practices and thought their waiata (songs) were filthy and debasing. The Catholic Bishop Pompallier, who was admired by Māori converts to his faith, looked down on them as “infidel New Zealander.”131 These attitudes helped to fuel the New Zealand Land Wars in which the acquisition of land was ‘the issue.’ While some missionaries sided with the Crown other missionaries opposed the government land policies but were systematically incapable of being the voice and protectors of iwi and hapū. The choices left to the missionaries was limited to choosing to side with the might of colonialism or being dismissed as being irrelevant by both the Crown and iwi. The New Zealand Land Wars of the mid-19th century was a defining moment in the acceptance or rejection of Christianity by Māori. The Good-News message of Christianity was warmly received by Māori but many rejected the European packaging that it came wrapped in. The New Zealand land wars provided iwi with an opportunity to re-evaluate their relationship with Christianity. Some remained loyal to their denomination while others followed new syncretic prophetic movements. These prophetic movements incorporated biblical and Māori spiritual beliefs and emphasised deliverance and liberation from colonisation. What the Māori writers say about land: Graham Cameron writes from a context of land loss suffered by his Pirirakau and Ngāti Ranginui people who invited the Church Missionary Society (CMS) to establish a mission amongst them in Tauranga. In 1864 tension between the Crown and iwi over land and sovereignty flared into warfare in Tauranga at the battle of Te Ranga and the battle of Pukehinahina (Gate Pā). In the Tauranga campaign the CMS missionary literally turned his back on the iwi who brought him to Tauranga to be their missionary. Before the battle of Pukehinahina the missionary held a special Eucharist service for the officers of the colonial forces in the Church that his Māori parishioners had built. As he delivered the Eucharist his Māori members were barred from entry or participation. They instead watched through the Ranginui Walker, “Reclaiming Māori Education” in Decolonisation in Aotearoa: Education, Research and Practice ed. Jessica Hutching and Jenny Lee-Morgan (Wellington: NZCER Press, 2016), 20. 131 83 windows of their Church as their missionary blessed the Officers who were going to lead the colonial forces in battle against them. Since then the iwi of Tauranga have maintained a deep suspicion of European Christianity. The Ngāti Ranginui iwi of Cameron refused to accept defeat and adopted Pai Mārire as their religion but in doing so learned of a person named Jesus Christ who surrendered his will to God. In the Ngāti Ranginui search for spiritual enlightenment land and the loss of land was and still is a major issue. Another prophetic movement that grew out of the New Zealand Land Wars is the Ringatū Church. This Christian faith movement was established by the prophet Te Kooti during the New Zealand land wars as a protest in response to the injustices created by the land wars. Kāhautu Maxwell writes from this context and how Te Kooti used biblical scriptures to keep alive a common Māori practise that celebrated the Māori New Year of Mātāriki. For Kāhautu Maxwell the practice of celebrating Mātāriki is reinterpreted biblically through the resurrection of Jesus Christ who becomes Te Kōpura, the new seed from the old seed. As Jesus was physically buried in the land of Israel, he was also resurrection from the same land that he had been entombed in. At the conclusion of the Hūrae (July)132 old and new seeds are planted into the soil to take root and grow. Without the land, the seed whether it be old or new cannot survive. Land and seeds have Christological significance in Ringatū Church theology and liturgical practice. Identity is an important concept for Māori that is tied to the land. The New Zealand Land Wars more than any other event in the history of the country strained the identity of the people of the land. Their status changed from being a people who exercised ownership over the land to being a dependant vulnerable landless minority people. When the identity of people is tied to the land, changes in the ownership status of the land will evidently affect the identity of the people that results in people having to renegotiate their identity and place in the world. Land became a central issue as the Anglican Church abandoned their Māori roots in this country to become a settler Church for colonists. Hirini Kaa and Hone Kaa, both of them Anglican priests, write from the context of being ‘Nāti Porou Mihingare’ (Anglicans). European Anglican missionaries visited the East Coast of the North Island to transpose their form of Christianity and mission totally ignoring the mission work already established by Piripi Taumata-a-kura. Church buildings established and given ancestral names by Taumata-a-kura were renamed by the missionaries who apparently believed that Western Christian names were 132 The Hūrae is a major gathering of Ringatū follower at the beginning of July. 84 the only means of identifying with the Christ.133 In the face of this history, Hirini Kaa, argues that the Anglican Church in the context of his Nāti Porou iwi became an important site where those who remained loyal to the Church could renegotiate their identity as a largely landless people in this new world. Like land in the context of Aotearoa New Zealand, land in the bible is a contested commodity. Land brings with it the memory of trauma between Māori and European settlers and between Israelites and Canaanites in the biblical context. The story of land in the bible moves from the original declaration by God in the Genesis creation stories that ‘it is good’ and brings forth life to a struggle between two peoples over sovereignty of the land. The right of possession, occupation of the land, and survival in the land become central issues in the biblical story for both Israelite and Canaanite. Land and the memory associated with the land is contested. While viewed as a rich fertile productive land teeming with life to some people, the same land is viewed by another people as waste land. Examples of these differing views of land can be seen in Exodus which describes the land of Canaan as a land flowing with milk and honey.134 After the Babylonia victory Jeremiah describes the same land as a ruin and a waste.135 In one song Isaiah describes the land of Israel as a thriving vineyard on a fertile hill. As the song progresses the vineyard becomes unfaithful to its owner and yields wild grapes which results in its protection being removed and becoming overgrown with briers and thorns.136 Māori and Land: Land in the Māori world is described as; whenua (placenta). Other important words associated with land in a wide context are, whenua tuku iho (land inherited), whenua raupatu (confiscated land), whenua tautohetohe (land disputed), riro whenua atu, hoki whenua mai (land confiscated must be returned), and tangata whenua (people of the land). The land is a physical entity with a historical element, layered in human customs and is underpinned with a spiritual dimension. The theme of land is closely connected to whakapapa. The root word in whakapapa is ‘papa’ taken from the word Papatūānuku which is the word for earth. In Māori creation narratives Papatūānuku is the earth mother who marries Ranginui the sky father and they produce the world and all the life that it contains including humans. This narrative creates a genealogical link between land and humans and, as I will explore further in the following chapters, this provides a fruitful lens for developing Christology. Kaa, “A Stained-Glass Window,” 12. Exodus 3:17. 135 Jer 25:11. 136 Isaiah 5: 1-7. 133 134 85 Dr Joseph Te Rito of Ngāti Kahungunu says that whakapapa is more than simple genealogy; it is a framework for understanding one’s identity.137 Whakapapa provides not just familial connections, but also connects us to the land and the stories and histories. Whakapapa is more than reciting names; it comes with connections and relationships between people and the land. These relationships are expressed in narrative which is an art form that connects deeply with the human psyche. In 2019 one of the major issues in Aotearoa New Zealand was the up lifting of Māori babies who were considered by the State to be at risk. This created a national outrage as it severed familial and land connections when the children were placed into the foster care of people who were unrelated to the children. Some iwi negotiated an arrangement with Oranga Tamariki the State agency for the care and protection of children. In this arrangement iwi will up lift the children who are considered by the State to be at risk. The children will then be placed by the iwi into the foster care of adults who are related to the children. This maintains the important whakapapa connections between the child and the iwi. Professor Wiremu Doherty of Ngāi Tūhoe and current CEO of tertiary provider Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiarangi, provides another definition of whakapapa based on his interpretation of the word whakapapa that helps to understand the connection between the land and people. The key concept in the word, whakapapa, according to Docherty is raupapa meaning to lay out or to map the stages of development.138 This principle is also a biblical feature in Genesis 10 where the descendants of Noah are listed according to their families, their languages, their lands and their nations. The relationship between the people and their land base are mapped taking into account the connectedness between the people and the land from conception to realisation highlighting the sequential order of events. This mapping of the land can also be applied to the mission of Jesus by mapping the principle geographic locations of his ministry in sequential order to give greater insight into his ministry and identity. His early life is spent in the Galilean town of Nazareth where he is often identified in the Gospels as Jesus of Nazareth.139 Other geographic features include Galilee as the region where he practised his itinerant ministry. Jesus is also referred to on occasions as the Galilean. Another geographic feature that he is identified with is the road as he spent much of his time travelling. The Gospel of Luke records a definitive journey that Jesus takes passing 137 Te Rito, J. (2007a). Whakapapa: A framework for understanding identity. MAI Review, 2, Article 2; Te Rito, J. (2007b). Whakapapa and whenua: An insider’s view. MAI Review, 3, Article 1. 138 Wiremu Doherty, Mātauranga ā Iwi as it applies to Tūhoe, Te Mātauranga a Tūhoe. In Enhancing Mātauranga Māori and Global Indigenous Knowledge. (Wellington: New Zealand Qualifications Authority, 2014), 35. 139 Mark 10:47; John 1:45. 86 through many towns and villages on his way to Jerusalem, his final destination. Postresurrection, Matthew and Mark relocate Jesus and his disciple back in Galilee while Luke continues to locate the post-resurrection narratives in Jerusalem. Taking in the physical features of name, place and space that are associated with Jesus in the Gospels can provide further insights into his identity and mission. Using proverbs to express images, metaphors and thoughts is a common practice in the Māori world. The use of proverbs and metaphors is a poetic form of language that is used to reference specific ideas with underlying messages. As a methodology the use of proverbs can be extremely influential in public speeches and decision making. The Auckland based iwi have a proverb that captures the connection and relationship between the land and the people. In chapter 3 Dr Peter Wensor applies this proverb to Jesus as the link who ties the land and the people together in relationship. For Peter Wensor, Jesus Christ is expressed in images and metaphors that express a Māori worldview while remaining connected to key biblical texts. Proverbs are often invoked to remind people who you are and to express your connections to important people, places and events. A proverb can signify the inseparability of the people from the land. In describing Jesus Christ, Te Waaka Melbourne writes from a context of being challenged by a younger generation of Māori who rejected Christianity as they saw it as a vehicle of colonisation. As we saw in chapter three, Melbourne responded to the criticism by drawing on a tribal proverb of his iwi to explain Jesus Christ and to emphasise the connection and relationship between people: Koeau, ko au, ko koe, ko tāua (You me, me you, the two of us). The connection and relationship with Jesus are expressed in the same way that the relationship people and a river or a mountain are expressed as a oneness of being and identity. The people are the land and the land is the people. In the same way Jesus Christ is the believer and the believer is Jesus Christ. Land in the Bible The context and content of the world is shaped by land and the status applied to the land. In the opening passages of the bible, land is not a feature until the third day of creation where the water is moved around to make space for the land. On day three the earth emerges from the water taking shape and producing vegetation, plants and fruit trees. On day five the earth produces living creatures of every kind and God saw that it was good. In the second account of creation land is the major geographical feature that produces human life before any other 87 form of life. Humans are given the specific task of tilling the ground.140 In both accounts there is a clear link between the earth and life and the second account makes the link between land and people a principal theme. Land is a biblical symbol of abundant life in all its forms and all life is dependent on the land. As a symbol, land is laden with many dimensions of meaning. Land has much more significance than being merely a geographical backdrop in a narrative. The biblical symbolism of the land includes, land as life giver from the creation narratives where God says “let the earth put forth vegetation, seed and fruit trees of every kind.”141 Another biblical image is the land of plenty, a land flowing with milk and honey. This term milk and honey is first used in Exodus 3:8 when God appears to Moses in the burning bush and announces his plan to Moses to bring his chosen people out of slavery to the land of Canaan that is described as a land flowing with milk and honey. Land in this context is imaged as one of abundance, of lush fertile lands and plenty of water. Milk and honey were two of the most prized foods in the Old Testament. A further biblical image of land is ‘promised-land’ that is used in reference to the land of Canaan which is flowing with milk and honey. Promised-land theology holds God, people and land in a covenant relationship. These land images are infused with meaning while the land itself is a central symbol in scripture. Again, in the following chapters I will attempt to demonstrate how reflection on land may contribute to the academic discourse of Christology. What symbols you place at the centre of Christology will impact on revealing the nature and identity of Jesus Christ. The land also has a defined role in salvation which is sometimes represented in scripture in terms of a new heaven and earth and as the coming of a New Jerusalem. Walter Brueggemann says that, land is a central, if not the central theme of biblical faith. Biblical faith is a pursuit of historical belonging that includes a sense of destiny derived from such belonging. 142 Brueggemann goes on to suggest that the theme of land might be a way of organising biblical theology. As a symbol, land demonstrates an intimate link between a person and their environment. Christology is the quest to understand who Jesus Christ is and this also involves understanding who he was in his historical context and in his natural environment. It is also important to consider how Jesus interacted with the environment. Hans Conzelmann claims that the land and its features provide Christological facts that are not often noticed. Typical 140 Gen 2:5. Gen 1:11. 142 Walter Brueggemann, The Land, Place as Gift, Promise and Challenge in Biblical Faith. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977), 3. 141 88 locations in the canonical Gospels include mountains, lakes, the plain, a desert and the Jordan River, which are employed in particular ways to highlight the Christological significance of Jesus.143 These poetics of land demand that geography, topology and the aesthetic relationship between people and the land be taken into serious consideration when forming an opinion of who Jesus Christ is and his significance. Understanding the Jesus of history means understanding the Jesus of a particular land. Jesus was a descendant of illustrious ancestors who were promised a particular piece of land. In biblical and contemporary modern-day Israel, land is an emotive and a contested subject. In the bible the Israelites take possession of a land promised to them but belonging to someone else. They defend the land they took possession of and at times they lose control of the land when they are punished for not faithfully obeying the Covenants and the Law. Jesus belonged to this land, identified as an Israelite and actively practised Judaism, the religion of his people which contains the seeds of Christianity.144 Whenever we conceptualise land we are engaging in a social construct; we are expressing our values and our theology of land and its associated concepts of ownership. According to Geoffrey Lilburne a theology of the land must include the wisdom of indigenous people.145 The Canaanite people are the indigenous people of the land of Canaan and it is their land that the bible is interested in. As the story progresses, the Canaanites become dispossessed of the land and disenfranchised as a people. The presence of Canaanite women in the genealogy of Jesus and the personal approach and request of a Canaanite woman to Jesus sees a disenfranchised people become visible again. Whenever native American scholar Robert Allen Warrior reads the Bible, he reads the text through Canaanite eyes and argues that “the Canaanites should be at the centre of Christian theological reflection and political action.”146 The experience of native Americans mirrors that of the Canaanites and has much to teach about liberation theology in relation to indigenous peoples. The visibility of Canaanites in the Gospel texts is significant for Christological reflection for four reasons. Firstly, with their inclusion the response by the Canaanite woman to who Jesus is cannot be ignored. Secondly, at some stage Jesus must address his own identity 143 Hans Conzelmann, The Theology of St Luke. (London: Faber and Faber, 1960), 70-71. W D Davis, The Gospel and the Land, Early Christian and Jewish Territorial Doctrine. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974), 366. 145 Geoffrey Lilburne, A Sense of Place, A Christian Theology of the Land. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1989), 92. 146 Robert Allen Warrior, “Canaanites, Cowboys, and Indians, Deliverance, Conquest, and Liberation Theology today” in Native and Christian, Indigenous Voices on Religious Identity in the United States and Canada, James Treat, ed. (New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, 1996), 100. 144 89 as a descendant of Canaanite people. Thirdly, Jesus must realign his field of mission to include the Canaanite people. Fourthly and most critically, as an advocate of justice, Jesus must address the suffering and oppression of Canaanite people. These particular issues are quite critical in light of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict today and other areas of the world where land, identity, belonging and ownership are in conflict. The possibilities for Christology becoming a voice of justice and peace in this contentious area are enormous. Land does not exist in a vacuum; it has a history to it that involves interaction with people. Sacred places are identified, shrines, monuments and altars are built that signifies some activity that the people have experienced in that particular place. The Gospels present another layer in the history of the land with their focus on the presence and activity of Jesus Christ. The land takes on a new significance on account of Christ’s presence and activity. In an article written in ‘Heartlands’, Dean Graetz reflecting on Aboriginal Australian land practices and beliefs says that, the land itself is active, having its own being, its own memory.147 He goes on to quote an Aboriginal proverb, ‘we have forgotten but the land never forgets.’ Christology and Land: Christology is understanding the nature of Jesus Christ and his significance for salvation. Traditionally, Christology has been subject to the dogmatic concerns of the Church and spoken of in narrow androcentric doctrinal theories of atonement and salvation. These narrow parameters restrict Christology from the wide and rich field of images that thrive in the New Testament. The challenge to Christology is to see beyond traditional categories to the peripheries where other categories lay dormant waiting to be recognised and become part of the conversation. Understanding the land in the biblical context is also a task of Christology and assists in drawing up a Christian ethic for the land. 147 Lilburne, A Sense of Place, 34. 90 Conclusion: The following table shows a comparison between the land in the context of Aotearoa New Zealand and the land in the biblical context. Table 1: Comparison of land in the biblical context and the context of Aotearoa New Zealand. Biblical Context Aotearoa New Zealand Land emerges from under the water in the creation stories and is blessed by God who commands the land to bring forth life. Abraham, the original ancestor of Israel was a landless person, a wandering Aramean looking for land that was promised to him and his descendants by his God. After being liberated from slavery, Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years before entering the Promised-land. Land emerges from the different stages of creation and brings forth life in Atua and humans. The ancestors of the Māori people travelled the Pacific Ocean in search of new land to call home. After moving from Island to Island throughout the Pacific the ancestors find new land that was discovered by their ancestor Maui. Israelite take possession of the Promised- Europeans arrive in Aotearoa New Zealand land and in the process conquer the people from 1769. A Treaty is signed between who lived in the land. Māori and the British Crown providing certain rights and obligations on both parties. Israel is occupied by Rome. The demand by settlers for land results in the New Zealand land wars in which Māori lost significant amounts of land. The intention of this chapter has been to highlight new emerging themes for Christology from the Christological reflections contained in chapter three. A thematic analysis of the written work of the writers in chapter three has identified particular aspects of the respective writer’s perceptions, worldviews, feelings, beliefs and experiences. The voice of the researcher-writer is the key component that takes ownership of the topic in their own context and with their own words, free of constraints. Two new themes have been identified that can contribute to further Christological discourse concerning the identity and nature of Jesus Christ. The first of these new themes is utilisation of a whakapapa methodology and analysis of the genealogy of Jesus recorded in the Gospels of Mathew and Luke. In the Gospel of Matthew, the genealogy of Jesus Christ has references to Canaanite women in the land of Canaan. This provides a hereditary link between Jesus and the Canaanite people which will be explored in chapter five. The genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke differs from Matthew’s 91 version in names and structure and will be examined in chapter six. It is my contention that the genealogy of Jesus is the starting point of Christology. The second new theme is the tripartite relationship between land, the people and God. The biblical story takes place in a land locked environment of the Ancient Near East. As the biblical story progresses the land also develops its own distinctive character. In chapters six I will analyse the land as an important factor in the genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke. In chapter seven I will examine the land, its voice and its memories as the centre of Christology. In chapter eight I will look at the people of the land in biblical tradition re-evaluating the role and significance of the presence of the Canaanite people as the people of the land and as the Gentile antithesis of Israel and what this means for Jesus who has Canaanite and Israelite heritage. 92 CHAPTER FIVE A whakapapa analysis of the genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew 1:1-17. E kore ahau i ngaro He kakano ahau i ruia mai i Rangiātea I can never be lost I am a seed sown long ago in Rangiātea1 Introduction: In Chapter two I identified whakapapa as an influence in the formation of my own Christology. In chapter three the theme of whakapapa is constantly repeated in the Christological reflections of a number of writers. In chapter four I identified that whakapapa is considered to be the foundational layer of Mātauranga Māori (Māori Knowledge). This is shown by the number of previous and current research projects undertaken by Māori at post-graduate level in Universities and Wānanga that involve whakapapa in the title, the content or the methodology of their research. These factors make whakapapa a major area of enquiry for this thesis. In the previous chapter I outlined emerging Christological themes from the reflections of the thirteen Māori theological writers. Whakapapa was identified as a recurring theme amongst a number of writers. In this chapter I will apply a whakapapa analysis to the genealogy of Jesus contained in the Gospel of Matthew 1:1-17. I will do this by exploring the significance of whakapapa as a foundational base of mātauranga Māori, then by looking at the role that women have as the traditional holders of whakapapa and knowledge within traditional Māori society. Following this I will examine briefly the role of genealogy in the Old Testament before giving a description of the genealogy of Jesus contained in Matthew 1: 1-17. I will then revision Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus with a whakapapa analysis. Whakapapa in Mātauranga Māori: A Kaupapa Māori based theory and methodology is a critical way of thinking that uses mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) as its theoretical base. This methodology is expressed using kawa (processes), tikanga (cultural practices) and whakaaro (cultural philosophies) to critique, examine, analyse, rationalise and express a Māori world view and a Māori view of the world. In practice it affirms, validates and normalises the Māori way of life and the relevant 1 This is a well-known proverb from the Aotea area of the West Coast of the North Island which shows the importance of genealogy and culture with the belief that if you know your whakapapa you can never be lost. 93 codes of knowledge in an academic environment while critiquing non-Māori constructions and definitions. Mātauranga Māori communicates knowledge that is inter-generationally transferable from person to person providing insight into different realities about knowledge and knowing. Mātauranga epistemology begins with understanding connections and relationships between animate and inanimate. The initial research question is, what is the whakapapa (genealogy) of this thing that is being encountered? According to Rāwiri Taonui, whakapapa is at the core of mātauranga Māori.2 The late Sir James Henare summed up the importance of whakapapa to all aspects of life: ko te whakapapa te taumata tiketike o te mātauranga Māori (genealogy is the pinnacle of Māori knowledge).3 Whakapapa is a taxonomic framework that underpins creation narratives, land tenure, water rights, intrinsic and extrinsic relationships between the physical and spiritual worlds, the environment and the universe. The initial analytical research question is, ‘who or what is this thing I am encountering, and what is my relationship to it?’ Many Māori whānau today maintain old ledgers that were hand written in pencil or ink pen, some dating to the 1800s. These manual scripts contain whakapapa, ancient prayers, historical stories, important local events, stories of ancestors, records of battles won and lost, peace-making, songs, love affairs, proverbs, personalities, connections to land blocks, connections to other tribal whakapapa, memories, letters, important hui where responses and decisions were made concerning topical issues of the day, dates of births, baptisms, marriages and deaths. These ledgers contain a wealth of whānau, hapū and iwi knowledge and histories. This chapter contains some of my own personal insights from forty years’ experience of researching, documenting and teaching whakapapa as a living art for the benefit of today’s generation of my own iwi. In 1981 at the age of seventeen I was given a number of whānau whakapapa books and ledgers due to my interest in whakapapa and tribal history. These precious documents have been added to and include manuscripts written in 1885 by my ancestor Hāmiora Tumutara Te Tihi o te Whenua Pio IX. His manuscripts were valuable sources of information for ethnographers Elsdon Best, John Cowen, and John White in their Rāwiri Taonui, ‘Whakapapa – genealogy – What is whakapapa?’ Te Ara – the Encyclopaedia of New Zealand (accessed 11 May 2018). http://www.TeAra.govt.nz/en/whakapapa-genealogy/page-1. 3 Pierre Lyndon, Personal conversations, Queenstown, 29 August 2018. 2 94 own publications.4 For this chapter, along with personal insight on the subject I will also draw upon these historical whanau whakapapa books and ledgers as a documentary source. In chapter three I observed that Māori Marsden refers to Jesus as a master tohunga whakapapa (an expert weaver) who weaves all parts of creation into relationship.5 The tohunga must fully understand and appreciate the intricate nature of their own whakapapa first before engaging with the whakapapa of another being. Father Henare Tate defines Jesus as ‘te mātāmua, the first born of creation.’6 The term te mātāmua is a familial term used in whakapapa that defines consanguine ties and responsibility within whānau, hapū and iwi. The term, whāngai, or adopted child is used by Hone Kaa to describe Jesus Christ.7 Whāngai is the customary practice of adoption dating back to Tamanui-te-ra and Maui-tikitiki-a-Taranga and is still practised today within families and inter-tribally. Moeawa Callaghan describes Jesus as, he tipua, a person of extraordinary abilities and achievements.8 As whakapapa progresses back in time people are recognised as koroua and kuia9 (grandfather and grandmother). From the fourth generation and beyond people are referred to as tupuna (ancestors). If they are still alive they are referred to as, tupuna kuia and tupuna koroua (great grand mother and father) which signifies that they are living ancestors.10 The further back the genealogy goes people are referred to as mātua tupuna (foundational ancestors), kaitiaki (guardians), taniwha (shape changers),11 tipua (extraordinary beings) and Atua (ancestor at creation of universe).12 As we have seen, Te Waaka Melbourne uses a Tūhoe tribal proverb, Koeau, ko au ko koe ko taua (You-me, me, you, us), to describe the relationship with Jesus Christ.13 The proverb is owned by the tribe, a collective of many people related by descent from a common ancestor See: Elsdon Best, Tūhoe, The Children of The Mist, (Wellington: A H & A W Reed Ltd, 1972); John White, Ancient History of the Maori; His Mythology and Traditions. (Wellington: George Didsbury, Government Printer, 1897); Maui Pomare & James Cowan, Legends of the Maori, (Wellington: Fine Arts, 1930). 5 Marsden, The Woven Universe, xiv. 6 Tate, He Puna Iti i Te Ao Marama, 55. 7 Kaa, “A Stained-Glass Window,9-15. 8 Callaghan, “Te Karaiti in Mihingare Spirituality, 240-250. 9 There are tribal difference in referring to grandparents. In Taitokerau iwi of the North Island the term is Karani papa and Karani mama (Grandmother and Grandfather). In the South Island iwi of Ngāi Tahu the word for Grandfather is Poua, Grandmother Taua. 10 Within my own iwi of Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau, my late mother as the oldest living person within the iwi was referred as Tupuna Kuia by the grand-grandchildren of the iwi. 11 Within my iwi of Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau are two well-known taniwha, Irakewa and Tūpai. Both were human from the 1350-1400 CE period who changed their shape to accompany and assist one of their descendants, Waitahanui-ariki-kore when he migrated from the Cook Islands to Aotearoa New Zealand. Today both taniwha exist as eels in the Tarawera River and act as guardians of the River and their present-day descendants. 12 Atua has been translated as God however this definition is challenged in this thesis with my own definition of Atua as ancestor present at the creation of the universe and actively involved in the events of creation. 13 Melbourne, “Māori Spirituality in the New Millenium,’109. 4 95 yet the wording of the proverb suggests two individuals in common relationship. In the TūhoeChristian context the two people sharing in a common relationship are the iwi collective and Jesus Christ rather than the individual in relationship with Jesus Christ. Proverbial sayings in Māori society are memorable expressions developed from lived experience that are expressed in poetic form as guidelines and reference points for daily living. Proverbs extend beyond the human realm to express the ties between humans and the environment in which they live. Te Ati Haunui a Paparangi who live alongside the Whanganui River have a similar proverb ‘Ko te awa ko au, ko au ko te awa’ (I am the River and the River is me), that expresses their relationship and identity with and as the Whanganui River. Melbourne draws on a Tūhoe proverb to express corporate kinship ties and identity in relationship with Jesus Christ. As these five theologians have all drawn upon whakapapa terminology and concepts in creating their Christology, it is my contention and the central argument of this chapter that whakapapa, especially, the whakapapa of Jesus Christ may be taken as the starting point of Christology. Te Reo Wahine Māori - Te Ture o taku whaea, the law of mothers: As mentioned in chapter one, my greatest teacher in learning whakapapa was my late mother Mrs Millie Amiria Te Kaawa. On a number of occasions my mother explained to me that the kaitiaki (guardians, holders, keepers and teachers) of whakapapa and histories often captured in mōteatea (tribal songs) in our iwi are women, not men. The art of karanga is closely related to whakapapa and an in-depth knowledge of whakapapa is a requirement of karanga. The two concepts of karanga and whāngai are integral to whakapapa. The root word of karanga is raranga, to weave. Whakapapa is weaving another strand to an ongoing history where the first strand was woven in the creation event. Whāngai means to feed people knowledge of their whakapapa as a birth right and all the connections and responsibilities. Whakapapa involves, feeding and being fed, finding your own strand in a rich whakapapa and weaving a new strand into that lineage making whakapapa an active living practice. To deny people knowledge and the opportunity to weave another strand to their whakapapa, exposes that whakapapa to the risk of not continuing into the next generation for the benefit of those not yet born. In our upbringing we had many children stay with us who came from broken homes. My mother would pay extra-special attention to the young girls, encouraging and inspiring them to a good life as their whāngai mother. In Onepu, many of the young girls of our iwi had lost their own grandparents and subsequently did not know them. To those young girls she became their whāngai kuia (grandmother). When she lay in a coma dying in Whakatane 96 hospital in January 2018, I arrived at the hospital from Dunedin to find twenty of those young girls nursing and attending to her every need. They stayed with her for three days until she drew her last breath. She was their whāngai kuia who fed two generations of young Māori women with her teachings and encouragement and they were her whāngai daughters and granddaughters who readily learnt from her and who now carry her teachings into the future with their own daughters and grand-daughters. Genealogy in the Old Testament: Genealogy is a global phenomenon and practice. As a word genealogy derives from the Greek words γενεά (generation) and λόγος (knowledge). Based on this etymology, genealogy, is concerned with preserving intergenerational knowledge of human lineages and the origins and histories of and within those lineages. Through genealogy, pedigrees are established illustrating connectedness in a complex web of relationships that enables a person to legitimise claims to belonging, relationships, status, power, resources, and wealth. The Old Testament of the Bible is a genealogical manual script and contains vast genealogical lists in the Books of Genesis, Numbers, Ruth and 1Chronicles. The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah record post-exilic lists which were important to reconnect the Babylonian exiles with their tribal roots when they returned to Israel. Being able to recite your genealogy to a patriarchal ancestor is the foundation stone of Israel which has tribalism as its root. Proof of ancestry allowed the person to fully exercise their inalienable rights and responsibilities, enabling them to hold civic and religious office.14 In the Book of Genesis genealogies often precede or conclude narratives and serve to put the narrative into context. Genesis begins with the creation of the heavens and earth and that narrative sequence concludes two genealogies in Genesis 4: 17-26. The first genealogy from verses 17-25 is a linear genealogy that also expresses ethnological characteristics of the line of Cain and ends in a segmented genealogy of Lamech’s three sons and daughter. The second genealogy from verses 25-26 is of the line of Seth, younger brother of Cain, and concludes with the statement that: from this time men began to call on the name of the Lord. This formula can be expressed with the following equation: Formula 1: Flow of genealogies in Genesis chapter 4 Narrative-------------) Genealogy ---------------------) Action Creation Genealogy People call on the name of the LORD 14 Joachim Jeremias, Jerusalem in the time of Jesus. (London: SCM Press, 1969), 275. 97 A similar formula takes shape from chapters 5-9 which concludes with a covenant between the main character in the narrative and God. This formula is illustrated in Genesis 59 which begins by providing a linear genealogy from Adam to Noah that links the previous story to the following story. While it is a brief record of human reproduction, it provides an interpretative framework which shapes the following story.15 Following the Adam-Noah genealogy is the narrative of the flood where Noah is the hero (Genesis 6-8) and concludes with God making a covenant with Noah complete with a sign of the covenant (Genesis 9). The next two chapters follow the same pattern beginning with a segmented genealogy from Noah giving ethnological characteristics of different peoples. Within three generations Noah’s descendants multiply into powerful nations who build the Tower of Babel that causes Yahweh to act decisively confusing their languages and dispersing the people over the whole earth. The formula is continued; a genealogy is followed by a narrative and then by Yahweh acting decisively. Genesis 11- 15 follow the same formula, a genealogy from Shem, son of Noah is given to Abraham a tenth-generation descendant of Noah. Narratives of Abraham follow and that sequence concludes in chapter 15 with Yahweh establishing his covenant with Abraham. This formula can be expressed with the following equation: Formula 2: Flow of genealogies in Genesis chapters 5-9 Genealogy------------) Narrative ----------------------) Covenant / Divine Action Noah Flood Rainbow World Tower of Babel Confuses language and scatters people Abraham Call, Egypt, Lot Land Genealogical lists continue in the Book of Numbers in preparation for the Israelites entering and settling the Promised Land. A census is taken that organises the vast population into clans and families based on their descent from the sons of the ancestor Israel. This gives structure to the wandering remnants shaping them into a fledgling nation. Over thirty-eightyear period statistics emerge and details are worked out and actioned along genealogical principles concerning military strengths and operations, living arrangements, secular and religious roles, responsibilities, duties, migration patterns, future succession planning, leadership, inheritance rights of daughters. At the end of this period all that is required for the embryonic nation is land to call their own and they stand on the edge of the land known as Canaan that has been divinely designated as their Promised Land. 15 Warren Carter, Matthew and the Margins, A Socio-Political and Religious Reading (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000), 55. 98 The first Book of Chronicles is a rewritten history after the return of the Babylonian exiles. The story in the first part is almost entirely retold by genealogical lists in chronological order from Adam to the establishment of the Kingship by Saul and David. The genealogies restate the Israelites’ view of world history, indicate their ancestors’ role and influence in shaping history, and establish important time lines to place the story within a context. The context of Chronicles is the Babylonian exiles returning to the land of their ancestors after a four-hundred-year absence. While they have learnt their histories in exile, they are now faced with having to assimilate back into a society with which they have a degree of unfamiliarity. Zerubbabel uses genealogy as the basis to resettle returning exiles according to their genealogies. Hezekiah also uses genealogies as the basis for his religious reforms. The genealogies conclude in chapter nine with the genealogy of King Saul prior to his death and the ascent of David to the Throne. Chronicles continues with David’s achievements and struggles and concludes with preparation for building the Temple in Jerusalem and Solomon’s succession to David as Monarch. This formula can be expressed with the following equation: Formula 3: Flow of genealogies in Numbers and 1 Chronicles Numbers Genealogy Sons of Israel Narrative Nation Building 1 Chronicles World history from Adam Exploits of David to David as King Action From tribe to nationhood Israelite Monarchy established The Old Testament shows that there is a genealogical economy related to human production and activity. Stories were narrated of ancestors within the framework of a genealogy so history becomes an expression of that genealogy.16 For example in the Book of Genesis, genealogy takes precedence as a prologue to the story of the ancestor-hero, placing the narrative within a specific context and time line. The story of Noah begins by presenting his genealogy before the flood narrative and concludes with a covenant between Yahweh and Noah. The Abraham saga similarly begins by presenting his genealogy and also concludes with a divine covenant and set out the genealogies functioning as the hero’s credentials. An important aspect of the genealogical economy includes the centrality of land. In the narratives of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob land is promised successively. Through famine the children of Jacob migrate to Egypt where one of Jacob’s sons has a respected position. The descendants of Jacob became quite numerous. This became a burden on their hosts resulting in 16 Raymond E Brown, The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. (New York: Doubleday, 1993), 65. 99 their numerous descendants becoming slaves to their Egyptian hosts. They are liberated from their slavery, eventually finding land that is divinely bequeathed to them. Occupation and settlement of the land into tribal territories is based on tribal principles of genealogical descent. The nation of Israel is constituted along genealogical descent lines from the sons of Israel. As the narrative continues some descendants of the nation of Israel are led away into captivity by the Babylonians. Four hundred years later the exiles return and are resettled into their tribal regions on the principles of genealogical descent. A theological agenda also exists in the genealogical economy. The genealogies evoke and recall the memory of promises, covenants and curses. The genealogy of Noah evokes the memory of the rainbow covenant that Yahweh would never again destroy the earth by flood.17 The genealogy of Abraham preserves the memory of the promise of being the ancestor of as many descendants as there are stars in the sky.18 Abraham is given a substantial gift of land that his descendants will occupy in future and by Abraham all nations will be blessed. 19 The genealogy of David preserves the memory of the promise that the Messiah would be one of his descendants.20 Due to this promise exact and detailed genealogies were kept of the Davidic line as it was expected that the Messiah would arise from amongst his descendants. Genealogy also brought exclusive privileges that were often hereditary in nature for both royal, civic and religious offices. The royal succession was reserved specially for the descendants of King David. Civic office often passed from father to son and the priesthood was reserved exclusively to the descendants of Aaron. Service and status were conditional upon proving descent. Proof of legitimate ancestry was the very foundation of society and even the simple Israelite knew his immediate ancestors and could point to which of the twelve tribes he belonged.21 The Genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew The Gospel of Matthew begins with the genealogy of Jesus highlighting his descent from Abraham and David who are both crucial figures in the genealogy. Their importance is illustrated in both featuring in the prologue, the main body and in the postscript of the genealogy. Every name mentioned evokes a story beginning with the common ancestor 17 Gen 9: 8-17. Gen 15: 5. 19 Gen 22:18. 20 Isa 11:1-5, 10; Jer 23: 5-6. 21 Jeremias, Jerusalem in the time of Jesus, 275. 18 100 Abraham who heads the genealogy and stands at the beginning of Jewish accounts of history.22 The lineage progresses to David where the title ‘King’ is attached to his name changing the nature of this genealogy from a prophetic patriarchal line to a patriarchal royal line. From King David forward there is no further mention of prophets. From King David to Jeconiah there are thirteen Kings in succession until the Babylonian exile. The location of the genealogy within the Gospel of Matthew is an emphatic statement by the author of the Gospel to claim the title of King for Jesus of Nazareth providing the royal pedigree of Jesus to support this claim. From a kaupapa Māori methodology, as an orator within the Māori world when you quote your own whakapapa on the marae you are making a bold statement of your importance. When I move with the Māori King, Tuheitia, as part of his kāhui wairua, (religious advisors) I note that his orators will only recite the King’s whakapapa and his whakapapa alone as they all individually and collectively cede their whakapapa to the King. If any of his orators publicly recite their own whakapapa it is taken as a challenge where they are laying forth their right to be King. When visiting other marae outside of his own Tainui tribal area, the host receive the King and often publicly recite a whakapapa from their iwi that connects to the King’s whakapapa, showing that the King is also a descendent of their ancestors and of their iwi. This was one of the criteria in choosing Pōtatau Te Wherowhero as the first Māori King in 1856. Within his own iwi of Waikato, he had seniority within whakapapa that made him paramount chief but he also had the pedigree to be able to trace his lineage to most senior lines of different iwi. Pōtatau was able to trace his whakapapa to the senior lines of Ngāti Haua, Maniapoto, Ngāti Raukawa, Tūwharetoa, Ngāti Pikiao, Tūhourangi, Ngāti Whakaue, Ngāti Rangitihi, Ngāti Awa, Ngāti Kahungunu, Ngāti Porou, Te Aupōuri and Taranaki iwi. Pōtatau could also trace his whakapapa to eleven of the major waka that are claimed by various iwi. Using the explanation of the importance of whakapapa to the Māori Kingship, the genealogy of Jesus located as chapter one, verse one of the Gospel of Matthew, is an emphatic statement by the Gospel author that claims both the patriarchal prophetic line from the common ancestor, Abraham but also the royal line of King David for the person known as Jesus. His genealogy lays out his credentials, evidence, and history to support this claim. In the Gospels and New Testament there are only two genealogies recorded and both belong to Jesus. There are no other genealogies recorded within the Gospels or New Testament which makes the genealogy of Jesus paramount. 22 Davis and Allison, Matthew, 167. 101 Kingship language is a feature of Matthew’s Gospel where Jesus is referred to or acknowledged by others as King. After his birth the Magi search for the new baby asking “where is the King?”23 At his entrance into Jerusalem he sends two disciples ahead to find him a donkey, instructing his disciples if they are challenged to reply saying, ‘see your King comes to you gentle and riding on a donkey.’24 Before Pilate, and under incredible pressure, Jesus rhetorically acknowledges that he is a King explaining that his kingdom is not of this world and should not be considered a threat to Cesar or the Roman Empire.25 There is also a distinctive kingship language in Matthew’s Gospel. When Jesus preaches publicly for the first time he uses the words, the kingdom is near.26 In the Lord’s Prayer, after acknowledging the holiness of God in the first two lines, the first request of God is that ‘thy Kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven’.27 In chapter thirteen, Jesus uses parables to give insight into what life is like in the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom is likened to seeds that multiply, a mustard seed, yeast, the joy of finding hidden treasure and a net that captures all kinds of fish. Women in the Genealogy of Jesus: Raymond E Brown and Warren Carter identify a rhythmic formula in Matthew’s genealogy; A was the father of B, B was the father of C.28 The text supports the pattern suggested by Brown and Carter; Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac was the father of Jacob. The pattern breaks when the five women in the genealogy, Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, Uriah’s wife and Mary, mother of Jesus are named. The inclusion of women is a feature to the Gospel of Matthew. Garland says that women were not normally included in genealogies unless there was an irregularity of pedigree or some noteworthy association.29 Krister Stendahl identifies the common denominator for the inclusion of the women in the genealogy; they all represent an irregularity in the Davidic line.30 The purpose of the genealogy is to legitimise the claim of Jesus as the Messiah by accentuating both his Jewish lineage from Abraham and his royal Davidic line. In 23 Matt 2:2. Matt 21:5. 25 Matt 27:11. 26 Matt 4:17. 27 Matt 6:10. 28 Raymond E Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, A commentary on the infancy narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. (New York: Doubleday, 1993), 60; Warren Carter, Matthew and the Margins, A SocioPolitical and Religious Reading. (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press Ltd, 2000), 65. 29 David E Garland, Reading Matthew, A Literacy and Theological Commentary on the First Gospel, (New York: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1993), 17. 30 Krister Stendahl, Quis et Unde? An analysis of Matthew 1-2. In: Graham N Stanton (Ed), The Interpretation of Matthew, (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995), 74. 24 102 proving his heritage, the genealogy provides both a list of ancestral names and also the promises made by Yahweh to Abraham and David.31 The inclusion of the women highlights two irregularities: according to St Jerome, they are notable because of their sin, while according to Martin Luther they are distinctive because they are all foreign or Gentile women. Furthermore, the women all show initiative in difficult situations and, these women point the way to Mary, wife of Joseph and mother of Jesus.32 The sin of several of the women includes sexual promiscuity; they are alleged to be seductresses, prostitutes or adulteresses who had a scandalous relationship with a Jewish man. Designated as sinners, Jerome felt that this illustrated the pressing need for a saviour figure in Jesus for sinful humans. Jerome’s theory has been disputed by various biblical commentators.33 Matthew’s Gospel is considered to be the Gentile friendly Gospel and the inclusion of foreign women (Aramean, a Canaanite, a Moabite and the wife of a Hittite), justifies Matthew’s inclusion of Gentiles in the ministry of Jesus. Citing four Old Testament women in the genealogy reinforces repetitive points in the Gospel where Gentiles show extraordinary faith in contrast to the unbelief of the Jews. When Jesus heals the son of the Centurion, astonished, Jesus proclaims that he has not found anyone in Israel with such faith and similarly he commends the Canaanite woman for her great faith when persisting with her request for him to heal her daughter.34 While the genealogy meets Jewish messianic expectations Jesus is presented as more than a Jewish messiah but as a messiah for all peoples when he commissions his disciples to take his mission to all nations.35 In the individual stories of the women they show exceptional initiative, using a range of different methods for economic existence and survival (Rahab, Ruth) for political safety (Bathsheba) or for a reason to exist (Tamar). The women show their faith in exploring unusual means to protect their own interests and overcome obstacles created by men.36 31 For a record of promises to Abraham see: Gen 22:18. For a record of promises to David see: 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Chr 17: 11-14; Ps 89:3, 132:11; Isa 11: 1-5,10; Jer 23: 5-6, 30:9, 33:14-18; Ezek 34: 23-24, 37:24. 32 Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, 71-73. 33 See: Janice Capel Anderson, Matthew, Gender Reading. In Amy Jill Levine with Marianne Blickenstaff, ed. Matthew, A Feminist Companion, (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 30; Raymond E Brown, The Birth of the Messiah: A commentary on the infancy narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. (New York: Doubleday, 1993), 71; David E Garland, Reading Matthew, A Literacy and Theological Commentary on the First Gospel, (New York: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1993), 17-20; Krister Stendahl, Quis et Unde? An analysis of Matthew 1-2. In: Graham N Stanton (Ed), The Interpretation of Matthew, (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995), 75; Elaine Mary Wainwright, Towards a Feminist Critical Reading of the Gospel According to Matthew. (New York: Berlin, 1991), 65. 34 Matt 8:10, 15::28. 35 Matt 28:20. 36 Carter, Matthew and the Margins, 59. 103 Elaine Wainwright expands on Warren Carter’s theory and challenges other writers whose theories designate the women as sinners saying that claim cannot be supported by the text.37 A feature of genealogies is that they provide an opportunity to remember people and events that have been forgotten or hidden away in the details. In the story of Tamar, an Aramean woman, after the death of her husband, the brothers-in-law fail in their legal obligations to provide her with a child resulting in Tamar taking matters into her own hands to be impregnated by her father-in-law. The Bible records Tamar as a widow who became a prostitute to be impregnated but what is easily overlooked in the story is the judgement of her father-in-law Judah who, when he discovers that he is responsible for impregnating Tamar declares her to be more righteous than he.38 Six generations later, Rahab, a Canaanite woman, enters the story as a prostitute who shows hospitality and protection to the Israelite spies and charges them to keep her family safe during and after conquest of Jericho. After this story Rahab disappears completely from the Bible until the genealogy of Jesus is provided by Matthew. To the surprise of the reader, Rahab appears as the mother of Boaz, grandmother of Obed and mother-in-law to Ruth. The biblical text makes no mention of this and the only way to confirm this is to go outside the text to secondary sources. The Rabbinic text and the Midrash say that Rahab married Joshua and that the Spirit of the Lord rests on Rahab. This is a challenge to her sole designation as a sinner, however there is still no mention of Rahab marrying Salmon and being the mother of Boaz. Genealogy 3: Judah and Tamar to King Solomon: Judah = Tamar Perez Hezron Ram Amminadab Nahshon Elimelech = Naomi Mahlon Zerah Salmon = Rahab = Eliam Ruth = Obed Jessie Boaz Uriah’s wife = King David King Solomon 37 Elaine Mary Wainwright, Towards a Feminist Critical Reading of the Gospel According to Matthew. (New York: Berlin, 1991), 65. 38 Gen 38:26. 104 Ruth married Mahlon the son of Elimelech and Naomi and shows great faithfulness to her mother-in-law after her husband and father-in-law die. Her supposed sin is never identified and Ruth marries Boaz, a relative of her mother-in-law. After they wed Ruth is blessed by the Lord (Ruth 4: 13), becoming the mother of Obed who is named by the women of the neighbourhood (Ruth 4: 17) and eventually the great-grandmother of David who would be King as the genealogy above shows: In the story of Uriah’s wife, who is not named in the genealogy, David lusts after her and successfully plots to have her husband killed in battle (2Sam 11:1-27). David marries Uriah’s widow after a period of mourning but it is David not Uriah’s wife who is judged and punished for adultery by the Lord (2Sam 12:1-15). This unnamed woman is recorded in the genealogy of Jesus as the mother of Solomon. The suggestion that the women are distinguished because of their sinfulness is a selective remembering of history, which Elaine Wainwright describes this as gender politics, whereby women are recognised only when they are a problem and become dangerous to the patriarchal system, needing to be domesticated.39 Tamar is unable to conceive a child from her husband and after his death the application of the levirate custom still leaves her without child. The opportunity to conceive a child from the youngest brother is denied her and she is banished to solitude from the family. She goes outside the convention of the levirate custom and conceives a child to her father-in-law. The application of levirate custom is the recurring issue for Ruth. After she is left widowed, Ruth schemes with her mother-in-law to marry Boaz using the law as their ally. In these cases, both Tamar and Ruth go outside the normal parameters of custom and tradition and challenge the androcentric system to achieve a sense of justice. Rahab, like her people is condemned to possible death or at the least to being a conquered person but goes outside convention initiating her own negotiations with the spies for the safety of her extended family. Her non-compliance with her King’s request makes her a threat to her own leader. In the spies reply to Rahab’s request there is a possibility of betrayal by Rahab and this is negated as they guarantee they will treat her kindly and faithfully as long as she doesn’t report what they are doing.40 The wife of Uriah engaged in an affair with King David and became pregnant. The biblical text does not explicitly state if Bathsheba consented to the affair, yet it is King David who is castigated for his adultery and their child dies a few days after birth. Bathsheba bears another child to the King and secures her son’s succession to the throne instead 39 40 Wainwright, Towards a Feminist Critical Reading of the Gospel According to Matthew, 66. Josh 2:14. 105 of the elder surviving sons from other wives. At different stages in the narratives the women pose a threat to the male characters and the accepted societal norms highlighting abnormalities in the system. Their inclusion in the genealogy critiques an androcentric lineage and narratives alerting the reciter and hearer of the genealogy to the presence and significance of women in the ancestry of Jesus, not only as mothers, but also as liminal characters whose domestic arrangements introduce a point of tension that challenges the patriarchal God, leaders, system, laws, customs, traditions and narratives. The fifth woman mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus is Mary, wife of Joseph and mother of Jesus. The way the genealogy is written casts suspicion that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus and suggests that Mary was a pregnant teenager preparing for life as a solo parent. Had Joseph been the biological father of Jesus then the pattern would have continued with Jesus’ name appearing in sequential order after Joseph’s name consistent with the words ‘father of Jesus. There would have been no reference to Mary as wife or mother. The genealogy as it is written in the text places Jesus on the outer in relation to the Davidic line through his mother’s marriage as the following genealogy shows: Genealogy 4: Jehoiachin to Jesus: Jehoiachin Shealtiel Zerubbabel Abiud Eliakim Azor Zadok Achim Eliud Eleazar Matthan Jacob Joseph = Mary Jesus Genealogically, Jesus must be brought into the web of historic Abrahamic and Davidic relationships in order to legitimatise his claim as Messiah. A short narrative follows the genealogy in which Joseph struggles to accept Mary’s unplanned pregnancy and plans to break off the engagement privately to save her public embarrassment. In the narrative Joseph is assured that what has transpired is due to divine intervention. Joseph is addressed as a descendant of David. His royal pedigree is acknowledged 106 and through him, God orders the in-grafting of Jesus into the Davidic line,41 consistent with scripture promises that the Messiah would be from the line of David. Through Joseph’s lineage Jesus is the son of Abraham, son of David, fulfilling scripture expectations of the Messiahs lineage. The inclusion of Mary into the genealogy as wife of Joseph and mother of Jesus establishes a radical new ordering within the House of Abraham and David. With the inclusion of Mary as an appendage in the genealogy, Jesus becomes the Son of God.42 Re-visioning the Women in the genealogy of Jesus: In this section I will revision the women in the genealogy of Jesus as provided in the Gospel of Matthew using a whakapapa analysis. This re-visioning will apply insights that have been raised in chapters two, three and four concerning whakapapa. This methodology will make connections and comparisons between the genealogy of Jesus and my own context as a Māori person in Aotearoa New Zealand in the twenty-first century to draw out new knowledge in understanding the genealogy of Jesus. Re-visioning Tamar In Genesis there are thirty-two named women and forty-six un-named women. 43 Thirty-five women are named in two different biblical books while eight women appear in three different biblical books. Tamar appears in three biblical books; Genesis, Ruth and Matthew. She is superseded only by Rachel who appears in four biblical books and Miriam who appears in five biblical books. In Genesis, Tamar is one of the two main characters of chapter thirty-eight while in the Gospel of Matthew, Tamar is included in the genealogy of Jesus. Tamar is mentioned in the Book of Ruth 4:12, as a blessing during the marriage ceremony of Ruth and Boaz.44 Within the Genesis story of Tamar and Judah there is no back history to Tamar that provides her genealogy or tribal connections. The only information provided by the text is that her father is still alive and has a house. David Garland lists her as an Aramean and is supported in this view by Davies and Allison.45 Arameans were an Aramaic speaking confederation of tribes who emerged from present day Syria. Mignon Jacobs offers a different view based on 41 Garland, Reading Matthew, 75. Janice Capel Anderson, “Matthew, Gender Reading,” in Matthew, A Feminist Companion, ed. Amy Jill Levine with Marianne Blickenstaff, (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 25-51. 43 Herbert Lockyer, All the Women of the Bible, the life and times of the women of the Bible. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1967), 10. 44 Carol Meyers, Toni Craven & Ross S Kraemer, Women in Scripture, A Dictionary of Named and Un-named Women in the Hebrew Bible, The Aprocryphal / Deuterocanonical Books and the New Testament (New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2000), 161. 45 See: Garland, Reading Matthew, 17; Davis and Allison, Matthew, 170-171. 42 107 Chapter 38:11 where Judah directs Tamar to live as a widow in her Father’s house which implies that he lives locally. The setting of the story is provided in chapter 37:1, the land of Canaan where Jacob was living. The characters in the opening verses of chapter thirty-eight are all Canaanites. This would indicate that Tamar was a Canaanite. The lack of information about her nationality and genealogy, Mignon says, that the narrator is not as concerned about the nationality or ethnicity of Judah’s wife or daughter in law as Abraham was about Isaac or Rebekah was about Jacob.46 Judah’s choice of wife and daughter-in-law is not impeded by the animosity towards marrying Canaanite women as exemplified by his great-grandfather Abraham and with which Judah would have been familiar.47 Judith McKinley asks the question when engaging in hermeneutical analysis, ‘to what extent do you accept the biblical storyteller’s constructs?’48 The structure of the story shows that the main content of the narrative concerns the transition from one generation of males to the next.49 Other issues emerge as the narrative progresses including, widowhood, levirate marriage obligations and prostitution:50 These three customs develop into important features of the Israelite nation with levirate marriage having legal standing. The Judah-Tamar narrative is sandwiched between the conclusion of the Jacob cycle and the beginning of the Joseph narrative. As an independent narrative it is embedded in the Genesis ancestor narratives beginning with Abraham and progressing to Judah’s grandfather Isaac and his father, Jacob. Judah and his younger brother Joseph are the next level of ancestor narratives. The narratives also include sections concerning the choosing of an appropriate wife based on genealogical links. There is a Māori proverb, me moe i to tuahine (tungāne) kia heke te toto ko korua tonu (marry your own sister or brother so that if your blood is to be shared, it is only your own).51 This proverb best explains the kinship marriage relationships within the family. Sarah is the half- sister of Abraham as he reveals to Abimelech explaining that they have the same biological father but different biological mothers.52 Rebekah who marries Isaac, is the grand46 Mignon R Jacobs, Gender, Power & Persuasion, The Genesis Narrative and Contemporary Portraits. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 183. 47 Gen 24:3. 48 Judith E McKinlay, Reframing Her, Biblical women in postcolonial focus. (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2004), vii. 49 Esther Marie Menn, Judah & Tamar (Genesis 38) in Ancient Jewish Exegesis: Studies in Literary form and Hermeneutics. (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 13-15. 50 Sara Shectman, Women in the Pentateuch, A Feminist and Source-criticism Analysis. (Sheffield: Phoenix Press, 2009), 105. 51 Apirana Mahuika, “Leadership: Inherited and Achieved,” in Te Ao Hurihuri, The World moves on, aspects of Maoritanga, ed. Michael King (Wellington: Hicks Smith and Sons, 1975), 86-114. 52 Gen 20:12 108 daughter of Nahor, the younger brother of Abraham. Leah and Rachael marry Jacob, they are the daughters of Laban, grandson of Nahor and the brother of Rebekah and mother of Jacob. These daughters- in-law share a common ancestry with their husbands as descendants of Terah. Sarah, Rebekah, Leah and Rachel all progress to become acknowledged Matriarchs of Israel, an honour that is not extended to Tamar. This historical context provides an insight into the value and practice of maintaining the racial purity of the Abrahamic family that is expressed through the prohibition of interracial marriage that emerged with the ancestors Abraham and Sarah. The traditional family lands of Abraham and Sarah are in Ur of the Chaldees and Abraham is called by God to leave the House of his father Terah, eventually settling in the land originally occupied and owned by the descendants of Canaan. Abraham has been promised by God the lands that the descendants of Canaan possess. When it is time for his son Isaac to marry, Abraham sent his chief servant to find a wife for Isaac making his servant swear that he will not choose a wife from the Canaanite women amongst whom they are living. The servant travels at Abraham’s directions back to his birth country of Ur to find a wife for Isaac and chooses Rebekah.53 The importance of maintaining their racial purity by avoiding mixed marriages resurfaces when Jacob reaches the age for marriage. His mother Rebekah, weary of her life because of the Hittite women, question the worth of her life if Jacob marries a Hittite woman, who she terms as, ‘one of the women of the land.’54 Isaac supports Rebekah’s instruction to Jacob not to marry a Canaanite woman telling Jacob to find a wife from amongst the family of Laban who is his mother’s brother.55 Rebekah refers specifically to Hittite women but Isaac changes this to Canaanite women. The connection between Hittite and Canaanite women is that they are both indigenous ‘women of the land’. The issue of maintaining their racial purity and not entering into inter-racial marriages does not pass to the fourth generation of the family as Judah happily marries a Canaanite woman and has three sons. Judah also selects a Canaanite woman named Tamar for his firstborn son Er. The text does not say that he is aware of his parents and grandparent’s preference for maintaining their policy of racial purity and their dislike of interracial marriage with Canaanite and Hittite women. Nor does the text explain why he chooses a Canaanite woman for a wife and daughter in law. Judah shows no bias against Canaanite women of the land. 53 Gen 24: 1- 67. Gen 27: 46. 55 Gen 28:1. 54 109 As a Canaanite woman in a narrative located in her land, Tamar’s full identity as a person or a woman of the land is never acknowledged. Her parentage or ancestry is not regarded as important enough to be written into the story, unlike that of Judah’s mother, Leah, and Grandmother, Rebekah whose connections are well documented. As the narrative develops Tamar becomes a wife, sister-in-law, daughter-in-law, widow, widowed-daughter, prostitute, the woman, the consecrated women, the condemned and finally a mother. Tamar is never acknowledged as a woman of the land living in her own land, but instead becomes ‘the other’, the outsider. Going from a woman of the land to the ‘other’ disenfranchises her and severely compromises her rights, privileges and options. Tamar is tangata whenua, a person, a woman of the land with a history and whakapapa that is not acknowledged. This disenfranchisement of women of the land to being ‘the other’ flows into the narrative of the second woman named Rahab in the genealogy of Jesus. Re-visioning Rahab: In researching the narrative of Rahab in the Book of Joshua I was reminded of an important lesson as an indigenous person, namely how to deal with your own anger when the story impacts on your own story. A number of times sitting in the library I became angry at how successive authors either missed the point or ignored the fact that Rahab was an indigenous person fighting for the immediate and future survival of her heritage, culture, language, land and people. Ignorance is alive and well in theology. Often on occasions I would have to put the books down and go for long walks to deal with my own emotions in order to clear my thoughts before re-engaging with selected texts. It was while reading Reframing Her, written by a former Old Testament lecturer at Otago University in my under-graduate days, Judith E McKinlay that I learnt that emotion is part of the journey and to not ignore those moments of frustration as they are critical tools that allows the researcher to enter into the text with the question, “what is my role in this?” According to McKinlay, when you engage with this question it is you the reader, the receiver of the story that brings it to life.56 Reading the story from the underside of history of those displaced and silenced in history transforms the text from being mere historical words written on paper to a living reality that still has meaning for today. This will bring some uncomfortable, disquieting and challenging questions of interpretation and understanding.57 Re-visioning Rahab through an indigenous lens, transforms her from being a prostitute to an indigenous person fighting for the survival of her people in their own land in the face of 56 57 McKinlay, Reframing Her, viii. McKinlay, Reframing Her, ix. 110 impending danger. The story of Rahab is the story of indigenous people in history who have faced a constant battle for survival using the limited options available to them against more powerful forces who use brutal tactics including genocide without conscience to exterminate entire populations and take possession of the land. Rahab is an indigenous Canaanite female person (tangata whenua) living in her ancestral land of Canaan which carries the name of her ancestor, Canaan. In the biblical narrative Rahab is a prostitute with no mention of her indigeneity which signifies that this narrative is shaped and written with a political ideology that recasts indigenous people in a stereotypical negative frame of being a weak, heathen and pagan people. This is a legacy of colonisation and imperialism that dominates, controls and exploits people and their lands. Rahab is not a weak person, she has her own business, her own house, provides and cares for her family and has acknowledged status in the community evidenced by the King’s officials coming to visit her. Instead she is recast negatively as a sex worker. I find in written material those who do not come from the culture of the writer or text are recast as the voiceless or spoken for or as the binary other as opposed to the normalised people and world of the text. This is consistent in the narratives of three of the women named in the genealogy of Jesus who in their narratives are portrayed as Gentiles who married into Israel and by their faithfulness to their adopted faith are transformed into feminine heroes of Israelite history. I see Rahab through her words and actions as the kaitiaki (guardian) of her peoples’ language, culture, customs, histories and future which were under divine threat of extinction. She realises the historical plight that indigenous peoples have faced since the beginning of time, especially when facing total annihilation. If they are permitted to live, it is conditional and they can no longer live freely in their own lands with many of their basic universal human rights denied. This type of oppression is something that the Israelites are fleeing from in their exodus from Egypt and seem to have forgotten their own experience of oppression and slavery as they prepare to dispossess another people of their ancestral land. In striving for liberation, Paolo Freire says that, the oppressed tend themselves to become oppressors.58 Amnesia of oppression and slavery is becoming a flaw in the character of the former Egyptian slaves who rewrite history giving divine theological justification of their actions. The story of one people’s liberation becomes the story of another people’s misery. 58 Paolo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (London: Penguin, 1972), 34. 111 The spies arrive at Rahab’s house to spend the night and as their host she extends her protection to the spies with her hospitality.59 The King of Jericho hears that spies are present in the city and seeks them out.60 Rahab lacks confidence in the leadership and diplomacy exhibited by the King and takes it upon herself to successfully negotiate with the spies for the safety of indigenous Canaanite people, starting with her own extended family, within the future nation of Israel who will inhabit their traditional lands in perpetuity. The plight of indigenous people is that they always operate from a point of powerlessness and this is Rahab’s plight. The spies agree to her demands61 which are later ratified and actioned by Joshua the leader of the Israelites.62 The conclusion to this narrative is that Rahab and her extended family including their slaves continue to live in the land of their birth right ensuring that a small seed of her people survive. The story of Rahab is narrated in the Book of Joshua, son of Nun and has a familiar resonance with the history of Aotearoa New Zealand. Contact with Captain James Cook in 1769 initiated the process of colonisation that followed a process of interaction with sealers, whalers, traders and finally the arrival of missionaries. Emeritus Professor Ranginui Walker describes the missionaries as the advance guard of colonisation.63 When Joshua secretly sends two men to view the land, especially Jericho64 they are the advance guard gathering data for Joshua to assist in his overall plan to secure the land for the Israelites. Although Rahab has secured the safety of her own extended family it does not prevent the destruction of her people that follows when the Israelites enter into the lands that was promised by God to their ancestors. Many battles are fought until the indigenous people of the land are beaten into submission. The Israelite nation develops in their new lands and those of the indigenous population who survive are excluded from participating in the new nation unless they convert to Judaism, the religion of the conquers. In the New Testament, Rahab is mentioned twice as a model and example of faith. Hebrews includes Rahab, the only female along with Abel, Enoch, and the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph and Moses as models of faith.65 The letter from James names only Abraham and Rahab. These New Testament references elevate Rahab to the status of matriarch of Israel. Furthermore, Rahab is acknowledged as one of the four most beautiful women in the 59 Josh 2:1. Josh 2: 2-3, 23. 61 Josh 2: 17-21. 62 Josh 6: 22-25. 63 Ranginui Walker, Ka Whawhai Tonu Matou, Struggle Without End, (Auckland: Penguin Books, 1990), 79. 64 Josh 2:1. 65 Heb 11:1-31. 60 112 world, a proselyte and the wife of Joshua, leader of the Israelites, who conquered her lands and people which elevates her as the female leader of Israel by marriage. Amongst her future descendants are her great, great grandson David who becomes King of Israel and two of Israel’s most significant prophets, Jeremiah and Ezekiel. The significance of Rahab for Christology is that Rahab is another indigenous connection to the land of Canaan. Like Tamar, Rahab is able to trace her genealogy directly to the land and the ancestors who inhabited the land prior to the arrival of the others, the strangers, the Israelites. Because Jesus is a descendant of Rahab this indigenises Jesus and makes him a person of the land. He is able to trace his genealogy through Rahab to the original people of the land. Land is a central theme in the Old Testament and is obtainable by gift from God, hereditary succession, economic means or by conquest. Rahab’s land rights are based on hereditary succession, while the land rights of Salmon, who fathered her child Boaz, are based on conquest. Acquisition of the land through divine gift could equally be argued in respect of Rahab’s ancestors who had previously dwelt in the land for generations and by Salmon whose people believed that their God had given this land to them. Land is layered in story’s and the inclusion of Rahab in the genealogy of Jesus provides two layers of stories for Jesus to claim as his, one an Israelite story of conquest the other predating and superseding the Israelite story, The second story is traceable in the Bible to Canaan, the grandson of Noah and ancestor of the Israelites ancestor Abraham. Of the named people in Matthew’s genealogy, Tamar and Rahab, have a pre-Israelite history with the land known as Canaan. Excluding Rahab, an indigenous woman of the land of Canaan from the genealogy reduces the indigenous links of Jesus to the land. His primary relationship to the land would be through his Israelite ancestors who colonised the land of Canaan. In spite of the command from God to ‘to completely destroy the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites and not leave alive anything that breathes’ 66 it appears that some survived as centuries later Jesus comes face to face with a Canaanite woman who appeals to Jesus to heal her daughter.67 In the Gospel of Mark the woman is listed as a Gentile, born in the region of Phoenicia in Syria.68 In his version, Matthew, reclaims the woman’s indigeneity as a Canaanite woman from the vicinity of Tyre and Sidon two important cities in the Old and New Testament. Sidon takes its name from Sidon the firstborn son of 66 Deut 20:16. Matt 15:21-28. 68 Mark 7:26. 67 113 Canaan.69 In his reply to the Canaanite woman, Jesus appears to suffer either from amnesia or ignorance forgetting his own Canaanite ancestry from Tamar and Rahab, and refers to Canaanites as dogs. The indigenous rights of the Canaanite woman to the land are purer than that of Jesus who at best, using his own terminology, can only claim to be a descendant of the same people he calls dogs. Her humbleness is evident in her acknowledgement that she is no more than a dog in Jewish eyes. She reasons with Jesus that in spite of her perceived status she is still eligible to at least eat the leftovers from the Master’s table. Her more correct answer should have been that her rights as a descendant of the original people of the land makes her more eligible to sit at the Master’s table than descendants of the people who conquered her ancestral lands by force. Her humble steadfast argument liberates Jesus from what he has been educated to believe, namely that Canaanites are inferior. At the end of the dialogue Jesus responds more as the Son of God, focussing on her steadfast faith when under pressure and eventually declares her to be a woman of great faith. The initial responses by Jesus to the Canaanite woman’s request to heal her daughter illustrates that Jewish opposition to Canaanite people still existed. His final response granting the woman’s request and declaring her to be person of great faith demonstrates that supplications by Gentiles are worthy of Jesus’ beneficence and that his mission is not limited to meeting Jewish messianic expectations. Rather he is a messiah for all people. The location of this narrative of an indigenous woman and Jesus is located by both Gospel writers immediately before Jesus, in Caesarea Philippi, poses the messianic question of his identity. The narrative concerning the Canaanite woman should be seen as a lead in to the question of his identity. The identity question was posed by Jesus to twelve men who were similar to him in culture, language, history and with the same genealogy traceable to the ancestor Abraham. The narrative of the Canaanite women re-members Jesus to his mixed heritage that indigenises Jesus to the land. Riki Paniora writing on the subject of identity says that culture plays a significant role in his understanding of who he is, and as an opportunity to understand who he may become.70 In asking his disciples the identity question, Jesus is pointing towards the future asking not only who he is in the present but who he is to become in the future. When he is confronted by the Canaanite woman Jesus acts in accordance with his historical-cultural-religious upbringing. In his final response to the Canaanite woman he casts 69 70 Gen 10:15. Riki Paniora, Ko wai au? Te Kōmako, Issue 4, 2008. 52-55. 114 off the historical baggage and answers more like the Christ, the Messiah that he is identified as being in the following narrative. In the narrative prior to the Canaanite woman Jesus is questioned by the Pharisees about why his disciples disobey the teachings of the ancestors?71 Jesus responds by pointing out that God gave the original teachings which were interpreted by the ancestors and further reinterpreted by succeeding generations according to their own understanding thus resulting in something different to what God intended. The interaction with the Canaanite woman illustrates his point. When the Canaanite people enter the biblical story, they are the people of the land. God has no intention at that stage of dispossessing them of their land. There is no animosity between the Canaanites and Abraham, the Canaanites make allowances for Abraham and his descendants to settle peacefully amongst them. As the story progresses over hundreds of years the relationship changes to the point where the descendants of Abraham become the landlords and the Canaanites are considered to be outsiders. When he is confronted with the request by the Canaanite woman he responds with the language and attitude that carries historical baggage. As the conversation develops Jesus casts aside the historical baggage with his final response to the Canaanite woman sounding more worthy of a response from someone claiming to be the Son of God. After this interaction Jesus shows glimpses of who and what the Son of God is by healing many people72 and feeding more than four thousand people.73 After these miracles Jesus departs for Caesarea Philippi where he addresses with his disciples the question of his messianic identity. His response to the messianic declaration by Peter has an eschatological element that Jesus must first suffer and experience death and resurrection. This extends the question from who am I to who I am to become? The Rahab narrative has echoes of the story of Tamar whose primary identification in the Old Testament text focusses on her being a prostitute rather than an indigenous woman of the land. Prostitutes were marginal characters in Israel and only tolerated due to their provision of sexual pleasure for men. The actions of Rahab save her family as a seed of the Canaanite people and she continues to live in her native lands no longer as a social outcast but under the protection of the Israelites. The Canaanite woman in the Gospel story also takes successful action from a point of powerlessness to save her daughter. There are no further references to Rahab in the Old Testament or the Gospels but after the story of the un-named Canaanite 71 Matt 15:1-9. Matt 15: 29-31. 73 Matt 15: 32-39. 72 115 woman, Rahab becomes a person of great faith in the New Testament writings of Jesus’ followers. The inclusion of Tamar and Rahab in the genealogy of Jesus highlights indigeneity within the ancestry of Jesus. In the narrative of the Canaanite woman and Jesus, the author of the Gospel of Matthew shows a concern for the indigenous people of the land by reclaiming her identity as a Canaanite who is eligible to eat from the Masters table. Re-visioning Ruth Marshall D Johnson points out that many of the genealogies have been employed to show Israel’s link to its neighbours.74 The Book of Genesis contains the narrative of Moab, son of Lot and one of his daughters. Moab became the ancestor of the Moabites and the ancestor of Ruth. The genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew begins with Abraham and follows his line of succession to his son and grandson. Moab is the grandson of Haran, brother of Abraham making Moabites, Ammonites, Ishmaelites and Israelites of the same genealogical stock. This is shown in the genealogy below. Genealogy 5: Terah to Jesus: Terah Abraham Ishmael Isaac Jacob Judah Nahor Bethuel Rebecca Laban Leah Rachael Ishmaelite’s Israelites Boaz Haran Lot Daughter Moab Ben-ammi Moabites = Obed Jesse David Ammonites Ruth Jesus Within my own iwi this type of genealogy or whakapapa is described as he whare matua75 as it is structured like a traditional carved house. The house in this whakapapa is the house of Terah. At the apex of a traditionally carved house is the tekoteko (a carved human-like figure) 74 Marshall D Johnson, The purpose of the biblical genealogies with special reference to the setting of the genealogies of Jesus. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969), 77-82. 75 Parent or superior house. 116 who represents an important tribal ancestor who stands as a sentinel protecting the house and its people. The next layered generation is the maihi, the barge boards that are located on the front of the house are considered to be the outstretched arms of the ancestral house. In this parallel Biblical context that would be the three children of Terah. The next layer is the amo, the vertical supports that support the maihi. In this context the amo are the children of Abraham, Nahor and Haran. The remaining generations are the heke and poupou, the rafters and carved pillars. The artwork adorning the tekoteko, maihi, amo, heke and poupou, express the stories of those ancestors. Within the structure of this whare matua, the main descent lines are established as Ishmaelites, Israelites, Moabites and Ammonites. Ruth takes her place within the whare matua as an iho māreikura, a whakapapa that connects and unites two different iwi from the line of Terah. Very few of those named in the genealogy of Jesus have a biblical book named in their honour that tells their own personal story. The Book of Ruth is the narrative of a non-Israelite woman married into the Israelite family and its inclusion as part of the Old Testament canon is a powerful counter argument against maintaining the racial purity of Israel as proposed by Abraham when he instructs his servant to find a wife for his son from amongst Abraham’s own people76 or by Rebekah who forbids her son to marry a woman from outside their own lineage.77 The Book of Ruth provides a persuasive argument for the Israelite nation to be more inclusive of those labelled as outsiders counter-balancing the argument forbidding mixedmarriages in the post-exilic period as contained in the Books of the prophets Ezra and Nehemiah. Kirsten Nielsen says that, genealogies are not passed down in order to preserve historical facts but to reflect a contemporary power structure.78 The story of Ruth is a valuable source to examine the power structures that held Ruth in tension with Israelite laws and customs. In the Book of Deuteronomy, Moabites are excluded from joining the Assembly and inter-marriage is forbidden. This prohibition is due to the historical episode when the Moabites would not assist the Israelites with bread and water as they made their way out of Egypt instead employing Balaam to pronounce a curse on them.79 After the Exodus event, Moabite women 76 Gen 23. Gen 27: 46. 78 Kirsten Nielsen, Ruth, A Commentary. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1997), 23. 79 Num 22: 1-20. 77 117 are portrayed negatively as leading Israelites to worship false gods,80 and leading Solomon to worship foreign deities.81 As a foreigner, Ruth is a marginalised figure who cannot use the normal channels of society to claim her rights. Arriving in Bethlehem, Ruth is acknowledged as a foreigner, a Moabite woman and at best as the daughter-in-law of Naomi. The constant reminder of her ‘otherness’ critiques Jewish particularism which emphasised the maintenance of racial purity and discouraged inter-racial marriages with Moabites, Ammonites and Idumeans who are recognised nevertheless as having the same origins. When Ruth meets Boaz, her late father-inlaw’s relation, the issue is who has legal rights to her? Ruth responds by holding Boaz, an Israelite man to account and responsibility. The issue of land is central to the book of Ruth. As the story comes to an end, Ruth marries her Israelite husband after he buys the land that belonged to his late relation Elimelech. In the purchase Boaz also purchases all the property that belonged to Kilon and Mahlon, the late sons of Elimelech. In the transaction Boaz buys the land and at the same time legally acquires the widows Naomi and Ruth in order to maintain the names of their late husbands in the property. Thereafter, Boaz takes Ruth as his wife. The women of Bethlehem tell her story. They talk about her but do not use her name. She is compared to Rachael, Leah and Tamar who also married into the family and are celebrated as matriarchal figures. Often Ruth is not acknowledged by name but as the Moabite, a Moabite widow and daughter-in-law. Her role after marriage, defined in relation to Jewish men, is to continue the male lineage. When she produces a son, the women of Bethlehem name him Obed and they acknowledge him not as the son of Ruth but as the son of Naomi, her former mother-in-law. As a Moabite woman Ruth is also a woman of the land. Historically, hostility existed between Israelites and Moabites and inter-marriage was discouraged to the point where some marriages were broken up during the Ezra-Nehemiah period. Ruth challenges the controversial rules as recorded in Ezra 9-10 which forbade inter-marriage with Moabites, and those recorded in Nehemiah 13:1 forbidding admittance of Moabites and Ammonites into the Assembly of God. At no point in the narrative does Ruth deny her identity as a Moabite but she became Jewish by choice thus accepting the God and people of her mother-in-law. The Book of Ruth stresses the need for an inclusive attitude towards those who are descendants of the people of the land so that they can become good exemplars of Judaism. 80 81 Num 25:1-5. 1 Kgs 11:1-8. 118 Re-visioning Uriah’s Wife: The fourth woman mentioned in the Matthew genealogy is un-named but taken to be Bathsheba the daughter of Eliam82 and the granddaughter of Ahithophel the Gilonite.83 Eliam is one of the group of thirty-seven mighty warriors of King David while Ahithophel was a counsellor of King David who was part of Absalom’s unsuccessful conspiracy against King David. Bathsheba is remembered for her affair with King David that is well documented in 2 Samuel 11 and later she became the mother of Solomon who succeeds his father David as King as the following genealogy shows: Genealogy 6: Obed and Ahithophel to Jesus: Obed Jesse David Ahithophel Eliam Bathsheba = Solomon = Uriah Jesus The genealogy of Jesus in Matthew does not include the name of Bathsheba or take into account her illustrious genealogy except to mention that David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife.84 The genealogy shows both a pattern break and the establishment of a new pattern. The new pattern centres on the insertion of ‘was’ indicating past tense. This pattern is not localised to the inclusion of the women but includes two men. The established pattern is: Isaac the father of Jacob Jacob the father of Judah At the beginning of the genealogy, Abraham ‘was’ the father of Isaac. In verse twelve, after the exile to Babylon, Jeconiah ‘was’ the father of Shealtiel. The new pattern adds the word ‘by’ centring on the women in the genealogy with the formula: Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah 82 2 Sam 11:3, 2 Sam 23:24. 84 Matt 1:6. 83 119 Concerning the mother of Solomon, the formula slightly changes including the word ‘was’ into the text. The second addition is ‘by the wife of Uriah’. The addition of was to the text adds emphasis to the statement that David was the father of Solomon. As it is written the text is incorrect concerning the birth of Solomon. Bathsheba was no longer the wife of Uriah but was living and acknowledged to be the wife of David. The text should read: David the father of Solomon by Bathsheba. Given that the text is not written this way, however, suggests that the author of the Gospel is trying to highlight something important. For me, the question in this section does not focus on who Solomon’s mother is, or who Uriah’s wife is; we know both to be Bathsheba. Nor does it focus on why the name Bathsheba is omitted from the genealogy. The question is why the name Uriah is included in the text when Bathsheba was no longer his wife? There are a number of ways the text could have been written to include the name of Bathsheba; Matthew could have added to the mention of Solomon, ‘by Bathsheba, who had been Uriah’s wife’, but it was not written that way. The inclusion of the name Uriah is not just to show the affair between King David and Bathsheba and David’s plan to have Uriah killed, but to highlight something about Uriah that is important for the genealogy of Jesus. Uriah was a Hittite which I believe is the main point of the inclusion of his name. Hittites were biblically known as the children of Heth, son of Canaan. Chapter 10 of the Book of Genesis gives the following account in the table of nations: 15 Canaan was the father of, Sidon his firstborn, and of the Hittites, Jebusites, Amorites, Girgashites, 17Hivites, Arkites, Sinites 18Arvadites, Zemarites and Hamathites. Later the Canaanites clans scattered 19and the boarders of Canaan reached from Sidon towards Gerar as far as Gaza, and then towards Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha. 16 This same list is included in 1 Chronicles 1:13. Heth is the great-grandson of Noah who is the common ancestor of Abraham and Heth making Israelites and Hittites close relations in the line of Noah as shown in the following genealogy: 120 Genealogy 7: Noah to Abraham: Noah Shem Arphaxed Shelah Eber Peleg Reu Serug Nahor Terah Abraham Ham Canaan Heth Japheth Gomer Ashkenaz The children of Heth were certainly known to Abraham and his God. Yahweh makes a covenant with Abraham giving him all the lands of Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites.85 But no one tells the people living in these lands that they will soon have a new landlord and neither does Abraham tell the named peoples that they have lost their lands to Abraham. As the ancestor narrative progresses Abraham and his nephew Lot agree to separate. Lot chooses the fertile plains of the Jordan, leaving Abraham the land of Canaan to live in. When Abraham arrives in the land of Canaan the promise is repeated again and Abraham is told by Yahweh to walk through the length and breadth of the land because Yahweh is giving it to him.86 Although Abraham is divinely given the land and is physically living in the land, he still refers to himself as an alien, a stranger in the area, in spite of owning it, which seems unusual for a person claiming to have been divinely given the land. His wife Sarah dies and the Hittite leaders come to mourn Sarah. Abraham requests land from the Hittites, to bury his wife Sarah with the words, ‘I am an alien and a stranger among you.’87 The Hittites reply that he is a prince amongst them. Abraham eventually succeeds in securing land to bury Sarah and during the negotiations Abraham twice physically bows to the Hittites who he calls, the people of the land.88 When translated into the Māori language, people of the land become ‘tangata whenua’ which has deep roots within the Māori world and carries important connotations for a Māori hermeneutical interpretation of the biblical text. Such language allows the Māori reader to enter 85 Gen 15. Gen 13: 1-18. 87 Gen 23:4. 88 Gen 23 86 121 into the world of the text thus bringing the text alive for the reader in their context. There are two texts in Te Paipera Tapu89 where the words, tangata whenua, are used in the Genesis ancestor narratives. While negotiating with the Hittites for land to bury his wife Sarah, Abraham acknowledges that he is ‘he manene ahau, he noho noa iho i roto i a koutou (I am an alien and a stranger among you),90 before he physically bows to the Hittites as the people of the land (ka piko ki te tangata whenua).91 This action of physically bowing to the people of the land he repeats, ka tuohu a Āperahama i te aroaro o ngā tangata whenua. 92 The word piko is used in the first instance but replaced with tuohu in the second instance. Piko means to bend, stoop, or curved while tuohu means, submit, a sense of submission, crestfallen, as expressed in a well known Māori proverb: whāia e koe te iti kahurangi, ki te tuohu koe, me maunga teitei (pursue your treasured aspirations, if you falter let it be only to lofty mountains). These subtle differences are not conveyed in English language translation which typically use ‘bowed down’ in both instances. These subtle differences in language make the text come alive and enables me as a Māori to enter into the world of the text as an active participant experiencing and feeling the story meaningfully and in a way that relates to my own situation rather than standing on the outside as a spectator. The inclusion of the words tangata whenua leads me to question if the concept of tangata whenua is an authentic Māori concept or if it has been introduced into the Māori language by the early missionaries in the 1814-1820 period. In the interaction between missionaries and Māori, selected words were introduced into the Māori language from the Tongan language. The missionaries could not find adequate words in the Māori language that expressed praise and worship. The words; whakawhetai and whakamoemiti were introduced into the Māori language from the Tongan language. The words, tangata whenua meaning people of the land, are contained in the Book of Genesis. In 1827 the first parts of the Bible translated into the Māori language were published containing selected parts of the Book of Genesis. It is conceivable that the concept of tangata whenua arose from translations of the Bible and were identified with by Māori and adapted to their culture. Further research of early texts pre- and post-introduction of Christianity is required to establish if tangata whenua is an authentic Māori concept or if it is a concept introduced into Māori society by the influence of the Bible. Te Paipera Tapu is the Māori language translation for Bible. Gen 23:4. 91 Gen 23:7. 92 Gen 23:12. 89 90 122 To conclude this section on women in the genealogy of Jesus, we recall that the name of Bathsheba is missing from the text. She does not follow the line of the other three women mentioned in the genealogy who are all women of the land, Aramean, Canaanite and Moabite. Bathsheba is Israelite and does not fit the criteria of the other named women. When Solomon was born, David and Bathsheba were no longer illicit lovers but were a married couple so this may explain why there would have been no need to mention that she had been the wife of Uriah. The name of Uriah is included as he is a Hittite and is indigenous to the land, not Bathsheba. This indigenous connection to the land is the common link between Tamar, Rahab, Ruth and Uriah. Their inclusion in the genealogy of Jesus makes Jesus himself indigenous to the land of his Canaanite ancestors, as well as to his Israelite conquering ancestors. Without this indigenous link, Jesus would simply be Jesus the conqueror. Te Reo Wahine Māori: I began this section with the voice of a Māori woman, Mrs Millie Amiria Te Kaawa QSM, my mother. A common trait that I share with Jesus is that his mother, Mary, appears in his genealogy and she is the dominant parent in his life, appearing at significant times during his life. Mary, is the fifth woman to appear in his genealogy which is unusual as the genealogy that is provided is not her lineage but the lineage of her husband Joseph. Dr Karyn Paringatai of Otago University writes as a Nāti Porou person raised outside her traditional tribal area of the East Coast of the North Island having been raised at the other end of the country in Southland, without her native language, customs and traditions. An article she has published in the Journal, Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work, articulates the experiences of those reclaiming their language and culture as tribally displaced people. In her article she writes on the identity development of Māori who are raised outside their traditional tribal areas and, poses the question; what criteria are used when deciding how to prioritise whakapapa?93 Senior Nāti Porou leader, the late Dr Apirana Mahuika writing in Te Ao Hurihuri provides some important criteria that are unique to whakapapa in a Nāti Porou context. He could not agree with the view that leadership was the prerogative of males determined through primogeniture. Mahuika outlines two important criteria for Nāti Porou whakapapa. The first criteria is the ability to trace your lineage to important female ancestors. Nāti Porou have a Karyn Paringatai, ‘Maori identity development outside of tribal environments,’ Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work, issue 26, vol 1, 2014. 49. 93 123 matriarchal structure in which they celebrate their own first and foremost regardless of their gender. There are at least eleven hapū within Nāti Porou named after female ancestors, the most of any iwi. This highlights the importance of women within the leadership structure of the wider iwi. Women, in their own right were noted and respected leaders, providers and protectors of the people. They achieved their status through inheritance and by their outstanding achievements. The second criterion is the identification of people as the children of their mother as an indication of rank. With at least eleven hapū named after women who were the common founding ancestor of the hapū, all members of the hapū trace their lineage to and from that ancestor. To have a hapū carry your name and celebrate you in mōteatea, pūrākau, pakiwaitara and whakataukī, you must be of sufficient mana for descendants to identify and associate with you as the foundation ancestor. Within Nāti Porou it is more likely that your mother rather than your father would be elevated to leadership and responsibility. A common Nāti Porou practice in claiming leadership is to quote a proverb or song where identity and status are related to the leader’s mother and her rank within the iwi. Mahuika quotes another Nāti Porou, Arnold Reedy who says that if you remove our female genealogies, our genealogies will be made common.94 It is the female genealogies that set Nāti Porou aside as unique because women have equal status to their male counterparts. Many of the senior lines of descent bear female names and the majority of Nāti Porou marae are named after women. Within Nāti Porou you will equally hear stories of the female ancestors Ruataupare, Hinematioro, Hine Tapuhi, as well as stories of the male ancestors Paikea, Porourangi and Tūwhakairiora. In the modern context, to ensure that the strong tradition of women leaders continues fifty percent of the elected delegates to Te Rūnanga nui o Nāti Porou are women, more than any other iwi. The late Eruera Manuera, paramount chief of one of my iwi, Ngāti Awa, explained to my father, that his claim to paramountcy came from his taha rangatira (superior descent line) in whakapapa, which he stated as his Tūwharetoa side as a descendent of Pou to muri, son of Tūwharetoa. This particular whakapapa descended to his mother, Maata Te Taiawatea of Te Pahipoto who was also a descendant of a line of celebrated Ngāti Awa paramount chiefs, Te Rangikawehea, Hātua, and Rangitukehu. His taha rangatira was his mother’s whakapapa that Apirana Mahuika, “Leadership: Inherited and Achieved,” in Te Ao Hurihuri, The World moves on, aspects of Maoritanga, ed. Michael King (Wellington: Hicks Smith and Sons, 1975), 86-114. 94 124 enabled him to lay claim and carry the paramountcy of Ngāti Awa for sixty years after his mother’s death. On my own marae, Te Ahi-inanga in Kawerau, our ancestral wharenui (traditional large carved house) are Hahuru, mother of Tūwharetoa and Hinemotu the third wife of Tūwharetoa. There are no ancestral wharenui that carry the names of any men including that of our common, founding and illustrious ancestor, Tūwharetoa. My tribal marae, opened on 27 April 1924, was an expression of kotahitanga (unity or oneness) of the various whānau in the Kawerau area. In advance it had been decided that the ancestral houses would carry the names of Hahuru and Hinemotu as the unity of the iwi are expressed in them as the mothers of the iwi. The ancestors of Hahuru are the original owners of the land while Hinemotu is the daughter of Ngai Tai and Te Whanau a Apanui iwi of the East Coast of the North Island. Together both ancestresses are the taha rangatira (superior descent line) of the iwi known today as Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau. Applying the emphasis on the importance of a mother’s genealogy to Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, it appears as a patriarchal lineage from Joseph, the husband of Mary, which includes kings and illustrious ancestors. The genealogy emphasises King David and Abraham in the introduction, within the genealogy and at the conclusion to the genealogy. Through the lineage of Joseph, Jesus is the son of David and the son of Abraham as stated in the introduction to the genealogy. His father’s lineage is traceable to Abraham but goes no further. Mary appears at the end of the genealogy and Joseph is introduced as the husband of Mary, rather than Mary being introduced as Joseph’s wife. Joseph becomes Mary’s appendage rather than Mary being Joseph’s appendage which shows her importance. The only genealogical information for Mary is found in the Gospel of Luke who says that Mary was related to Elizabeth wife of the priest Zechariah and mother of John the Baptist. Elizabeth, was a descendant of Aaron making Elizabeth and possibly Mary of the tribe of Levi. In spite of the lack of genealogical information concerning Mary it is her, as the mother, who provides the taha rangatira for her son Jesus. The Nāti Porou criterion of identifying people as the children of their mother is shown in Matthew’s genealogy where Mary is identified as the mother of Jesus while Joseph is identified as the husband of Mary but not the biological father of Jesus. As the Gospel stories unfold his mother becomes the dominant parent while Joseph disappears from the Gospel narrative when at the age of twelve his parents lose Jesus and then find him in the Temple. Beverly Roberts Gaventa says that: 125 Each of the early Christian narratives permits us a mere glimpse of Mary, the mother of Jesus. She appears in the occasional scene; she utters perhaps a few sentences and she disappears from sight. Slender and elusive as these glimpses are, they are nevertheless significant.95 In the infancy narratives Mary is named five times, however she has a non-speaking role. Mary does not reappear until Jesus is well into his ministry when she shows up unannounced with her other sons to see Jesus. He refuses to see them and redefines who his mother and brothers are as those who do the will of his Father in heaven. When he is rejected in his home town of Nazareth he is identified as the carpenter’s son whose mother is called Mary. Her final appearance in the Gospel of Matthew is at the crucifixion where a Mary witnesses the event with her two sons James and Joseph who are also identified as the brother of Jesus when he is rejected in Nazareth. Mary is portrayed as an uncomfortable companion of Jesus in his ministry and as a witness to his crucifixion.96 These texts elevate the genealogy of Jesus out of the historical human realm and transforms his genealogy from being common to being tapu (sacred). Summary: Critical exegesis of biblical texts confronts the reader of the text with the question, what is the reader’s role in the narrative? When the reader engages with the question one enters into the text from one’s own unique situation thereby bringing the narrative to new life, uncovering parts of the story that may have been relegated either to the margins or even the dark underside. Entering into the text as tangata whenua, a person of the land, exposes a whole world of indigeneity that has been previously overlooked and ignored. An example of this is discovering in the text the indigeneity of three of the women in the genealogy of Jesus and how this opens up a whole new hermeneutical world of indigeneity. Entering into the text as a descendant of the indigenous people of Aotearoa New Zealand allows me to converse with scriptures. The words ‘people of the land’ translated in the Māori Bible as ‘tangata whenua’ resonate with me deeply as these are the two words that Māori have used as self-descriptive terms. The inclusion of the words ‘people of the land – tangata whenua in the Māori Bible leads me to ask whether the concept of the people of the land predates missionary contact or whether it has been introduced into the Māori vocabulary and world from the bible? 95 96 Beverly Roberts Gaventa, Mary, Glimpses of the Mother of Jesus (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995), 126. Miri Rubin, Mother of God, A History of the Virgin Mary, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009), 8. 126 The first passages of the bible were translated into the Māori language in 1827 with selected passage from the Book of Genesis translated. This leads to another question about why only certain passages were selected for translation. When the Negro Bible was published for slaves, ninety percent of the Old Testament and fifty percent of the New Testament was missing. The bible for slaves contains only fourteen of the sixty-six Books of the standard Bible. All references to emancipation were removed completely from the bible which explains for the substantial missing sections. Good research seeks the reasons why those particular passages were translation into the Māori language and what was the theology in those passages that the interpreters wanted to communicate? It would not be until 1868, forty-one years after the first initial translations that the full bible translation was completed. There were very few if any publications written by Māori in te reo Māori during that timeframe. Texts written by Pākehā during the 1827-1868 timeframe need to be examined for reference to the words tangata whenua and its connotations. Two of the earliest te reo Māori texts do not contain the, words tangata whenua. The 1835 He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tīreni (Declaration of Independence) uses the words; whakaminenga o ngā Hapū (assembly of subtribes) whenua rangatira (chiefs of the land) and mana i te whenua (authority in the land) but there is no mention of the words tangata whenua. Te Tiriti o Waitangi (The original Māori language version of the Treaty of Waitangi) signed in 1840 uses the words tangata Māori (Māori people), ngā hapū (subtribes), ngā rangatira (the chiefs) and whakaminenga (the assembly of people) to describe Māori but the words tangata whenua are not included. Both texts were translated by Pākehā who may not have had an understanding of the concept of tangata whenua, but that is unlikely. Perhaps the influence of the Bible on the Māori language, self-perception, identity and biblical notions of being tangata whenua are a post-doctoral research project. In te reo wahine, the women who are tasked as kaikaranga set the agenda of the kaupapa and dictate the emotion of the gathering. The inclusion of the women in the whakapapa dictates the agenda for the whakapapa that begins with the ancestor Abraham who is promised descendants and land by his God. The women included in the whakapapa provide further links to the land as they are all indigenous to the land. Abraham acknowledged the ancestors of the women as ‘people of the land’ while his daughter in law Rebecca refers to the Hittite women as ‘women of the land.’ The three named women in the whakapapa are all women of the land which further indigenises Jesus to the land. Where references to indigenous peoples are utilised this inevitably has political connotations as indigenous people the world over have suffered the fate of imperialism and 127 colonisation. In this inhumane process identity of the indigenes is reworked and reshaped by the coloniser to fit their propaganda. Where narratives of indigenous people have survived there is an element of resistance and renegotiation of their identity in the narrative. This is a common thread in the inclusion of the women in Jesus’ genealogy. The narratives of the women in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus become sites of struggle over the identity and indigeneity of Jesus as distinct from his racial purity as an Israelite. Matthew shows Jesus to be the descendent of patriarchs and kings. The inclusion of Tamar, Rahab, Ruth and the mother who had been Uriah’s wife recalls the internal struggle within the Israelite nation not to compromise their racial purity as the chosen race of God. Their history begins with their founding ancestor Abraham who arrives in the land known as Canaan where he bows twice to the Hittites, thus acknowledging them as the people of the land. In spite of that acknowledgement, Abraham’s preference is for his son Isaac to marry from within his own extended family. He dispatches one of his servants to find a wife from Abraham’s own lands and returns with Rebecca the grand-daughter of his brother Nahor. When Rebecca’s son Jacob is of age to marry, Rebecca instructs her husband not to allow their son to marry a woman of the land. Her grandson Judah ignores the family tradition of opposing mixed-marriage in order to maintain their racial purity. Judah marries a woman of the land and also finds a woman of the land, Tamar, for his son. This introduces the people of the land into the genealogy of Jesus and this is further extended and deepened by Rahab and Ruth. In the New Testament there is only one narrative of a woman of the land who encounters Jesus in her own land. This encounter takes place prior to Jesus posing the question of his messianic identity to his disciples. Identity is the issue in Caesarea Philippi and identity is the issue in the encounter with the Canaanite woman. According to his genealogy Jesus has mixed ancestry that includes ancestors who were described as tangata whenua. This sole narrative has the potential to change how the identity of Jesus is viewed by introducing indigeneity into the reality of Jesus’ identity. Robert Allen Warrior, a First Nations theological scholar says that the task is to move the Canaanites to the centre of Christian theological reflection and political action.97 The women in the genealogy of Jesus are the ignored voice of the tangata whenua, perhaps even of the whenua (land) itself. Keeping them at the centre of the genealogy ensures that the struggles Robert Allen Warrior, “Canaanites, Cowboys, and Indians, Deliverance, Conquest, and Liberation Theology today” in Native and Christian, Indigenous Voices on Religious Identity in the United States and Canada, James Treat, ed. (New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, 1996), 93-104. 97 128 of indigenous people worldwide becomes the hereditary mission of justice for the followers of Jesus, yesterday, today and tomorrow. To ignore their position in the genealogy of Jesus is to condemn the voices of indigenous people to silence and invisibility. The genealogy in Matthew is that of Joseph who descends from the ancestor Abraham and King David validating Matthew’s claim for Jesus as son of Abraham, son of David, heir apparent to the throne of David. The inclusion of Mary, mother of Jesus provides the taha rangatira for Jesus as son of God. It is the insertion of Mary as the mother of Jesus into the genealogy that elevates the genealogy of Jesus from being common to being sacred. As mentioned in Nāti Porou tikanga (way of life), an important principle in claiming leadership is to identify with the whakapapa and achievements of your mother. Within Matthew’s genealogy, Jesus is referred to as, the Christ, son of Abraham, son of David. Within the wider biblical text Jesus is also identified as the carpenter, the son of Mary which shows that his mana or status is hereditary from his ancestors Abraham and King David on his father’s side and directly from his mother through the conception of Jesus by the Holy Spirit which is expressed in the following genealogy. Genealogy 8: Eleazar to Jesus: Eleazar Matthan Jacob Joseph = Mary = Jesus God Holy Spirit In the bible there are two versions of the genealogy of Jesus. This chapter has focussed on analysing and re-visioning the genealogy in the Gospel of Matthew. In the next chapter the focus will be on analysing and re-visioning the second genealogy in the Gospel of Luke. He Kupu Whakapono - Creedal Statement Similar to chapter four a creedal statement has been composed from the research contained in this chapter. This statement expresses faith in Jesus Christ based on reading the genealogy of Jesus contained in the Gospel of Matthew. This confession of faith captures the beauty of Māori thought and language in testifying to the importance of the whakapapa of Jesus to Christology. 129 Whakarongo, e taku tama Listen my son ki te ako a tōu pāpā, to the teachings of your father, kaua e whakarērea te ture a tōu whaea forsake not the law of your mother. Aue, e Ihu, e Ihu Jesus oh Jesus He uri koe o te whenua Descendent of the land takoto ki Kenana From Canaan takoto ki Horana From Jordan takoto ki Iharaira From Israel Uri o ngā kāwai tupuna Descendent of founding ancestors Tama a Āperahama, Son of Abraham Tama a Rāwiri, te Kīngi e Son of David, the King Tama a Tāmara, Son of Tamar Tama a Rahapa, Son of Rahab Tama a Rutu, Son of Ruth Tama a te wahine o mua o Uria. Son of the former wife of Uriah Whakarongo ra e tama Listen my son Ko to taha rangatira ko to whaea Your mother’s side was the chiefly side Tama a Meri, Son of Mary I whakatangātatia nei e te Wairua Tapu Conceived of the Holy Spirit Tama a Te Atua Son of God Ko Ihu Karaiti Jesus Christ, He reo motuhake o te whenua voice of the land He reo motuhake o ngā iwi taketake o te ao Voice of the indigenous people of the world Ko te whakapapa te taumata Whakapapa is tiketike o te mātauranga Māori e! the pinnacle of Māori knowledge! This is a sung faith statement to the tune of a Tūhoe mōteatea (lament) named, e Kui Kumara.98 Conclusion: In this chapter I have discussed the importance of whakapapa as a foundational concept within Māori knowledge. Within this knowledge system I have highlighted at the beginning and end of this chapter the key role that Māori women have as the guardians, protectors and 98 This mōteatea can be heard and seen at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_dmNxMG-W8 130 communicators of such knowledge. Following this I have looked at genealogy in the Old Testament and its significant use within the wider schema of recording and telling history. Following an analysis of the Old Testament usage of genealogy using mātauranga Māori I have reinterpreted the reasons why the four women in the genealogy of Jesus have been included in his genealogy. To conclude this chapter, I have composed a creedal statement that expresses the importance of genealogy to the understanding of Jesus Christ. In this creedal statement whakapapa as a concept derives from the land (Papatūānuku) and indigenises the genealogy, identity and nature of Jesus Christ. In the next chapter the theme of genealogy continues with an examination of Luke’s version of the genealogy of Jesus. In the Lukan version too, the land is a central issue in the genealogy of Jesus. As mentioned in the introduction to this thesis that I would identify where further areas of research can be undertaken. This chapter has identified that a further area of possible research is the influence of missionaries on the Māori language in the 19th century. As this chapter has shown the missionaries imported selected words from the Pacific into the Māori language as there was no equivalent words within the Māori language to explain certain Christian concepts. Imported words included, whakamoemiti for worship and whakawhetai for giving thanks. A second possible area of further research is the influence of the Paipera Tapu (the Māori language bible) on the Māori language. What was the reasoning behind the selection of certain passages from the Book of Genesis for translation into the Māori language and what was the theology of those selected passages? It is possible that some biblical concepts like tangata whenua may have come into the Māori language and customs through the missionary influence as they translated the bible into the Māori language. This deserves further dedicated research. 131 CHAPTER SIX A whakapapa analysis of the genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke 3: 23-38 Introduction: Continuing with the statement from the previous chapter that genealogy is the starting point of Christology, in this chapter I will continue with the enquiry into the genealogy of Jesus by applying a Māori epistemology of whakapapa to the genealogy of Jesus that is recorded in the Gospel of Luke. With the inclusion of Adam as the human origin of the genealogy and God as the progenitor of the genealogy the focus moves to the relationship between people, land and God. In this thesis the focus has been on exploring the human relationships with the genealogy recorded by Matthew. The land has been alluded to by re-examining the women recorded in Matthew genealogy of Jesus. The focus of this thesis now begins to enquire into the significance of the relationship between people, land and God and its implications for Christology. Continuing with the statement from the previous chapter that genealogy is the starting point of Christology, in this chapter I will examine the genealogy of Jesus recorded in the Gospel of Luke. The genealogy recorded in the Gospel of Luke from Jesus to Abraham and then to Adam and ultimately to God, shines the spotlight on Israel’s and indeed all of humanity’s relationship to the land. The task of the genealogy of Jesus is to reset the theology of land that Israel has adopted. This theology is underpinned by the Abrahamic covenants. The genealogy changes the theology of the land to a Christology for the land and people. Jesus is not only a human messiah but also a messiah for the land who brings about a new relationship between land and people. The genealogy recorded in the Gospel of Luke begins with a sequence from Jesus to King David then to Abraham and continues to Adam and God who is the creator of Adam. The focus in this chapter will be to examine the section from Abraham to God to see what new feature is revealed in the identity of Jesus. This chapter concludes with a diagram that draws on Māori artistic imagery taken from nature showing that land and people have a common origin that is sourced in God. Genealogy in the Gospel of Luke: In the Jesus genealogy contained in the Gospel of Luke there are a total of seventy-seven names, all males that span three time periods. The three time periods agreed by Luke and Matthew are; the pre-monarchical period, the monarchical period and the post-monarchical 132 period.1 Luke adds a fourth, a pre-Abraham period covering twenty-two generations from Abraham to Adam and finally to God. This period also includes significant events, the worldwide flood, Noah and the Ark, the Tower of Babel and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. The biblical basis for this fourth genealogy section is the book of Genesis 1-25. The book of Genesis concerns origins that provide an outline of the beginning of creation from God to the first human(s). In the first creation narrative, God creates humankind, male and female, ‘in our likeness, according to our likeness.’ They are given dominion over the earth and instructed to be fruitful and multiply and have many children so that their descendants will live all over the earth.2 The Genesis text does not provide a list of or information about who these people are or about their characteristics. In the second account of creation, God creates a man with the text describing the material that was used to create the man and what was required to make this man a living being. From the rib of the man’s body, God creates a female partner for the man. As the story progresses the two humans are expelled from the Garden of Eden and the man gives the woman the name Eve. In the NRSV English language Bible the name of the man, Adam, is finally given well after the couple have been expelled from the Garden of Eden and after their son Cain is punished for murdering his brother Abel. Following the murder of Abel, a genealogy is given for six generations from Cain to Lamech. Although Adam is the first human to appear in the Old Testament, he does not figure in the Bible’s first genealogy. His first-born son, Cain, is named at the head of the first genealogy. At this stage of the narrative, the man has not been named and is referred to in the text only as the ‘man.’ At the conclusion of the Cain-Lamech genealogy the name of the man is finally given as Adam. At the conclusion of the Cain genealogy the narrative explains that Adam and Eve have another son who they name Seth. The text explains that Seth is in the likeness and image of his father, Adam. The second biblical genealogy follows immediately after this with Adam as the head of the genealogy. The Lukan genealogy is consistent with the genealogical list in Genesis that gives an account of Adam’s line.3 This list begins with God as the creator of male and female who are created in the likeness of God. The words, “own likeness” and “image” used when God creates humans in Genesis 1 are repeated in the genealogy that describes the father-son relationship between Adam and Seth. This link back to the original creation of human beings in the image 1 Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, 84. Gen 1: 26-31; 5: 1-2. 3 Gen 5: 1-2. 2 133 and likeness of God, indicates the divine origin of the human race that is shared with the messiah.4 This genealogy brings Jesus into relationship with the whole human family by virtue of his descent from the first man who was, the son of God.5 The Jesus genealogy ties the fate of the world to the fate of Israel as Jesus becomes the culmination of the history of Israel and also the culmination of the history of all humankind.6 The genealogy has its own distinctive feature that encompasses the origins of the peoples of the Ancient Near Eastern world. As the origins descend, they branch out to form a world map based on a common ancestry. This is a relational world map where Adam, according to Jewish scriptures, is declared the ancestor of the world.7 By connecting Jesus to Adam as the ancestor of the world, Jesus is brought into an organic relationship to all humanity.8 As people populate the world there is continued branching into different tribes and nations. The Jewish lineage remains a straight line in all generations from Adam to Jacob and one son is chosen to continue the line. The line from Seth to Abraham is an unbroken line of first- born males. The lineage emphasises the primogeniture of the first-born son that becomes enshrined in Jewish law.9 In the Gospel of Luke, the genealogical order of names ascends from Jesus to God. This pattern of ascent can be found in three Old Testament narratives. The first example is given in the book of Numbers: when Zelophehad dies he is survived by his five daughters who pleaded their case before Moses to succeed to their father’s inheritance as he has no living sons. The narrative begins by providing the daughters’ genealogy in ascending fashion to the patriarch Joseph.10 In a second example, prior to his anointing by Samuel, Saul’s pedigree is given in ascending order from Saul to Aphiah who was of the tribe of Benjamin, the founding ancestor of Saul’s tribe.11 Both genealogies recorded in this manner link back to a founding ancestor in Joseph and Benjamin. This validates the land claim by the daughters of Zelophehad and Saul’s claim to the throne. The book of Zephaniah gives a third example giving the prophet Zephaniah’s genealogy in an ascending manner. Placed at the beginning of the book the 4 Alfred Plummer, St Luke, The International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1901), 105. J M Creed, The Gospel according to St Luke, The Greek text with Introduction, Notes and Indices (London: MacMillian and Co, 1950), 59. 6 Justo L Gonzalez, Luke, Belief, A Theological Commentary on the Bible (Louisville: Westminster, John Knox Press, 2010), 55. 7 Karin R Andriolo, “A Structural Analysis of Genealogy and Worldview in the Old Testament” American Anthropologist, vol 75, no 5, 1972, 1657-1669. 8 William Manson, The Gospel of Luke, The Moffatt New Testament Commentary (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1930), 35. 9 Deut 21:15-17. 10 Num 27:1. 11 1 Sam 9:1. 5 134 genealogy traces Zephaniah’s links back five generations to Hezekiah who was the thirteenth successor to King David. The genealogy in an ascending order connects to the past validating the prophet’s pedigree and credentials thus supporting his appointment to the task that has been given to him. This ascending type of genealogy applied to the genealogy of Jesus validates the claim that Jesus is the son of God which is proclaimed in the baptism narrative immediately prior to the genealogy. A distinctive feature of the Lukan genealogy is its use of the son terminology. In his genealogy there are seventy-seven names in total that follow a set formula of, A the son of B, B the son of C, culminating with Adam, the son of God. In the genealogy all the names included are male and each person is a son including Adam. Only one name is mentioned in each generation and there is no branching to include any other siblings, nor are any females included. No data is attached to any names, there is no indication of the order of their birth position in the family. The genealogy does not give any meaning or significance of their name nor is there any information concerning their achievements in life. The Lukan genealogy does not make claims to titles like the ‘son of Abraham’ or the ‘son of David’ that are made in the Gospel of Matthew. Prior to the genealogy, Luke does make the claim of Jesus being the ‘son of God’ in the infancy narratives. The first example given is when the angel Gabriel tells Mary that, the holy one to be born to her will be called the son of God.12 The second example is in the baptism narrative when a voice from heaven declares to Jesus that you are my son.13 The genealogy follows these two narratives echoing the pregenealogy annunciation and the post-baptism declaration. In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus himself questions the ‘son of David’ title pointing out David’s own words from Psalm 110 where David calls the messiah, Lord, and does not refer to the messiah as his descendant.14 Another distinctive feature of Luke’s genealogy is that he does not quote a single name of any Kings after David. Matthew gives a royal character to Jesus’ lineage through a succession of Kings from David that includes Jehoiachin. The prophet Jeremiah prosed that no descendent of Jehoiachin would ever sit on the throne for neglecting his duty to protect the vulnerable.15 Luke avoids this pronouncement on the line of Jehoiachin by providing an alternative lineage from Nathan, another son of David. In the book of Zechariah, 16 the house of Nathan, while a sub-division of the house of David, was also to be legitimately distinguished 12 Luke 1:32-35. Luke 3: 22. 14 Luke 20:41-44. 15 Jer 21-22. 16 Zech 12:12-14. 13 135 from the rest of the House of David.17 The line of Nathan is distinguished as a priestly line which gives the lineage of Jesus in the Lukan genealogy both a priestly and royal character. Adam – Jesus Typology: Throughout Christian history theologians have reflected and written on the significance of the antithetical parallelism between Adam and Jesus. Both are linked by a common genealogy that makes Adam the original human ancestor of Jesus. In Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians, Paul provides an explicit and sophisticated reflection on the significance of Adam to Christology. Paul argues that human condemnation resulted from the actions of Adam which corrupted human nature resulting in the introduction of death. In contrast, by the grace of God in Jesus Christ, justification and righteousness were achieved bringing life to all.18 In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul gives a sustained argument that the resurrection of Jesus is the first-fruits for those who have fallen asleep; as death entered into the world through Adam so in Christ all will be made alive.19 From the first century, typology between Adam and Jesus became an important subject developed by the early Church Fathers. In his theology of recapitulation, Irenaeus (ca.130 – ca.202) explains that Jesus’ obedience to God overcomes the disobedience shown by Adam to God. Athanasius of Alexandria (ca.296-ca.373) used the Adam-Christ parallelism in his theological teaching to show that, while Adam forfeited life, the word of God was made manifest in Jesus who experienced a human death. As a human person, Jesus overcame death to regain the life that was forfeited by Adam. Cyril of Alexandria (ca.375 – ca.444) took the position that Jesus was the second Adam. Due to the disobedience of the first human, all humans since Adam were subjected to the wrath and judgement of God. Jesus as the second Adam knew no sin. He was obedient to God and was open to the Holy Spirit. Maximus the Confessor (ca.580 – ca.662) saw in the exemplary life of Jesus the overcoming of Adam’s sin. In overcoming the temptations, enduring the passions and dying on the Cross, Jesus gained the victory of life. Protestant theologians also have an established tradition of theological reflection on the Adam-Jesus antithetical parallelism. For Martin Luther, Jesus came to take the place of Adam paying the ultimate penalty. A major tenet of Luther’s reformation was his doctrine of justification by faith alone. The first article of his doctrine was based on Romans 3: 24-25, 17 Costantino Antonio Ziccardi, The Relationship of Jesus and the Kingdom of God According to Luke-Acts (Rome: Gregorian University Press, 208), 294. 18 Rom 5: 18. 19 1 Cor 15: 20-21. 136 Jesus Christ our God and Lord, died for our sins and was raised again for our justification. John Calvin in his Institutes of Christian Religion, describes Adam’s sin as the original sin. In the Garden of Eden, Adam was united and bound to his creator; estrangement from his creator resulted in the death of Adam’s soul.20 As the progenitor of the human race who was given dominion over the earth, all of creation bears part of the burden of his original sin that becomes a hereditary corruption of all creation. While one human brings about the downfall of humanity, another human being, Jesus, restores salvation to humanity by abolishing death. For Karl Barth, Adam the first human being is representative of all of humanity which makes everyone Adam. Jesus shares in Adam but is the person who stands for all people and all of creation making him the inaugurator, representative and revealer of what through him and with him the many, all people shall also be, do and receive.21 Contemporary theologians have continued reflecting on the Adam-Jesus tradition adding new insights to the discussion. For Brendon D Crowe, the location of Luke’s genealogy as part of the opening act of Jesus’ ministry suggests that the messiah is portrayed in Adamic terms.22 The genealogy ascends from Jesus to Adam who is, son of God. Adam loses paradise when he is expelled from the Garden of Eden which has repercussions for everyone as he is the representative of humans. Like Adam, Jesus is an anointed representative whose obedience even unto death reserves and reopens paradise. An example of this is when Jesus is on the Cross, he replies to the request of one of the prisoners saying, ‘today you will be with me in paradise.’23 Through Jesus, paradise is regained for humans. Drawing on Old Testament creation stories the use of the words ‘image and likeness’ in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus is son-ship language.24 In Genesis 1 God created humans in his own image. This ‘own image’ is restated in similar words in the genealogy provided in Genesis 5:1 from Adam to Noah. In the following verses Adam has his third son, Seth who is described as ‘a son in his own likeness, in his own image.’25 In the genealogy from Adam to Noah each person is described as the son of their father. In the infancy narratives Jesus is acknowledged twice as the son of God. At the baptism of Jesus, God publicly declares Jesus to be ‘his son.’ After his baptism, Jesus is led into the wilderness and his identity as the son of God is put to 20 John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, (London: SCM Press, 1961). Karl Barth, Christ and Adam: Man and Humanity in Romans 5 (New York: Collier, 1957), 42-43. 22 Brandon D Crowe, The Last Adam: A theology of the obedient life of Jesus in the Gospels. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2017), 31. 23 Luke 23:43. 24 J R Daniel Kirk, A man attested by God: The Human Jesus of the Synoptic Gospels. (Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2016), 223. 25 Gen 5:3. 21 137 the test with Satan challenging Jesus twice saying; if you are the son of God?26 Jesus faces and overcomes the challenge to his identity. In comparison, Adam, the original representative human, fails when tested by Satan in the Garden of Eden. Yongbom Lee says that Luke’s pneumatology provides the key to understanding the Adam-Jesus typology.27 Adam is the son of God as he was created personally by God from the dust of the ground. This was only his form or shape, what was required to go beyond a shape or form and become a living being was for God to impart life into the shape that was formed by breathing into his nostrils the breath of life. Life is generated by the Holy Spirit and Jesus is the son of God by generation of the Holy Spirit. Biblically, only Adam and Jesus have been generated by the Holy Spirit, one created, the other conceived. Brandon D Crowe develops the filial connection further based on his reflections on 1 Corinthians 15: 45 and 49. Crowe points out that Adam was created by divine activity; as a human person he was able to impart physical life through the means of natural pro-creation but he was unable to impart the Holy Spirit.28 In contrast, Jesus who was generated by the Holy Spirit and conceived by a human woman was able to impart the life-giving spirit. To summarise, I have developed the following table to highlight some of the main points in the Adam-Jesus typology: Table 2: Adam – Jesus Typology Adam Jesus Created by God from the dust of the earth with God breathing life breath into the man to become a living being. Perfect man, conscious of God. Head of human race. Conceived through Mary by the Holy Spirit and declared by a voice from heaven to be ‘my son.’ Jesus receives a human birth. Perfect man, conscious of God. Head of redeemed humanity (Eph 5:23; Heb 7:27, 9:28, 10:10-14. Gave life to all his descendants. Communicates resurrected life to all people (Jn 1:1-14). Given dominion over the created world (Gen At his resurrection and ascension Jesus is 1:26). given dominion over heaven and earth (1Cor 15:27; Eph 1: 20-22; Acts 10:36). Tested in Garden of Eden (Gen 2:16-17). Passed testing in wilderness (Matt 4:1; Lk Failed test. 4:1-3) and passed the test on the Cross. Disobeyed God (Gen 2). Obeyed God even unto death (Phil 2:8). Experienced death, remained dead and Experienced death and rose to new life in the brought death upon all. resurrection and offers this new life to all who believe in him. 26 Luke 4: 1-13. Yongbom Lee, The Son of Man as the last Adam: The early church tradition as a source of Paul’s Adam Christology. (Oregon: Pickwick Publications, 2012), 129. 28 Crowe, The Last Adam, 37. 27 138 In the next section of this chapter I will argue for a new category in the Adam-Jesus typology to be considered. The new category is the land that figures in the Lukan genealogy linking Adam and Jesus genealogically. Re-visioning the Genealogy of Jesus: Genealogies are written and published for particular reasons including: to prove a person’s ancestry, to claim status, and to prove connection to a specific piece of land. In the Gospel of Luke, it is my belief that the land and its connection to Adam is one of the reasons for the inclusion of the genealogy in the Gospel. Adam is the juxtaposition between the world of God(s) and the world of humans, he is the taproot of the human ancestry of Jesus. Adam was created by God who used the dust of the earth combined with divine breath to bring him to life. Without the land, Adam, Jesus and all humans would not exist. The genealogy has two functions, firstly; it provides a new interpretation that provides Jesus with a pivotal role in redeeming the estranged relationship between people and the land that was cursed in the Garden of Eden. Secondly; the theology of the land during the ministry of Jesus was underpinned by the Abrahamic covenants that promised people and land. The genealogy transforms the theology of the land to a Christology for the land and people that moves the central focus away from Abraham and the covenants and repositions Jesus at the centre of the human, divine, land relationship and interaction. A theology of the land part I In this section I will discuss the historical implications of a theology of the land. The land in the two Genesis accounts of creation provides a biblical definition and understanding of the land. In the first account of creation words that are used to describe the land are earth, land, and ground. In its original state the earth was formless and empty. The words ground and land are mentioned for the first time on the third morning of creation when God gathered the waters into one place and the dry ground appeared which God called ‘land’. The land is also described as ‘dry land’ which God commands ‘to produce vegetation, plants, fruit and seed, and God saw that it was good.’29 On the sixth day of creation God also called upon the land to produce living creatures, livestock, wild animals and creatures that move along the ground and God also saw 29 Gen 1:11-12. 139 that these creatures were good.30 Following this God said, let us make humans in our image and let them be fruitful and multiply and let them rule over the earth and subdue it.31 In the first account of creation the land is highlighted as the physical basis and environment of life.32 The earth is one of two foundations of creation that produces and sustains life. A distinguishing feature between the earth and land which is the second most common term used is that the land consists solely of dry land. In contrast the earth consists of dry land and also wetland that is land under the waters such as the seabed, the foreshore, the riverbed, the lakebed, swamps and other land associated with water. The third term, the ground is used in association with the earth to suggest that the ground is the solid surface of the earth and land. At the conclusion of the first creation narrative humans are given the earth to rule over it. Of the three terms earth, land and ground, it is the earth that produces vegetation and animal life at the verbal command of God who pronounces what is produced as being good. The second, Garden of Eden, account of creation in Genesis 2 gives more extensive attention to humanity and provides the text behind the genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke. In this account of creation, the words land, earth, and ground are used with different connotations. The earth is used in the same way as in the first account of creation as the basis and environment of life. The earth existed in its bare form; there is no vegetation and an image of a dry desert springs to mind.33 The words earth, and ground are used in connection with the creation of life, God creates a man from the earth whose name Adam is taken from the Hebrew word for earth, Adamah. The man was created specifically from the earth to work the ground and take care of it.34 The bond between Adamah and Adam or the earth and the man is a continuing literary motif. The earthly aspect is a component of Adam’s identity. God also uses the ground to create the beasts of the fields and the birds of the air. 35 The word land, on the other hand, is used to signify territory as in the land of Havilah and Cush. In the land of Havilah there is gold and other valuable stones which adds another dimension to the land’s value.36 Other prominent words are dust and garden. God creates a garden in Eden and places the man in this garden where a female partner is created for the man. God, land and people are the main 30 Gen 1:24-25. Gen 1:26-30. 32 Geoffrey Lilburne, A Sense of Place, A Christian Theology of the Land. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1989), 31. 33 Gen 2:5. 34 Gen 2:15 35 Gen 2:19. 36 Gen 2:11. 31 140 characters in the Garden of Eden narrative. After the fall however, man is banished from the garden; tilling the ground becomes a struggle, and he is consigned to return to the dust.37 The theology of the land from both creation accounts is best stated in the opening verse of Psalm 24: The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it.38 Included among the many themes that emerge from the creation narratives are: the sovereignty of God as creator, the goodness and blessedness of creation, the structure and order of creation, the beauty and complexities of creation, the place of humans in creation, and the relationship of the creator to creation. A motif that emerges from the Garden of Eden creation narrative is a theme of ‘holy land, holy people’.39 The Garden of Eden is considered sacred land because it was created by God. The two people who inhabit the garden are considered to be sacred because, like the land, they too were created personally by God. Most importantly. God chose to dwell with these two people in the land known as the Garden of Eden, often walking in the garden during the evening breeze.40 The theme of holy land, holy people becomes significant as the bible story progresses. In summary a biblical theology of the land consists of the earth, the ground and the land. The earth is the physical basis and environment of life. The ground produces animals, birds and human life. The land is pronounced good and produces vegetation, seeds, trees and fruit. The first aspects of land as a political and economic entity are introduced when Havilah which has gold and Cush are described in territorial and economic terms.41 At the centre of a theology of land are God as the creator and humans who are given rule over creation. Humans are represented by Adam and Eve who care for creation. Life in the Garden of Eden goes badly wrong however when the male and female are tempted by the crafty serpent to disobey the instructions given to them by God. The three partners to the disobedience are punished and the land is also included in the punishment. In the curse of the serpent in verse 15 and the suggestion that the seed of the woman will be pitted against the seed of the serpent, Christian tradition since the time of Irenaeus has seen the idea 37 Gen 3:19. Ps 24:1. 39 Michael Dauphinais and Matthew Levering, Holy People, Holy Land, A Theological Introduction to the Bible (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2005), 29-32. 40 Gen 3: 8. 41 Gen 2:11-13. 38 141 of a saviour or messiah figure, the future offspring of the woman.42 The woman’s offspring will bring destruction and destroy the serpent and at the same time will bring salvation and deliver humans from sin and death. This creates an expectation of a future Redeemer who would be a descendant (a seed) of the woman and man. It becomes immediately apparent that this redemption comes at a cost to the one who brings the redemption who will suffer injury with a bruised heel. This is a metaphor that is contrasted with the head of the serpent being struck by the woman’s offspring. Substitutionary blood needs to be shed as a sacrifice for sin to be forgiven. Of the two humans, Eve receives a double punishment, firstly of increased pain in childbirth and secondly, subservience to her husband. When Adam receives his judgement, it is the earth that is cursed first. The earth was cared for by the man and must now be forced by toil and labour to yield its produce for the man. Adam and Adamah are estranged from each other. His curse of estrangement from the earth seems to describe humankind’s divided nature of being earthly yet separate from nature.43 The earth-human relationship degenerates until the earth is covered with thorns and thistles. The second part of the curse is a death sentence for Adam and Eve and all their human progeny. Death means a return to the earth which was the natural state from which Adam was created. After the fall of humanity Eden is lost and God no longer dwells with the people in a special place. With paradise lost the man and woman move out of the garden into the wider world having a family and descendants who spread throughout the world. After nine generations humans have become so wicked that God wipes out human life leaving only one surviving family. Repopulation of the world begins with the Noah family and the first biblical covenant is introduced when God establishes a covenant with humans, the earth and every living creature.44 This covenant is unconditional with respect to humans and living creatures. The only obligation is on God who commits to never again destroying the earth or cursing the ground because of humans.45 Covenants include male circumcision as a permanent sign of the covenant with Abraham,46 the Mosaic covenant included the ten-commandments as the terms of the covenant47 and the Sabbath laws are permanent signs of the covenant.48 42 See Claus Westermann, Genesis 1-11: A Commentary, trans John J. Scullion S.J. (London: SPCK, 1984), 260. Ronald S Hendel, “Adam”, Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, ed. David Noel Freedman, Allen C Myers and Astrid B Beck, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishers, 2000), 119. 44 Gen 9:1-17. 45 Gen 8: 20-23. 46 Gen 17:9-14. 47 Exod 24:8. 48 Exod 31:12-17. 43 142 The land in the biblical creation narrative is not a passive entity, it is a character in its own right, a fourth party in the narrative as the divine – human drama unfolds. The character of the earth is implicated in punishments and becomes estranged from the man, refusing to yield its bounty to humans. In the next generation the earth again is implicated in the dispute between God and humans and is accused of being an accomplice in the death of Abel. The evidence which indicts the earth is that the earth opened its mouth to conceal and hide the blood of Abel.49 For his punishment Cain is cursed from the ground which will no longer yield to him.50 In seeking justice, the blood of Abel cries out from the earth.51 Humanity and the ground are co-partners created for companionship, mutual dependence and benefit. The disobedience of one inevitably affects the other.52 The ground plays a pivotal role in the continuing saga and is more than a setting or backdrop to a narrative; it is an active character with human-like qualities of its own. The redemptive purposes of God are not limited to humans alone but also encompasses the land which at the very least was a witness if not an active participant in the fall of humanity. As the human-divine story continues to develop the land and humans become further estranged from each other. If Adam is in need of a saviour figure then Adamah, from which Adam draws his identity, also shares in the need for a saviour. It is an emotional, moral and ethical entreaty to restore the land not to its former glory but to a redeemed and resurrected glory. The saviourmessiah-redeemer figure first mentioned in Eden is to be ‘a seed’, an offspring of Eve and Adam. In his Epistle to the Romans, the Apostle Paul moves the Saviour figure away from an androcentric understanding connecting all of creation to the redemption offered by Jesus: for the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.53 The genealogy in the Gospel of Luke shows Jesus to be this promised offspring not only of Adam but also the offspring of Adamah. Jesus then has a double mission to bring redemption and salvation to both Adam and Adamah. 49 Gen 4:11. Gen 4:12. 51 Gen 4: 10. 52 Marid Jørstad, “The Ground that Opened its Mouth: The Ground’s Response to Human Violence in Genesis 4”. Journal of Biblical Literature, vol 135 no 4, 2016, 714. 53 Rom 8:20-21. 50 143 The Adam – Jesus typology cannot consist solely of a duality between Adam and Jesus. The typology must also include Adamah, the land as Adam and Jesus are both descendants of the land. The land also suffers punishment along with Adam. The typology involves the tripartite relationship of Adam – Jesus – Adamah. In this relationship Jesus stands at the centre restoring the connections and relationship between people and the land that were damaged in the Garden of Eden. A theology of the land part II Ten generations after Noah, God chooses Abraham from the great city of Ur in Mesopotamia asking him to leave his home and go to live in the land of Canaan where covenants are established with Abraham and that consist of land and people. The holy land, holy people theme re-emerges as promised-land theology in which a selected people will once again dwell with God in a specially selected land that is promised to them. Genesis 12-17 establishes the parameters of promised-land theology. In these texts, promises are made, vows are exchanged, demands, obligations and responsibilities are stated. God promises that Abraham will be the father of a great nation and will give him land. Abraham is led to a new land and enters the land for the first time which begins his association with the land.54 The promises are repeated with the stipulation that all male descendants of Abraham be circumcised as a permanent sign of the ever-lasting covenant between God and Abraham.55 The promises and covenant are repeated by Abraham to his son Isaac who is the next generation, and so on to Jacob the grandson of Abraham, thus making the covenants, promises and obligations intergenerational.56 The Old Testament from this point on only has interest in one land, the land of Canaan, which was promised to Abraham and his descendants. This land according to Ezekiel is the centre of the world.57 Of all the land in the world, this land is set apart for God’s purposes of salvation. Although promised to Abraham and his descendants, God as the creator and the giver of the land is also the owner of this promised-land. Land is a gift and only the owner of the land who is God can gift land. The land can never be sold outright.58 As a recipient of the gift the descendants of Abraham can never own the land, at best they can be a tenant but never the landlord. This is expressed in the Levitical laws through the provisions for the Sabbatical Year 54 Gen 15. Gen 17. 56 Gen 26 and 28. 57 Ezek 38:12. 58 Lev 25:23. 55 144 and the Year of Jubilee. The Sabbatical Year allows the land to rest every seventh year and the Year of Jubilee, observed every fifty years, involves the forgiveness of debts and the restoration of forfeited property to the original owners.59 In the narrative Abraham enters the land he is promised unobstructed and without any opposition towards him. First contact between Abraham and the Canaanite indigenous inhabitants was peaceful and respectful as shown by Abraham being acknowledged as a prince by the leaders of the people of the land when his wife Sarah died.60 Abraham in return refers to these people as the people of the land. God’s gift of land to Abraham is meant for him to partner with those already living in the land. Those who bless Abraham will themselves be blessed and those who curse him will be cursed themselves.61 His initial travels through the land see Abraham build two altars, one in Shechem and the second in Bethel and these altars are respected by the Canaanites. Due to a severe famine Abraham and Sarah move to Egypt until the famine passes. They return to live in the land of Canaan where God gives them more land and Abraham builds another altar to his God in Hebron.62 An internal civil war erupts amongst the local kings and Abraham maintains his neutrality and develops strategic alliances with the Amorites. His neutrality is interrupted when he is forced to intervene and rescue his nephew Lot who is taken captive when Sodom and Gomorrah are ransacked by an alliance of four kings. Abraham rallies his own forces and succeeds in freeing his nephew and receives a blessing from Melchizedek the King of Salem. Both Abraham and his God are acknowledged by Melchizedek. As he has no children of his own Abraham names Eliezer of Damascus as his heir apparent. By divine intervention, however, Abraham fathers eight children and the son of his first wife becomes his heir. When his wife Sarah dies Abraham purchases from the people of the land a section of land to bury Sarah. This purchase of land establishes his legitimate right to the land. The promises and covenants were made within this context and provided a framework for the working out of Abraham’s relationship with the people already living there. Abraham’s right to the land is not based on conquest or on extinguishing the fires of people already living in the land, but rather on his working and living in partnership with the people of the land. 59 Lev 25. Gen 23. 61 Gen 12: 2-3. 62 Gen 12: 14-18. 60 145 For four generations the Abraham family live continuously in the land of Canaan. In peaceful and difficult times, he farms, trades and interacts with the various peoples of the land. The Abraham family become an acknowledged tribe in their own right and their rights to the land come from the purchase of land by Abraham. Their second claim to the land is by right of occupation having lived in the land consistently for four generations. Their rights to the land are recognised by other leaders and tribes who co-exist in the land with them. The theology of land still includes the divine, the land and people. The character of all three participants develops as the Genesis story progresses. The character of God is revealed in the different names that God reveals to Abraham once Abraham enters the land of Canaan. God is still the creator and gift giver of land and blessings. An obligation laden covenant is established between God, a chosen people and a selected piece of land. The people who are chosen are the descendants of Abraham who eventually proves his reliability and faithfulness under pressure. The condition of land has to be negotiated carefully as there are people who live in the land and claim the land as their ancestral inheritance. This is done successfully, wisely, and respectfully by the patriarch who wins the respect of the people of the land. The idea of a Saviour figure who will bring redemption restoring the estranged relationship between humans and the land was first raised in the Genesis narrative of the Garden of Eden. This begins to fade into the background as the emphasis focusses on securing land and setting down roots in the land while developing relationships with other people. As we have seen, the people of the land acknowledge Abraham as a prince amongst them and Abraham responds by acknowledging the Canaanites as the people of the land.63 The relationship between people and the land is further acknowledged when the women are acknowledged as the women of the land.64 These acknowledgements are few and far between however and are seldom remembered as the narrative becomes more anthropocentric and is communicated and interpreted in terms of human values and experiences of God rather than in terms of a holistic unfolding of the narrative in which the land is a key consideration. A theology of the land part III When the context changes and the descendants of Abraham leave for Egypt under the leadership of Joseph to escape a severe famine, they maintain ownership of the section of land purchased by Abraham as a burial site for his wife, Sarah. The ownership of the cave in the field at Machpelah is undisputed and is held in perpetual ownership by the descendants of 63 64 Gen 23. Gen 27:46. 146 Abraham. When Jacob dies Joseph, his brothers and a great company of elders and chariots and charioteers travel from Egypt back to the land of Canaan to bury their Father with his grandparents Abraham and Sarah, his parents Isaac and Rebekah, and his wife Leah. There was no opposition from the Canaanites who witnessed the mourning procession and named the area Abel-mizraim meaning mourning or meadow of Egypt.65 The people of Israel can argue that they maintained their ancestral rights to the land in perpetuity. When Joseph is on his death bed, he speaks with his brothers concerning three significant matters. Firstly, Joseph raises the possibility of God leading their future descendants out of Egypt and back to the land promised to their great-grandfather Abraham.66 Secondly, Joseph’s brothers are referred as ‘the Israelites’ which is the first time the word ‘the Israelites’ appears in scripture.67 This shows that there is a growing awareness of their identity as Israelites. Finally, Joseph requests to his brother that when they do leave Egypt for the land of Canaan they take his bones with them to be buried in the land of his ancestors.68 When the Exodus event happens Joseph’s request is remembered by Moses who gathers Joseph’s bones to take on the journey.69 Joseph is eventually buried in a portion of land purchased by his father Jacob at Shechem in the land of Canaan.70 These texts are vitally important as they show that the Israelites maintained a relationship with the land of Canaan when they were in Egypt and that this was respected by the Canaanite people. The descendants of Abraham win their freedom from slavery in Egypt when God raises up a prophet named Moses. He is divinely guided to lead them to the land that was promised to their ancestors Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Before they reach the boarders of this land promised to their ancestors two significant events happen. Firstly, they enter into another covenant relationship with their God who gives them the Law to live by. The difference between the Sinai covenant and the earlier Abrahamic covenants is that the Sinai covenant also spells out, in the form of the Decalogue, the obligations of covenant faithfulness. Secondly, the Sinai covenant forms them into a recognisable people who take the name of their ancestor ‘Israel’ who was one of the ancestors who participated in the first covenant and one of the last ancestors to live in the land. 65 Gen 50:11. Gen 50:24. 67 Gen 50:25. 68 Gen 50:25. 69 Exod 13:19. 70 Josh 24:32. 66 147 Their return to the land gives rise to some tension, however, between human customs and traditions and God’s promises which are eternal. According to human customs ownership rights to land required that the people maintain an uninterrupted association with the land. Four generations after Abraham enters the land of Canaan and stakes a claim to the land his descendants leave Canaan for Egypt due to severe famine conditions. Their ties to the land of Canaan are broken and remain so for four-hundred years until they reappear in the land of Canaan. Over this time, their claims to the land have grown cold. In this four-hundred-year time-frame the original people of the land have grown and developed their ties to the land and have become more numerous. In spite of these factors, the tripartite relationship between God, Israel and the promised-land is reignited. Under the leadership of another charismatic leader named Joshua they enter the land of Canaan and begin by force the reclamation of the land that was promised to their ancestors. It is in this context that the theology of the land part three is developed and it is this understanding of the land that is still in existence in the era of Jesus of Nazareth. In the occupation and settlement of the promised land cultural patterns are developed and maintained. You cannot talk about the land without talking about culture, religion and politics. The name of the ancestor, in this case Israel, becomes the name of the promised-land and the promised-land becomes known by the ancestor’s name. This thesis is revisioning Christology through a Māori lens and a shared value between Israelite and Māori is that you cannot speak of the land without speaking of the land of your ancestors.71 Each of the tribes of Israel is named after the sons and grandsons of Israel. Settlement of the promised-land is by allocation on a tribal basis. To speak of the geography of those specific areas is to speak of that particular tribe and the specific ancestor who the tribe is named after. The land is mapped geographically, tribally, and ancestrally.72 Life is woven into the fabric of the land such that to speak of the land is to speak of the people, and vice versa. The theology of the land reflects who held ownership rights to the land, who exercised trusteeship of the land and who were the beneficiaries. Ownership of the land belonged solely to God as sung in Psalm 24 ‘the earth is the Lord’s and all that is in it.’ The lordship of God over the land is never contested. The tribes allocated land according to the settlement process act as the custodial trustees on behalf of the owner. Land is allocated by the tribe in turn to the families who belong to the tribe. Tribal families are the beneficiaries who manage and work 71 Gen 48: 21. Karen J Wenell, “Jesus and Land, Constructions of sacred and social space in second Temple Judaism.” (PhD diss, University of Glasgow, 2004), 175. 72 148 the land for the benefit of their family, thus participating in the tribal inheritance. These rules are based on tribal allocation and not individual allocation.73 Land is not considered to be a person’s private property and cannot be sold permanently under any circumstances.74 A unique aspect of this land ownership model is that in a year of Jubilee occurring every fifty years, any land that is lost as debt payment is to be returned to the original owner and all debts on the land are to be forgiven.75 Land and people are the result of the promises made by God. To be a recognised people, a central piece of land is needed for the people to collectively live together. Land is not an optional extra, it is a necessity that helps shape identity. Maurice Andrew, writing of the Old Testament and how it is read in Aotearoa New Zealand, expresses the theological conviction that land understood as a possession is not enough, and to speak of people without land is not sufficient. There may be no people without land, but they both need a relationship that transcends them.76 The land and the people have separate identities and the people must find their identity in relation to the land rather than being a foreign people residing in someone else’s land. In settling the promised-land, the Israelites must become less preoccupied with themselves and form a relationship with the land. Covenantal obligations are not restricted to just humans and God. Obligations extend to the land making it an entity or a third party in its own right. The land like humans was also expected to observe covenantal obligations such as keeping the Sabbath sacred.77 The land is considered to be a place of rest for Israel and a place of rest for God, where God pauses and dwells.78 The importance of the land is shown as checks and balances were put in place to care for the land that included the year of Jubilee. This year of rest impacted on land management and property rights by allowing the land one year’s rest. 79 Other covenant obligations include the offering of first crops produced from the land’s annual harvest as well as first-born animals. The first-fruits of the harvest and the first-born animals belong to God and were offered to God as a sacrifice.80 The partners to the covenantal relationship were three-fold, God the creator and gift-giver. The second partner is the descendants of Abraham who were the receivers and custodians of the land as gift. The third and final partner is the land itself which is promised in 73 Num 36:3; Josh 17:5. Lev 25:23. 75 Lev 25. 76 Maurice Andrew, The Old Testament in Aotearoa New Zealand. (Wellington: Deft Publishers, 1999), 64. 77 Lev 25:2. 78 Deut 12:9; Num 10:33, 35:34; Ps 95:11, 132:8: Isa 66:1. 79 Lev 25. 80 Lev 27:30-33; Deut 14:22, 26:9-15. 74 149 the covenants as an inheritance. Land is an active partner and participant in the covenant, thus making it a tripartite agreement. What you locate at the centre of this tripartite relationship will impact on the substance of the theology of the land and on those who are covenanted to the land. G J Volschenk a research associate from the University of Pretoria reviewing the book by Walter Brueggemann, ‘The Land, Place as gift, promise and challenge in biblical faith’ critiques Brueggemann for failing to recognise the interrelationship between God, land and Israel. Volschenk describes this interrelationship as systematic and holistic and dialectical.81 He agrees with Brueggemann that land is a primary category of faith and that the need for land as a place to belong for a landless people is what caused God to initiate the covenant relationship between Israel and God. Volschenk creates his own model in the form of a triangle or pyramid that expresses the dialectical inter-relationships between God, land and people. As his diagram shows Volschenk locates at the centre the Torah and the covenants that hold the three parties together in creative tension. Diagram 1: Volschenk model.82 God Torah Covenants Land Israel The covenants and the law bring equilibrium to the relationship reminding the people of Israel that the gift of a land inheritance came about due to the covenants. Volschenk gives two different opinions on Jesus and a theology of the land. He quotes first W D Davies that the Jesus movement sought to replace the theme of land with the person of Jesus. He also quotes 81 G J Volschenk, The Land, Primary Category of Faith. HTS Theological Studies, Vol 60, No 1/2, 2004, 639. 82 Volschenk, The Land, Primary Category of Faith, 627. 150 Brueggemann theory that Jesus promoted a grasp the land with courage while on the other hand having patience and waiting in confidence for the gift from God.83 As long as the Torah and covenants remain at the centre of the relationship the land inheritance of the Israelites remains safe and they continue to dwell in the land. What is missing from the Volschenk triangle of inter-relationships, however, are the original people of the land who inhabited the same piece of land before they were dispossessed by the Israelites. This makes the diagram highly contentious and ethnocentric. The descendants of Abraham are regarded as the sole beneficiaries while those who were the original inhabitants of the land but who do not belong to the Abrahamic line are forgotten or treated as outsiders. Father Henare Tate offers a similar tripartite model. The language of the Tate model is te reo Māori (the Māori language) as is expressed in the words, Atua, tangata and whenua (God, people and land). The three words form the basis of every concept that Tate employs in formulating a systematic theology for Māori and so enabling Māori to speak of their identity and of who they are as a people. Tate lists ten further interconnected concepts that are held within the three foundational concepts of Atua, tangata and whenua. These are tapu (holy or sacred), mana (power or authority), pono (truth), tika (right), aroha (love), tūranga (roles), kaiwhakakapi tūranga (role players), whakanoa (the act of violation of tapu and mana), and hohou rongo mana (principle and process where tapu is restored).84 Diagram 2: The Tate model.85 Atua Tangata Whenua The Tate model is consistent with his theology in which all things are sourced in Atua the Creator God. Rather than the relationship being specifically with the people of Israel, the 83 Volschenk, The Land, Primary Category of Faith, 637. For an explanation of each concept see: Tate, He Puna Iti i Te Ao Marama, 40. 85 Tate, He Puna Iti i Te Ao Marama, 38. 84 151 relationship is with all people. Atua, tangata and whenua form the framework that underlies all concepts and enhances relationships while also expressing individual and collective identity. Jesus and Abraham: Underpinning the theology of the land during the ministry of Jesus is the Abrahamic covenant which is one of the most significant developments in the formation of the nation of Israel. References to Abraham will invariably reflect the covenant and its significance to Judaic religious and cultural life. In all four Gospels, Abraham is mentioned in stories, songs, prophetic statements, parables, discussions and debates. The fact that Abraham is mentioned in all the Gospels in a variety of ways and the numerous references show the importance that is given to examining and transforming the theology of land in the Gospels. These key passages show the understanding of the covenants that Jesus or the authors of the Gospels have and the changes that they wish to see made. These passages review and challenge the old system and articulate a new Christology for the land and people whereby Jesus replaces the covenants at the centre of the relationship between God, land and the people. To begin with, the Gospel of Matthew has two references to Abraham. The first reference appears when John the Baptist publicly questions the theology of the Pharisees and Sadducees. This narrative is shared with the Gospel of Luke. The Baptist challenges the foundation of their faith which is built on the supposed exclusivity of descent from Abraham.86 The language that John the Baptist uses in this text is that of judgement at the incorrect attitudes and beliefs that have perpetuated exclusion rather than inclusion. The only person who can determine the true descendants of Abraham is the one who comes after John, who sorts the wheat from the chaff and who baptises with the Holy Spirit. In Matthew’s second passage, Jesus universalises and priorities faith over descent when he accepts the request from a Roman Centurion to heal his ill servant. In this text Jesus breaks down the barriers of discrimination by including Gentiles in his works of salvation that were presumed to benefit exclusively the line of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.87 The Gentiles once excluded from the eschatological feast are now granted a seat at the table through faith. The entrance criterion to the banquet is no longer having the acceptable genealogical descent or ethnicity but faith. In healing the centurion’s servant Jesus makes the point that while Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are invited and attend the eschatological feast at the end of the age, Jesus is the host of this banquet and decides who is invited. 86 87 Matt 3: 1- 12. Matt 8:11. 152 The Gospel of Mark has one passage referencing Abraham in which the Sadducees are singled out for attention due to their lack of belief in the resurrection.88 This narrative is shared with Matthew and Luke. Resurrection is an accepted doctrine in Judaism but the Sadducees do not believe in this doctrine. In the debate with the Sadducees, Jesus raises the names of Moses, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob who are all subject to the resurrection. Jesus. in contrast to the prophets and patriarchs, is the Lord of the resurrection. Although the Sadducees legitimately, raise the issue of resurrection with Jesus, it is their method of doing so that exposes their real agenda. The lens that they use to discuss the issue of resurrection is marriage and the Levite law. This hints that the real issue for the Sadducees was the protection of inheritance and property rights. Their argument is that the patriarchal lineage should be given prominence over the matriarchal lineage. It is Jesus who includes in the debate the names of the patriarchs who are integral to the laws concerning inheritance and property rights. Jesus reminds the Sadducees that Israel’s inheritance comes from the patriarchs who received these from God. God the gift giver is a living God and so too is the law a living law. The Gospel of John has a lengthy discussion between Jesus and the Jews concerning whether the authority of Jesus is greater than the ancestor Abraham.89 This discussion challenges the Jewish core belief in their racial purity and superiority hence the debate is with ‘the Jews’ and not simply the religious leaders with whom Jesus often had disagreements. The discussion begins when people in Jerusalem begin to ask if the messianic claims by Jesus are legitimate in the face of the authorities constantly planning to have him killed. The main characters are Jesus, the chief priests, the Pharisees and the Jews. Jesus is given the opportunity to present the validity of his claims. He begins by addressing the Jews who had believed in him and three times the Jews respond by using ‘father Abraham’ or ‘children of Abraham’ terminology. At one point the Jews question the legitimacy of Jesus being Jewish saying that he is not Jewish but is instead a Samaritan or is possessed by a demon. Jesus concludes this discussion by highlighting that God existed prior to Abraham and that the laws of God preexisted any laws created from the Abrahamic promises and covenants. In this particular narrative Abraham and Jesus are held in contrast to each other. Abraham is a faithful follower of God and is a model of faith in God his covenant partner. Jesus, by contrast, is of God, this is a claim that is beyond the understanding of the Jews. Nor 88 89 Mark 12: 18-27; Matt 22:23-33; Luke 20:27-40. John 8: 31-59. 153 do the Jews understand that Jesus existed before Abraham. One of the messianic titles is son of Abraham however Jesus does not lay claim to this title but claims to be the God of Abraham. The Gospel of Luke has by far the most references to Abraham. There are eight different narratives which suggests that addressing the theology of the land is a major issue for either Jesus or the author of the Gospel. The Gospel begins by critiquing the Abrahamic covenants at the beginning of the Gospel before Jesus is born. After the annunciation, Mary visits her cousin Elizabeth and composes a song praising God. The first stanza ascribes praise to God while the second stanza speaks of the transformation that the unborn child with have on the world. The third and final stanza of the song praises God again, this time for faithfully honouring the promises made to Abraham and for showing mercy to the ancestors.90 Walter Brueggemann describes this as a poetry of inversion that parallels the song of Hannah which comes out of a context of landless and precarious Israelites.91 The inclusion of Abraham at the beginning of the Gospel signals that new arrangements of land management are being proposed where the gift of land is not just an historical event but is still subject to the deed of gift in that each generation has to prove that they are worthy of the gift of land. The Abrahamic covenants are raised a second time in the infancy narratives when John the Baptist is born. His father Zechariah filled with the Holy Spirit composes a prophetic song of thanksgiving that praises God for the realisation of the messianic hopes of the people of Israel. Mercifully, God has remembered the oath sworn to their ancestor Abraham and their deliverance is at hand.92 The horn of salvation is a sign of how mighty the deliverance will be. In Jesus, salvation from their enemies has arrived and he will show mercy by not only remembering and honouring those promises but by being the fulfilment and embodiment of those ancient covenants. The promises between God and Abraham are fulfilled in Jesus. As the birth of Jesus draws near the Abrahamic covenant becomes more prominent. Soon after Jesus is born, he is presented in the Temple. Abraham and the covenants are raised in a prophetic song by Simeon that redefines salvation and sets Israel free from the laws of the past. Simeon a priest was promised by God that he would live to see the messiah. He receives the child in the Temple and the text describes Jesus as, the consolation of Israel and the Lord’s Christ.93 The consolation of Israel is linked to the words salvation and revelation that are mentioned in the same song. Jesus is God’s Christ which locates his authority within God not 90 Luke 1: 48-56. Walter Brueggemann, The Land, Place as Gift, Promise and Challenge in Biblical Faith. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977), 171. 92 Luke 1:73. 93 Luke 2:25. 91 154 outside or separate from God. On many occasions Jesus is asked where his authority comes from and these words in the song give the loci of his authority before he is even born. In the song Simeon proclaims Jesus as a light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to your people Israel.94 Twice Abraham has been mentioned in the infancy narratives but the emphasis is placed on God’s faithfulness in honouring what he promised to Abraham. There is no mention of a human response to these claims but it is noted that the salvation Jesus brings also extends equally to Gentiles where previously salvation was exclusively Jewish. This gives a universality to the nature and mission of Jesus. Prior to Jesus commencing his public ministry his relative John the Baptist also has something to say about the Abrahamic covenants. When proclaiming his message, John delivers a strong warning to the Pharisees and Sadducees that their theology and systems built on the Abrahamic covenants are rapidly becoming obsolete and irrelevant due to their ethnocentrism and exclusive nature.95 The terminology that the Baptist uses comes from the prophet Isaiah who suggests that achieving equality and giving everyone an equal opportunity will be the main issue for the messiah. Descent from Abraham is no longer the main criteria in determining the make-up of God’s people, nor are the covenants and promises enough on their own. John the Baptist describes his cousin as the wrath of God who would dismantle the old way of being and establish a new ethical way of living inspired by the Holy Spirit.96 After his cousin’s critique, Jesus commences his public ministry and the genealogy is inserted by Luke in order to make clear Jesus’ credentials. The genealogy provided shows that Jesus’ lineage back to Adam and to God surpasses the descent from Abraham which is central to Jewish self-definition. To be Jewish is to be a child of Abraham and this allows a person to enjoy all the benefits and privileges that come with being a descendant of Abraham. These benefits include living in the land promised by God to Abraham. The genealogy verifies his descent and so makes Jesus eligible for these exclusive rights and privileges. But the genealogy does not stop at the patriarch but continues to Adam and to God making this genealogical line even more significant. Abraham is gifted land but Adam is the land by virtue of having been generated by God from the land. The same creative energy that generated Adam now generates Jesus by the Holy Spirit. Having been created from the land (Adamah), Adam is the physical 94 Luke 2:29-32. Luke 3:1-20; Matt 3:1-12. 96 Matt 3:1-12. 95 155 human embodiment of the land. In contrast Jesus is the physical human embodiment of the promise made to Abraham that through his seed all the families of the earth will be blessed. Luke’s review of the Abrahamic covenants is brought to a conclusion when Jesus is on the road to Jerusalem. Jesus starts teaching using the methodology of parables that includes a parable concerning Abraham, Lazarus and an unnamed rich man.97 This parable is unique to the Gospel of Luke and is the only parable where some of the characters are named. Common techniques of parable telling by Jesus include the reversal of fortunes, concern for the poor, the widow and the unemployed, and the restoration of the lost. English churchman and rabbinical scholar John Lightfoot sees the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus as a parable of opposition to the Pharisees who were lacking in maintaining their belief in the resurrection. The reference to the rich man having five brothers has brought speculation that the rich man was Caiaphas who did have five brothers. Johann Sepp and Harry Whittaker identify the Sadducees as the target of the parable due to their wearing of purple, fine linen and the priestly dress which the parable associates with the rich man.98 Furthermore, evidence that this parable targets the Sadducees lack of belief in the resurrection is that after Jesus raised Lazarus of Bethany from the dead the Sadducees attempted to have Lazarus killed again.99 Simon Perry argues that redefining the Abraham covenant is the purpose of the parable. Perry bases his argument on Genesis 15:4 where Abraham laments before God that the heir to his house is Eliezer of Damascus. God reassures him that Eliezer will not be his heir and that Abraham will have his own son. Perry’s argument is that Lazarus’s location outside the city gates signifies that Lazarus is not a descendent of Abraham and this explains why the rich man thought Lazarus was a servant. In having Lazarus placed in the bosom of Abraham in death, Jesus is redefining the nature of the covenant to include Gentiles.100 In the parable Abraham has Lazarus lying on his bosom. A great chasm has been fixed that separates them from the rich man who now finds himself excluded. He then appeals to Abraham for mercy and assistance. Abraham points out that he doesn’t have the authority to grant the rich man’s appeals. Appealing further on behalf of his brothers the rich man is advised by Abraham that his brothers have the law and the prophets to help them. If this is not enough, they will not believe someone who rises from the dead. This last comment refers to the 97 Luke 16: 19-31. H A Whittaker, Studies in the Gospels. (Staffordshire: Biblia, 1984), 495. 99 John 12:10. 100 Simon Perry, Resurrecting Interpretation, Technology, Hermeneutics and the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2012), 11-18. 98 156 resurrection of Jesus and implies that he confirms and fulfils the covenant relationship that had been mediated all along by the law and the prophets. In the passages that have been highlighted the understanding and significance of Abraham and the covenants has been explored. It turns out that despite Israel’s presumption to the contrary the law cannot give preferential treatment to Jews simply in virtue of their ethnicity and descent from Abraham. This presumption creates inequalities which lead to injustice and results in poverty. In the Old Testament laws were introduced to rectify injustice and prevent poverty. By the time Jesus arrives in the world cracks have appeared in the system and Jesus, followed by the authors of the Gospels, begins to probe these cracks that have opened up in Israel’s theology of land and their understanding of the covenant relationship with God. A Christology for the land and people articulates quite clearly that transformation is coming in the person of Jesus who traces his genealogy to both ancestor and land. Jesus stands at the centre of the relationship between God, humans and the land. Jesus does not replace the Torah or the covenants but is the fulfilment of these. The right of Jesus to stand at the centre of the tripartite relationship is based on three factors drawn out in the Abraham passages. Firstly, Jesus is pre-existent before Abraham. Secondly, Jesus is the Lord of the resurrection and the resurrected lord which makes the relationship between God, the land and the people a resurrection relationship. This moves the relationship from being historical to a future based relationship. Finally, Jesus is the host of the eschatological banquet which is not a banquet for the wealthy or well-connected. Jesus decides who will be issued invitations to attend the banquet and the terms and conditions of the invitation which are no longer based on status, ethnicity or the pedigree of the person. Faith similar to that of the patriarch Abraham is the sole criteria. Faith is universally accessible while descent has its limitations and excludes many. Tied to the land are a multitude of biblical, theological, cultural and religious factors that if altered there will be a cascading effect on all other associated dimensions and categories that are linked to the land. The missing element when it comes to the land is the justice question pertaining to the rights of the original people of the land, the Canaanites who were dispossessed of their land. This thesis is revisioning Christology through a Māori lens and draws on Māori experiences in comparison to Biblical stories. Justice from a perspective of a people who lost close to one billion dollars in land in the 1860s and who embarked on the pursuit for justice that took one hundred and forty years to achieve a $15 million settlement that was dictated by the Crown who caused the injustice it would be fair to say the justice is nothing more than an illusion. Until the justice question of the people of the land has been adequately addressed a proposed Christology for the land and people remains nothing more than an illusion. If Jesus 157 avoids this question then his only valid claim is that he is a Jewish messiah for Jewish people. He then becomes a local hero with little meaning and significance outside of that context. If he wants to truly be acknowledged as a messiah with universal appeal and significance he must become ‘the great re-arranger of the land’.101 Jesus must engage with the indigenous people of the land or he remains aligned with the status quo and participates in the oppression of the others by remaining silent. The relationship between Jesus and the people of the land will be covered in the next chapter. Re-visioning the Volschenk and Tate Models The Volschenk diagram shows a tripartite relationship between God, Israel and the land. The Tate diagram shows a similar more inclusive tripartite relationship with Israel replaced by all people of the world. The Volschenk model has the biblical covenants at the centre holding the three partners in creative tension.102 The Tate model also in the form of a triangle holds the Atua (divine), tangata (people) and whenua (land) together and functions as a framework to allow other concepts to exist and function within those perimeters. Both the Volschenk and Tate models are dialectical inter-relational triangles but they are also linear and hierarchical. Both models extend along straight lines progressing in a series of sequential steps from one corner to the other giving it a linear effect. This makes the Volschenk model one dimensional and the Tate model two-dimensional as it flows in both directions. As both models are shaped in the form of a triangle this suggests a hierarchy of relationships with the figure at the apex of the triangle (God) the superior figure which makes the two lower figures of Israel (tangata) and land (whenua) subservient to the figure at the apex. I have developed the following diagram from the ideas provided by Volschenk and Tate in their own models. The image that I have used is a koru that expresses the same principle of the interrelationship between God, land and Israel /people that Volschenk and Tate include in their models. The koru is one of the most commonly used designs in traditional and contemporary art in Aotearoa New Zealand. It has a significant meaning as a symbol of creation due to its fluid circular shape. The koru design is taken from the unfurling fern frond of the native New Zealand silver fern. On one level it represents harmony between the chaos of change and the calm of the everyday life. There is a point of equilibrium, a state of harmony that is reached with the koru representing this harmony that is reached in life. The koru is open ended and is a continuous 101 102 Burge, Jesus and the Land, 35, 41. Volschenk, ‘The Land, Primary Category of Faith,’ 625-639. 158 spiral suggesting that life is continuous. The koru also represents new life as it unwinds in a continuous spiral. Each spiral opens into a brand-new leaf on the silver fern plant where the koru ages and then dies. The koru depicted below begins with Atua as the origin of all things. Atua in the Christian context is expressed as a trinity rather than a sole male individual. Atua expressed in a Māori context includes Io, Rangi and Papa and their children. In a Māori Christian context, Atua embraces both the biblical understanding of God and the pre-colonial Māori understanding of God. Atua is the origin, the source, the beginning of the koru. Due to its circular shape there is no linear hierarchy of relationships. As the koru begins to spiral a new shoot emerges and is the beginning of new life. Creation evolves out of the source beginning with land and people. Each revolution of the koru represents the progression of history and the development of all creation. Diagram 3: The koru model. 103 Atua / God Whenua / Land Tangata / People 103 Māori designs, (accessed 18 December 2019), https://www.pinterest.nz/pin/622059767259682975/ 159 The circular shape of the koru conveys the idea of perpetual movement. Its inner coil, the corm, with its rolled inner leaflets, suggests a return to the point of origin. 104 In the larger scheme, this is a metaphor for the way in which life both changes and stays the same. Conclusion In this chapter I have examined the genealogy of Jesus recorded in the Gospel of Luke through the lens of the land. I have concentrated on the section of the genealogy from Abraham to Adam and then to God. I have explored the Adam – Jesus typology and drawn the conclusion that the significance of the land cannot be ignored in the typology. I have also looked at the theology of the land developed in the Old Testament that centred on gift, promises, and covenants between God and Abraham and his descendants who became the nation of Israel. In his ministry Jesus redefines gift, promises, and covenants in debates with various religious officials. Jesus is the fulfilment of the land covenants, the gifts and the promises. Finally, rather than composing a creedal statement of faith of articulating who Jesus is I have instead drawn on the Volschenk and Tate models and created my own Christological model using the koru from Māori art to express the interrelationship between God, land and people. Te Ahukaramū Charles Royal, Māori creation traditions, Te Ara, the Encyclopaedia of New Zealand. New Zealand Ministry for Culture and Heritage / Te Manatū Taonga. (accessed 19 April 2018), https://teara.govt.nz/en/photograph/2422/the-koru. . 104 160 CHAPTER SEVEN The Land and Jesus Introduction In the previous chapters the focus has been on whakapapa (genealogy) now the focus moves from whakapapa to the land. In my own Christological formation expressed in chapter two, I show an awareness of the land in which I was born and have had my entire formative and summative life experiences. In chapter three, land is a central component of the Christological reflections of the Māori writers. The writers draw on tribal proverbs that express the connection between people and certain landscapes. The writers use these same proverbs to express the relationship between Jesus and people of faith from their own tribal areas. In examining the genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew the land is identified as a common factor in revisioning the women named the genealogy. In chapter six the land is a major feature in the Lukan genealogy of Jesus with Adam and God as the origin of the genealogy. Through the genealogy of Jesus. the Biblical land agenda of Israel is recast and reset. In this chapter the focus is now moves to the land as an entity in its own right and its implications for Christology. In the Gospels, topography has an important role in the development of the biblical story and helps to further clarify the Christological claim of Jesus Christ. When examining the role that the environment plays in the Gospel of Luke, German Protestant theologian Hans Conzelmann says that ‘to this picture of the scene of Jesus’ life must be added the typical localities, mountain, lake, plain, desert, the Jordan, each especially employed in a way peculiar to Luke’.105 Interest in the text is not just in the human characters or the storyline, attention must be given to examining the whole picture that the author describes to bring out the Christological facts in each story. This chapter will analyse the significance of particular geographical locations in the canonical Gospels and examine how the environment contributes to a greater understanding of the identity and nature of Jesus Christ. Jesus and the land: From the opening verses of the Bible the land is a significant feature of the creation story and develops into a significant theme in the Old Testament. Land begins in the Bible as part of the wider universe that consists of earth, sky, sun, moon, stars, and water. Land is referred to for the first time on day three of the first Genesis creation story when God gathers the waters into 105 Hans Conzelmann, The Theology of St Luke, (London: Faber and Faber, 1960), 70. 161 one place to allow the land to appear. From this day land becomes one of the sources of life on earth producing vegetation, fruit, plants, trees and humans. The water is the other source of life to produce living creatures. This creation story highlights the importance of water and land as essential elements for life. The Garden of Eden account of creation in Genesis 2 has land as the dominant element and has water more ordered as streams and rivers that water the earth and designate the boundaries of the Garden of Eden.106 After Adam and Eve get into difficulty God speaks directly to the land concerning its role in their downfall. The land suffers its own judgement and punishment when the two humans are expelled from Eden.107 The land is also implicated in the murder of Abel.108 A close personal affinity and sympathy exists between God, humans and the land that is further developed as the Biblical story progresses. A storyline of a particular God, a particular land and a particular people begins to develop in the Book of Genesis. The land that is chosen to host the Biblical story is known as ‘the land of Canaan.’ In this particular land, the self-revelation of God takes place and the names and characteristics of God are revealed to Abraham. An unnamed God calls and leads Abraham from Ur of the Chaldeans to the land of the Canaanites.109 As an alien in a new land, Abraham has several encounters with the unnamed God. When the King of Salem visits and blesses Abraham, he finds that the name of this God is; El Elyon, meaning ‘God Most High, maker of heaven and earth’.110 When Abraham is ninety-nine years old God appears to him with the name El Shaddai meaning; ‘God Almighty’.111 At Beersheba, Abraham discovers another named, El Olam meaning, the Everlasting God.112 At Mount Moriah, Abraham discovers another characteristic of El Olam being; ‘the Lord will provide’.113 Abraham also learns that he is not alone in knowing this God. The Canaanites also acknowledge and worship the same God as Abraham under two of their Kings, Melchizedek the King of Salem and Abimelech the Philistine King.114 Covenants are created and agreed to that hold God and the descendants of Abraham in a binding relationship. The land of Canaan is an integral aspect in this relationship as promise, gift and inheritance. The Law keeps the human element of the relationship in order and 106 Gen 2:6, 10-14. Gen 3: 17-18. 108 Gen 4:10-11. 109 Gen 11: 31-12:1. 110 Gen 14: 17-20. 111 Gen 17:1. 112 Gen 21:33. 113 Gen 22: 14. 114 Gen 14: 17-20; 20: 3-7. 107 162 disciplined. Fidelity to the Law results in the Israelites maintaining the land, while disobedience to the Law results in the loss of the land to other nations. In Christological study, the land is a significant component of human salvation in both the Old and New Testaments. The human story of Jesus begins with his birth in a manger that resembles a cave. His human story also ends in a cave where his dead body was buried after his crucifixion. The cave becomes quite a significant site in the life of Jesus. Between his birth and ascension are a wide range of listed geographic features that have a significant role to play in his story. Land geography includes mountains, hills, plains, fields, the wilderness, trees, gardens and vineyards. Jesus is associated with delivering a sermon on a mountain, he prays on mountains or in a garden. A mountain is where the transfiguration of Jesus takes place, and his divinity is seen for the first time by his disciples. His life ends on a mountain and according to the Gospel of Matthew, his ascension takes place on a mountain in Galilee.115 In the wilderness, Jesus faces and overcomes the temptations by the devil. In the Gospels of Mark and Matthew, Jesus uses a simple fig tree as a teaching tool. While walking to Jerusalem he becomes angry and curses the fig tree for having no figs as it is out of season.116 The author of the Gospel of Luke uses this as an opportunity for Jesus to illustrate a point about patience and mercy.117 Many of his parables are rich in imagery from nature like a mustard seed, weeds, wheat, grain, a fig tree, birds, flowers, fruit, vineyard and sheep. A parable is a short and simple narrative that explores an ethical or theological concept. They often provide guidelines for ethical conduct that is consistent with life in the Kingdom of God. Shorter parables often employ a simile that provides a point of comparison between two things. An example of this type of parable is when Jesus likens the Kingdom of God to a mustard seed.118 Due to his presence and activity in places and locations where he teaches and heals many people. Jesus adds another layer of significance to the area or place. Some areas are places of historical importance that figure prominently in the Old Testament like Bethlehem, Jerusalem, Jericho and the Jordan River. Jesus raised the prominence of other places that are seldom mentioned in the Old Testament, if at all. Places like Nazareth, Bethany, Bethpage and Capernaum become prominent in the Gospels. Geoffrey Liliburne describes this as the Christification of holy space where the holiness of places is replaced with the holiness of a 115 Matt 28: 16-20. Mark 11: 12-14, 20-25; Matt 21: 18-22. 117 Luke 13: 6-9. 118 Matt 13: 31-32; Mark 4: 30-32; Luke 13: 18-19. 116 163 person.119 Each of these places becomes sanctified through the memory and presence of Jesus Christ. After his death some of these sites become centres of pilgrimage. The Gospel writer has paid meticulous attention to describing the features of the landscape in each narrative. On one occasion Jesus and his disciples are on the lake in a boat when a storm suddenly rises.120 The writer of the Gospel will have been familiar with the weather patterns around Lake Galilee and the sudden changes in the weather that can occur. As Jesus often crosses the lake, the writer will have known that the lake can be crossed easily in a fishing boat within a few hours. The accuracy of the details is a record that Jesus was physically present and active in these locations and not a story created around a campfire. These geographic features have more significance and meaning beyond poetic imagery. They are places where a glimpse is given of the Christological identity of Jesus of Nazareth. The people of Israel had several places of profound spiritual significance. Some places were located in Israel while other sites were located beyond its borders and served as places of pilgrimage. These sacred sites were markers where people encountered God. Altars and shrines were established in these places venerating God for his mighty deeds in history and the people were reminded of the covenant laws. Djiniyini Gondara, an Aboriginal Australian gives another way of viewing the law in relation to sacred sites saying, that the law is central to these sacred sites, it is a law that lives where new hope is born, and in significant ways, people renew their relationships for ongoing life.121 For Christians, the arrival of Jesus added another layer to these sacred sites. To the historical memory was added another layer that God was now to be experienced in Jesus. The most well-known sacred site in all of Judaism is the Jerusalem Temple. On several occasions, Jesus likens himself in significance to the Temple as the supreme sacred meeting place to encounter God. Narratives of Jesus often take place in places that have a historical memory. An example of this is the city of Jericho which was a fortified city-state of Canaan in the Old Testament. The city was captured by Joshua after the walls of Jericho collapsed. Their primary defences are destroyed, exposing the inhabitants to a more powerful invading force. Jericho is remembered historically as an old war site and battleground which surrendered to Joshua when he leads the Israelites into the Promised Land. In his mission, Jesus has minimal contact with Jericho, but he succeeds in transforming the outlook and prospects of Jericho. In the parable of 119 Lilburne, A Sense of Place, 97. Mark 4:35-40; Matt 8:23-27; Luke 8:22-25. 121 Djiniyini Gondarra, Series of Reflections of Aboriginal Theology. (Darwin: Bethel Presbytery, Northern Synod of the Uniting Church in Australia, 1986), 31. 120 164 the Good Samaritan, Jericho is a destination connected with Jerusalem. Travellers are robbed and left to die on the side of the road.122 Jesus makes Jericho an example of a place where God’s mercy and charity are given and received. In Jericho, blind beggars receive their sight,123 a tax collector named Zacchaeus repents and repays those he has defrauded and gives half of his possession to the poor.124 Jesus transforms Jericho from an ancient battle site to a place where God’s mercy and righteousness are active. Jesus is often depicted as continually being on the move, frequently changing his location. Where he is, is where the people are. He consistently attracts large crowds of people to him often in their thousands. He moves quickly and easily from places of power and privilege to places of disempowerment and under-privilege. Jesus enters into public debates with religious officials arguing his points to refigure, to re-imagine and refashion the world.125 The words used in the religious debates and parables concerning land often have multiple meanings and political overtones. The request from one male person for Jesus to arbitrate over the family inheritance is a case in point.126 In the Old Testament inheritance is a theological concept rather than a legal concept. The request to Jesus would have been a notable exception if he had agreed to arbitrate. The concept of inheritance is rich in meaning and history and is used to refer to acquisitions of spiritual blessings and promises from God. The most notable are the promises to Abraham of land and of descendants who will inherit the land. Jesus and Water While there is a large focus on land in the Bible, water is also important and has a prominent place in Biblical theology. In the first creation story in the Book of Genesis, water is the dominant feature in the first three days of creation and what does exist does so in relation to water. The characteristics of water taken from the first day of creation are that the water is deep, covered in darkness, has a face and the spirit or wind from God sweeps over the face of the water.127 The reference to the water having a face also gives the water a human characteristic. On day two of creation God separates the waters into upper and lower waters by a dome that is named sky. 122 See the parable of the Good Samaritan, Luke 10:25-37. Matt 20: 29-34; Mark 10:46-52; Luke 18:35- 43. 124 Luke 19:1-10. 125 Rebecca Chopp, “Theology and the Poetics of Testimony,” in Converging on Cultures: Theologians in Dialogue with Cultural Analysis and Criticism, ed. Delwin Brown, Sheila Greeve Davaney and Kathryn Tanner (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 61. 126 Luke 12:13- 21. 127 Gen 1: 1-2. 123 165 On day three of creation the waters are gathered into one place and named seas. This allows the land to appear which suggests that the land was submerged in the water. The land is named earth and starts producing life with vegetation, seeds, plants, trees and fruit. God pronounces what has eventuated as good. On the fifth day of creation God returns his attention to the waters with the commandment to bring forth life in the waters which is blessed with being fruitful and multiplying. The creation of birds is linked to the water rather than to the land.128 Water is the dominant feature of the first creation story. It is shaped, developed and given its place and role in creation before the appearance of land. Only when the place of water is confirmed does land appear for the first time in verse 9b. In the latter half of creation week, land and water both become sources for producing life. Land produces vegetation while the water produces everything that lives and moves in the water. The following day God creates from the earth, living creatures including humans who are eventually given dominion over what is created on land and in the water. At no point in this creation story does water become subservient to land. In the second creation story land is the dominant element with water mentioned only briefly. Water is one-dimensional rising from the earth to water the whole face of the earth. In the first creation story water had a face but, in this story, it is the land that has the face. The only other mention of water is the river which flows out of the Garden and divides into the four rivers Pishon, Gihon, Tigris and Euphrates. Water then disappears from the Bible only reappearing in the story of Noah when God decides to wipe humans from the face of the earth. He chooses water as the method to destroy all living things to return creation to its original primordial state of the first creation story. It rains for forty days, and after the waters recede, God establishes a rainbow as a covenant sign with the surviving Noah family that he will never destroy the earth again in like manner. The narratives of the patriarchs and matriarchs establish a culture and tradition in relation to water. Water is equated with hospitality. When three men are sent by God to visit Abraham, he offers them water, to drink and to wash their hands and feet. 129 The importance of water-wells is shown in the narrative of Hagar and Ishmael, God intervenes and provides a water-well that saves the boy from death.130 Water-wells are also places where people meet; 128 Gen 1: 20-23. Gen 18:4. 130 Gen 21: 19. 129 166 Abraham’s servant meets Rebekah at a water-well and chooses her as a wife for Isaac.131 Rivers are another prominent biblical water feature. The River Nile is an essential feature in the birth narrative of Moses and the contest between Moses and Pharaoh. 132 When Pharaoh relents and frees the Israelites, the Red Sea becomes a significant obstacle to navigate in the path to freedom. Divine intervention separates the Red Sea allowing the Israelites safe passage and escape from the clutches of Pharaoh.133 A similar divine parting of the waters occurs when the Israelites cross the Jordan River into the Promised Land. Water themes also extend to ritual purification to remove any form of impurity. This could range from hand washing to full body immersion. In the New Testament, water plays a vital role in the ministry of Jesus and assists in identifying some of the Christological facts about him. Water themes surround the Sea of Galilee where much of his mission activity takes place. Other significant waters are the River Jordan, a water-well, healing pools in Jerusalem and the offering of hospitality. The context in these places concerns baptism, healings, teachings and conversations. Other variations of the water motif include fish that live in the water and fishermen who are dependent on fishing for their livelihood. As we shall explore further below, new Christological metaphors arise from these places. Jesus refers to himself as living water, speaks of fishing for people and casting the net in deeper water. There are also the timeless images of Jesus sitting in a boat on the Sea of Galilee teaching the crowds of people gathered on the shoreline, of Jesus sitting at a water-well talking with a Samaritan woman, and of Jesus calming the wind and waves of the Sea of Galilee or walking on the waters of Galilee. Water like land is entwined with human customs and social contracts that would have been familiar to Jesus. An example of this is the encounter between Jesus and the Samaritan woman, which takes place at a water-well. A water well comes complete with a history, spirituality, beliefs, practices, customs and rituals that the story and characters are subject to. Jesus uses the water well in two distinctly different ways. Firstly, he forms a relationship with the Samaritan woman using the cultural and social customs of offering a drink of water between two people as a binding friendship agreement. Secondly, he uses the water well to draw attention to who he is and what he has to offer as the giver of life giving-water. 131 Gen 24: 11-15. Exod 2: 1-10. 133 Exod 14: 21. 132 167 Mapping of the geography Mapping of the environment can also apply to the mission of Jesus by mapping the principal geographic locations of his ministry in order to provide further insight into his ministry and identity. Hans Conzelmann highlights that in the Gospel of Luke, mapping distinguishes between the spheres of influence of John the Baptist and Jesus. John is the forerunner to the messiah who was tasked with preparing the way of the Lord. The ministry of both men overlaps making it possible for people to mistakenly confuse John the Baptist as the messiah. Luke arranges his Gospel using the topology to avoid confusion, keeping the two identities separate. Luke locates the ministry of John the Baptist as being along the River Jordan. The sphere of influence of Jesus is in Galilee, and he does not begin his ministry until John is imprisoned, which conveniently removes John from the picture to avoid potential rival claims about who the messiah is. The purpose of Luke in using the landscape in this way is to keep separate the respective localities of John and Jesus.134 It is not until after John is imprisoned that Luke mentions Galilee signalling the end of one ministry and the beginning of another ministry. Mapping of the landscape is about the connections, relationships and interaction between land, water, people and God. The Gospels refer to Jesus as Jesus of Nazareth which is the town where he spent most of his childhood.135 He is also referred to as the Nazarene.136 In his hometown of Nazareth, Jesus is; the carpenter,137 the carpenter’s son,138 the son of Mary,139 Joseph’s son,140 the brother of James, Joses, Judas and Simon.141 Identifying people by their parents’ name, occupation or the place a person comes from is a standard practice in Jewish society. The central sphere of Jesus’ mission activities was in Galilee, which has been described as ‘Galilee of the Nations’ by the prophet Isaiah142 and ‘Galilee of the Gentiles’ in the Gospel of Matthew.143 The narrative of Jesus’ ministry includes the primary locations of Capernaum, Caesarea Philippi, Gennesaret, Nain and Chorazin. Other ministry activities took place in Decapolis, Perea and Samaria. As the place names suggest, they are not strictly Jewish but include large populations of non-Jewish people. This mapping of the landscape sheds light on 134 Conzelmann, The Theology of St Luke, 27. Matt 26:71; Mark 1: 24, 10: 47, 16:6; Luke 4:34, 18:37, 24:19; John 1:45, 18:5, 7, 19:19. 136 Matt 2:23; Mark 14:67. 137 Mark 6:3. 138 Matt 13:55. 139 Mark 6:3. 140 Luke 4: 22. 141 Mark 6:3; Matt 13:55. 142 Isa 9:1. 143 Matt 4: 15. 135 168 whether his mission was strictly for Jewish people or if his mission extends to include nonJewish people. Mapping also spreads beyond the geographical into the political world. Before his death, Jesus instructs his disciples to meet him in Galilee after his resurrection, where he commissions his disciples to take his message to the world. The multi-cultural population of Galilee highlights that in the Bible, the land is a disputed commodity. To the Israelites, their country is known as the land of Israel or the Promised Land. To the Canaanites, it is known as the land of Canaan. Palestine during the era of Jesus was under Roman occupation, and a separatist movement existed intending to restore the Kingdom to Israel. A more significant issue is another claim to land ownership that superseded the claims of the Romans and Zionists with the existence of Canaanite people who survived by one means or another within the borders of Israel. The Canaanites originally owned the land they named as ‘Canaan’ and were dispossessed of their land by the Israelites. As land ownership is often in dispute, so identities and relationships are also disputed. The simple request of a woman for Jesus to heal her daughter becomes a much bigger issue when Jesus equates her identity and ethnicity as a Canaanite woman to the same status as a dog. Land, ethnicity, identity and status become the issue in the exchange between the Canaanite woman and Jesus. The narrative descends into the repository of a dark history where Jesus has to confront some uncomfortable truths about land, ethnicity, identity and status. The land is an essential criterion in the condition of personhood. Canaanites were landless, and a landless person is a non-person as they have no tūrangawaewae, no place to stand in this world.144 The task for Christology is to listen carefully to narratives and to consider how they might assist people to regain their personhood and their place to stand in the world. In summary, the rhythms of the earth, the waters, sun, moon and stars and their features and characteristics have a vital role in pointing to Christological facts about Jesus. As a biblical entity, the environment comes complete with connections, relationships, customs, social contracts and historical memory. It is also an essential source for identity and personhood. According to Walter Brueggemann, the land is a central, if not the central theme of biblical faith.145 Land in the biblical context is more than a mere setting for a story to develop. It has a distinctive personality, characteristic and value. It reacts and responds with its own emotions as storylines and characters develop sparking imagination as the land exerts its Cadogan, Tui, ‘A Three-Way Relationship: God, Land, People A Māori Woman Reflects’ in Land and Place: He Whenua, He Wāhi: Spiritualties from Aotearoa New Zealand, eds. H. Bergin, & S. Smith, (Auckland: Accent Publications. 2004), 31. 145 Brueggemann, The Land, Place as Gift, 3. 144 169 influence in interacting with the divine and humans. The land has its unique rhythms, its particular paradoxes and moves with its independent sense of time as generations of humans and Gods come and fade into the past, but the land remains and does not forget. Christologically the land and water move away from an anthropocentric language that expresses the values of patriarchy and hierarchy in words and concepts that describe Jesus as; Lord, King, Prophet, Priest, Judge and Messiah. Jesus subverts these title that are applied to him giving them a subservient nature teaching that greatness is found in servanthood to others.146 An earth-centred Christology is evident in words that describe Jesus as the sower, the gardener, the fisher of people, a friend, pain-bearer and journey-partner. Neil Darragh points out that in the context of Aotearoa New Zealand we are still in the process of shifting from predominantly human-centred images to more earth-centred images to co-exist alongside traditional images. People are still searching through the images of God that derive from water, ocean, wide-open spaces, seaside, tree, light, landscape, wind and similar images from the natural world around us.147This search for human and earth centred images can also inform Christology. In the following section, the significance of specific geographic features in the Gospels will be analysed in more detail and consideration will be given to how this informs the identity and nature of Jesus. Key biblical land features include the wilderness, the desert, plains, fields, mountains, the Jordan River and Lake Galilee. I will examine each of these geographical features for their Christological significance. The Desert: Images of deserts often equate to uninhabitable hot, dry, sandy places with minimal vegetation where life is unsustainable. The Old Testament describes the desert as, a barren region, a wasteland, a land not sown, a parched place, a land of drought where no human passes through and livestock are unable to graze.148 These descriptions of the desert depict an image of the original state of the earth before creation. The Garden of Eden is described in similar terms, there was no plant or herb of the field and no rain to water the earth.149 146 Mark 10:45; Luke 22:27; Matt 6:3-4, 8:5-10, 20:25; John 13: 1-20, 31-35. Neil Darragh, “Homeplace, Paradise and Landscape” in Land Conflicts, Land Utopias, ed. Marie-Theres Wacker and Elaine Wainwright (London: SCM Press, 2007), 118-125. 148 Lev 16:27; Deut 8:15; Jer 2:2, 2:6. 149 Gen 2: 2-5. 147 170 The first Genesis creation account uses the Aramaic word tohuwabohu to describe the state of the earth as a formless void.150 Deuteronomy uses tohuwabohu in the context of the desert, describing it as a howling wilderness waste. The Book of Job also contains the word in the same context describing the desert as a pathless waste where people perish.151 Psalm 107 also uses the word tohuwabohu and describes the desert as a place where people wander.152 Claus Westermann gives further examples from Isaiah and Jeremiah were tohuwabohu means a ‘desert or devastation that is threatened and used as the opposite of creation’.153 The two biblical creation narratives are structured in a way to show the desert and water as counterparts. In the first Genesis creation narrative, God spends the second day separating and ordering the water, which continues into the third day. Once the water under the sky is assigned its place, the dry land finally appears during day three. Later in the day, the land produces vegetation. Water is the prominent feature of the first creation narrative followed by dry land. The Garden of Eden account gives another view of creation in which the land is the more prominent feature and water a minor feature. A picture describes the earth like a hot, dry, dusty desert where there is no rain, plants, herbs or human life. God takes this hot arid place and turns the desert-like conditions into a garden with abundant life bordered by rivers. The desert is viewed as a terrible place because it has no water, food or towns.154 According to the psalmist, all that is needed to change the desert from an arid inhospitable wasteland region to a region teeming with life is water.155 Biblically the desert and the wilderness are often interchangeable. The significant difference between the two being that water is more readily available in the wilderness. The introduction of water transforms the desert both literally and metaphorically. The desert and water are used to demonstrate the capability of God. Isaiah was aware that obedience to the law had the potential to transform the desert into a place like the Garden of Eden.156 This was echoed in Psalm 107 where faithfulness to the covenant will see God turn the desert into pools of water and parched land into springs of water. 157 The same Psalm also declares that disobedience to the covenant and law would have the reverse effect; the fruitful land becomes a salty waste because of the wickedness of its inhabitants.158 150 Gen 1:2. Job 12:24. 152 Ps 107: 40. 153 Westermann, Genesis 1-11, 103. 154 Ps 107:4; Isa 21:13. 155 Ps 102:6. 156 Isa 51: 3. 157 Ps 107: 33, 35. 158 Ps 107: 34. 151 171 One of the difficulties of reading the Bible in translation is that the desert and the wilderness are often translated interchangeably. This can lead to confusion in biblical exegesis and a loss of nuance. In the NRSV, for instance, John the Baptist’s proclamation is referenced to Isaiah 40:3: A voice crying out in the wilderness to make straight in the desert a highway for our God. 159 In the NRSV, the quotation of the verse from Isaiah, the gospels omits mention of the desert.160 The desert and the wilderness are considered the place of John the Baptist who lived in the wilderness until the day he appeared publicly to Israel.161 The desert, the wilderness and the Jordan River were the locations where John the Baptist exercised his ministry. John received the message in the wilderness, but the sphere of his activity was along the Jordan River. The topography was used in the synoptic gospels to distinguish between the ministries of John the Baptist and Jesus and to avoid confusion between the one known as the forerunner to the messiah and the one claiming to be the messiah. During his mission, John the Baptist does not enter Galilee or Jerusalem, which were the spheres of activity of Jesus. Jesus does enter the wilderness and the Jordan River briefly but he largely stays away from those areas where John the Baptist ministered. After the temptation in the wilderness and his own baptism in the Jordan River, Jesus does not return to those places again. The Wilderness: The wilderness is a landscape where life is possible and can be suitable for grazing livestock.162 However, it is a delicate ecosystem that can change into an inhospitable place where the ecosystem becomes threatened.163 The delicate nature of the wilderness is spoken of by the prophet Jeremiah when he describes the wilderness as, a place where the land mourns due to the sinful nature of humans.164 The actions of humans have an effect on the land causing the water to dry up and turning an area into a wilderness or desert. Humans and land are again linked in a special binary relationship. In the Book of Exodus, the wilderness becomes the primary locus of Israel’s story after Moses is appointed by God to deliver Israel from Egyptian slavery under Pharaoh. Aaron is 159 Isa 40:3. Matt 3:3; Mark 1:2-3; Luke 3: 3-6; John 1:23. 161 Luke 1:80. 162 Ps 65: 12. 163 Joel 1: 19-20. 164 Jer 23: 10. 160 172 instructed by God to meet Moses in the wilderness and does so at the Mountain of the Lord.165 After leaving Egypt, the Israelites enter the wilderness of Sinai and camp there for some time before moving camp. After the death of Moses, Joshua became the leader of Israel and God describes the Promised Land to Joshua as starting from the wilderness.166 Forty years separate the time between Israel leaving Egypt and entering the Promised Land. These years are considered the wanderings in the wilderness. In the wilderness, the Israelites were often tested and disciplined by God. The wilderness became the place of preparation for the twelve tribes of Israel before they entered into the Promised Land. The themes of preparation and testing in the wilderness also come through in the synoptic Gospels. Through prayer and fasting Jesus prepared himself before being tested by the devil. For forty years the Israelites were tested in the wilderness. The number forty is also given as the length of days that Jesus fasted and prayed in the wilderness. In the wilderness years the Israelites constantly change locations as they move closer to entering the Promised Land. The wilderness is where the law is received by Moses directly from God for the benefit of the Israelites. The law prepares, tests and shapes twelve tribes of people into one nation who identify as the nation of Israel, ready for a life in the Promised Land of Canaan. Similarly, in the wilderness, Jesus prepares himself with prayer and fasting to have his identity as the son of God put to the test before actively engaging in his mission. The Level Place The ‘level place’ is unique to the Gospel of Luke and is worthy of consideration. The sole reference makes it a theological creation rather than an actual physical place or historic event. The Greek word for a level place is pedinos and has no other meaning other than a level place.167 It is used in Luke’s version of the Sermon on the Mount aptly referred to as the Sermon on the Plain as in the Lukan version the sermon is delivered on a level plain. There are several subtle differences between Matthew’s and Luke’s versions that suggest Luke was using the geography to correct some of Matthew’s account. In Matthew’s version, Jesus sees a great crowd of people who have come from Galilee, Decapolis, Jerusalem, Judea and from beyond the Jordan. Seeing the crowd, Jesus goes up the Mountain and sits down and begins teaching his disciples.168 Mountains, in Matthew’s theology 165 Exod 4:27. Josh 1:4. 167 Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, (accessed 29 September 2019), https://biblehub.net/searching.greek.php.q=gentile 168 Matt 4:23 – 7:29. 166 173 function as teaching locations. The Mount of Olives is an example in his final week in Jerusalem.169 Matthew’s theology of mountains is inconsistent with the theology of Luke who reserves mountains solely as places of prayer. Therefore in contrast to Matthew, Luke reserves the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem as a place of prayer for Jesus during his final week. 170 Prior to his Sermon on the Plain, Jesus is on the Mountain engaged in prayer before selecting his apostles and then descends the Mountain coming to a level place where he meets the crowds of people. The level place, not the Mountain is the place of teaching and healing in the theology of Luke. In the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew has Jesus seated to teach. This is a teaching methodology used by Rabbis. In this methodology, the teacher sits and the students sit passively at the teacher’s feet to learn. This method has connotations of the master-apprentice instructional model, which has often been conditioned by culture and religion. Luke gives a different teaching methodology where Jesus stands while teaching. How a teacher is positioned when teaching communicates a message. His methodology of standing while teaching pioneers a new evangelistic teaching technique as opposed to the instructional rabbinic technique of sitting to teach. The evangelistic and the rabbinic methodologies have vastly different connotations. Firstly, the teaching content is often theology or philosophy or both and the teacher is often making political statements that people may disagree with and so remains standing in case he is run out of town. This was the case in Nazareth when Jesus was teaching in the synagogue and the people disagreed with the content of his teaching and ran him out town.171 Secondly, due to the teacher standing the teaching session is short and to the point due to the fear of being run out of town. The Sermon on the Plain (twenty verses) is much shorter than the Sermon on the Mount (three chapters or one hundred and ten verses). The Fields In the Garden of Eden account of creation, the fields are the places where God brings forth life from the earth. Animals and birds are formed in the fields and brought to Adam to be named.172 After the fall of Adam and Eve, part of Adam’s punishment is to eat the plants of the field.173 169 Matt 24:3. Luke 22: 39-46. 171 Luke 4:28-30. 172 Gen 2: 19. 173 Gen 3: 17-19. 170 174 The fields soon become a place of sin and alienation. Plotting murder, Cain says to his brother, ‘Let us go out into the field’174 and it is there that the first death takes place. In the opening Genesis narratives, the fields change from being places that produce life to a place where death is brought about by human actions. The theme of death and fields continues in the narrative of the death of Sarah. Abraham negotiates with the Hittites who are the people of the land to purchase the cave of Machpelah as a permanent burial site for Sarah.175 The cave is situated at the end of the field of Ephron east of Mamre This cave and field becomes a significant site as an ancestral burial cave that contains the remains of Sarah, Abraham, Isaac, Rebekah, Jacob and Leah who are all founding patriarchal and matriarchal ancestors of Israel.176 In another narrative, Abraham sends one of his servants to Abraham’s country of origin to find a wife for Isaac. The servant finds Rebekah, and the first meeting with her prospective husband takes place in a field where Isaac takes her into his late mother’s tent.177 There are several Old Testament narratives, where fields are the location of important events. Jacob is working in the fields when Rachael takes Jacob as her husband.178 Jacob fearing reprisals from Laban receives a divine message to return to the land of his ancestors and tells Rachael and Leah of his divine instructions.179 Jacob is working in the fields when he receives news that Shechem defiled his daughter Dinah.180 In the narrative of Jacob’s son Joseph, fields are places of work. It is while they are at work in the fields that Joseph’s brothers turn on him and sell him to Potiphar, an officer of the King. Because of Joseph, Potiphar’s house and fields become blessed by the God of Joseph. All land in Israel is governed and managed by covenant laws and fields were not exempt from these laws. The book of Leviticus contains laws regulating the planting of fields and preventing the mixing of different kinds of seeds.181 Similar laws existed to govern harvesting. The people of Israel are instructed not to harvest to the edges of the field or to glean the loose ears of the crop, so that what remains can be gathered by the poor.182 In some cases, priority was given to the widow, the orphan and the alien. These laws dictated that the field was not to be harvested twice but that the widow, the orphan and the alien were permitted to gather what 174 Gen 4: 8. Gen 23. 176 Gen 49: 29-33. 177 Gen 24. 178 Gen 30:14. 179 Gen 31:4. 180 Gen 34:4. 181 Lev 19:19. 182 Lev 19:9. 175 175 remained unharvested.183 This way the Law ensured that everyone shared in the fruits of the land. The law requires further that a tithe be paid three-yearly from the harvest of the fields.184 The fields were also subject to the Law concerning the sabbatical year and the year of jubilee.185 Added to these laws from Leviticus, ‘the whole corpus of the law in Deuteronomy, chapter twelve is associated with the land’.186 Obedience to the Law is absolute while failure to keep the Law rendered the land impure. From these Old Testament narratives and laws concerning fields, words rich in meaning emerge like seed, grain, harvest, livestock, flock, wheat, sowing, the sower, soil, lilies and grass. These words were often drawn on by Jesus and used as metaphors in his parables to illustrate his main teaching points concerning what life was like in the Kingdom of God. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus draws on images of the lilies and grass of the fields to illustrate how God can provide.187 Harvest terminology is used by Jesus to illustrate gathering people into the Kingdom of God and the need for more workers to reap the harvest.188 A significant section in the synoptic Gospels focusses on a parable of the sower where Jesus draws on the images of a person sowing seeds and uses terminology that includes; weeds, a mustard seed and hidden treasure buried in a field.189 Jesus explains that faith is like a mustard seed, and elsewhere he speaks of the strategy required to prevent the weeds from taking over the wheat.190 In the parable Jesus identifies himself as the sower. These images are all drawn from the fields and give an earthiness to the theology of Jesus. As a location, fields are mentioned twice in the Gospel, according to Luke. The night Jesus is born, an angel appears to the shepherds announcing the good news that the messiah has been born in the City of David.191 The second mention of fields is when Jesus and his disciples are going through grain-fields on a Sabbath. The Pharisees criticise the disciples for not observing Sabbath laws by plucking and eating grain. Jesus’ response to the criticism is that he is the Lord of the Sabbath. 183 Exod 23:10-11; Lev 19:9-10, 23:22; Deut 14:28-29. Deut 14: 28-29. 185 Lev 27: 17-25, Deut 14: 28-29. 186 Jean Bosco Tchapé, “Conflicts over the Holy Land, Israel’s Acquisition of the Land of Canaan According to Deuteronomy,” in ed. Marie-Theres Wacker and Elaine Wainwright, Land Conflicts, Land Utopias. (London: SCM Press, 2007), 47-54. 187 Matt 6: 28-34; Luke 12: 22-31. 188 Matt 9:38; Luke 10:2. 189 Matt 13; Mark 4; Luke 8. 190 Matt 13: 24-30. 191 Luke 2:8-14. 184 176 In summary, fields are places that produced life in the creation narrative. With life goes death and the field is the location of the first human death. This fixes the parameters of life as being from birth to death. Stories layer the land, and the Book of Genesis sees fields as being layered in stories of the ancestors beginning with Abraham who successfully negotiates for the field of Ephron as a burial site for Sarah. The fields were important as workplaces for sowing, harvesting and as meeting places. In the context of work in the field, Rachel takes Jacob as her husband. In the context of work in the field, Jacob receives a message from God to return to his ancestral lands. Fields evoke a wide variety of ideas that are drawn on by Jesus to illustrate essential teachings often by the methodology of parables. Fields are also important sites for Christology. In the nativity story fields are the place where the birth of the Christ is announced by angels to the shepherds. 192 It is while walking through grain-fields that Jesus announces that he is the Lord of the Sabbath.193 This is an important point in the Gospels of Mark and Luke. Firstly, this pronouncement is amongst the first events of his ministry. Secondly, it is his first public self-revelation where he gives an indication of his own understanding of his identity as Christ. The placement of this narrative near the beginning of each gospel gives an indication of the importance that the gospel writers gave to this statement. Mountains: Pepeha is a unique Māori methodology of aphorisms that expresses meaningful tribal connections to specific parts of the landscape. Pepeha is a formulaic expression that uses an economy of words and metaphors encapsulating many values and characteristics that make the landscape and the people indivisible. Values include but are not limited to, kaitiaki (guardianship), whakapapa (genealogy), taonga tuku iho (heritage) and tūrangawaewae (belonging). Underlying pepeha are relational narratives of places, people and events expressed in genealogies, story, song and art. The names, places and events serve as locators of who the people are, where they come from and their current existence. Pepeha is an identity statement about tribal pride encapsulating and coalescing the descent group into a recognised and functioning socio-cultural, economic and political unit. A typical tribal pepeha begins by naming the most significant mountain and waters within the tribal boundaries that serve as tribal counterparts. 192 193 Luke 2: 8-14. Mark 2:28; Matt 12:8; Luke 6:5. 177 Aphorisms in the Māori world concerning the characteristics of mountains are quite common. An example of this is the mountain Pūtauaki194 who has several aphorisms describing his character: Pūtauaki, he ana kōiwi o ngā rangatira (a burial place of chiefs), he maunga nekeneke (a mountain who moves), he maunga korero (a mountain who speaks), he maunga pūremu (a mountain who has liaisons with female mountains), he maunga waiata (a mountain who composes and sings love songs), he matua (a mountain who has children), he ngārara tana kai (a mountain who eats insects for his food). Named with the mountain and waters are the iwi (tribe) and a person who is the recognised leader of the tribe who exercises authority over the mountain and water on behalf of the tribe. Often this could be the common ancestor of the tribe or a recognised leader of the tribe who exercised undisputed authority on behalf of the tribe. A typical pepeha that includes all these factors is: Ko Pūtauaki te maunga To Takanga i o Apa te wai Ko Tūwharetoa te iwi Ko Te Aotahi te tangata Pūtauaki is the mountain Takanga i o Apa is the waters Tūwharetoa is the tribe Te Aotahi is the person The Old Testament contains a number of aphorisms that reflect the tribal nature of Israel. Tribalism is at the heart of the nation of Israel which consists of twelve tribes named after the sons and grandsons of the ancestor Israel. The twelve tribes consisted of a network of sub-tribes and family groupings. In settling the Promised Land, mountains and waters became part of tribal allocations of land. The tribal markers of mountains and waters are not separate identities but counterparts that have a significant role in the ministry of Jesus and gives further insight into his Christological identity. The geography of Israel is very diverse, consisting of a coastal sea border, coastal plains, central highlands that include the mountains and hills of upper and lower Galilee. There are approximately five hundred biblical references to mountains in the bible. The most mentioned mountains are Sinai, Zion, Mount of Olives, Tabor and Carmel. Each one of these particular mountains plays a pivotal role in the ministry of Jesus. Pūtauaki is an extinct volcano in the Eastern Bay of Plenty and is claimed as an ancestral mountain of Ngāti Tūwharetoa and Ngāti Awa tribes. 194 178 The first biblical mention of a mountain is during the great flood when Noah’s ark comes to rest on Mount Ararat. The next mention of a mountain is when Abraham is directed by God to go to an un-named mountain in the land of Moriah and sacrifice his son Isaac. Abraham obeys the command and prepares to sacrifice his son on the mountain when an angel of the Lord intervenes. An aphorism connected to this narrative is, on the mountain of the Lord, it shall be provided.195 This is the beginning of biblical aphorisms which speak of the connection between mountains and God. The theme of associating mountains with God continues in the book of Exodus when Moses has several encounters with God on two different mountains. While tending the flock of his father-in-law on Mount Horeb,196 Moses has his first encounter with the divine in the wilderness when a burning bush appears but the bush is not being consumed by the fire. The practice of creating aphorisms that associate a mountain with God continues. Mount Horeb, for example, is called ‘the mountain of God’.197 The mountain is again prominent during the Exodus. Moses leads the people to the same mountain where he first encountered God. Moses then climbs the mountain and receives the Ten Commandments directly from God. Other prominent events at this particular mountain include the establishment of the Mosaic covenant and the Aaronic priesthood. Another significant mountain associated with Moses is Mount Nebo, where Moses, in his final moments, is granted a view of the promised land before he dies. The pattern of leaders dying on mountains also includes the death of Aaron who died on the summit of Mount Hor after Moses transferred the priestly role of Aaron to Eleazar.198 Continuing the theme of prophetic mountaintop experiences, the prophet Elijah challenges the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel and wins when he successfully calls on God to light his sacrifice proving to the prophets of Baal that his God is the true God. 199 In another story, Elijah flees, when Jezebel threatens his life. He finds refuge on Mount Horeb where Moses had received the Ten Commandments. After Moses led the Israelites to the Promised Land, they did not return to Mount Horeb, which was an important historical site to them. Several centuries later Elijah returns to the mountain, the only Israelite to do so since the 195 Gen 22: 14. Horeb and Sinai are different names for the same mountains. The Yahwist and Priestly sources refer to the mountain as Sinai while the Elohist and Deuteronomist refer to the mountain as Horeb. 197 Exod 3:1-12. 198 Num 20: 22-29. 199 1 Kgs 18: 20-40. 196 179 Exodus. Like his predecessor, Elijah experiences the presence of God while on the mountain in an unusual way through a still small voice.200 When the Israelites settle the land of Israel, mountains play an essential role as international borders between Israel and their neighbours. In the Old Testament are two distinct mountains with the name Mount Hor. The first serves as the border between Israel and the land of Edom.201 The second is the northern Mount Hor, which also serves as the northern border between Israel and the Syrian plains.202 Mountains also serve as inter-tribal boundary markers between the tribes of Israel. Mount Tabor, a small isolated dome-shaped mountain in lower Galilee, is strategically positioned on the route between Galilee and the Jezreel valley. It also serves as one of the boundary markers between the tribes of Naphtali, Issachar and Zebulun.203 Mount Zion adds a different dimension to the significance of mountains as nationalistic symbols. Mount Zion is the highest point in Jerusalem and considered to be the holiest site in Judaism. In the Abraham narratives, it is referred to as Mount Moriah and is the place where Abraham journeyed to sacrifice Isaac. Zion is first mentioned in 2 Samuel as a Jebusite stronghold called Zion captured by King David.204 David transformed Zion into his City, which became the political and religious heart of Israel. His successor, King Solomon, built the Temple on Zion, which becomes known as the Temple Mount. Zion is called the City of God, the City of David and the City of Jerusalem. Zion is symbolic for the land of Israel and stirs up the nationalist ideology of re-establishing a Jewish state within Israel. In the book of Isaiah Mount Zion is central to the theology of the prophet making it the figurative head of the mountains to which all the nations shall stream to for their final judgement.205 Isaiah also identifies Zion as the place where an eschatological banquet will take place during the end times.206 The banquet is a celebration where only the best food and wine are included. Returning to the opening statement in this section of the chapter concerning the Māori concept of pepeha, the naming of a person in association with a mountain, and the association of particular aphorisms with a mountain, this pattern can also be found within the Old Testament. Each of the named mountains in the Old Testament is associated with an ancestor who did mighty deeds worthy of remembrance and recognition. The following table highlights 200 1 Kgs 19:11-18. Num 33:37. 202 Num 34: 7-8. 203 Josh 19: 22. 204 2 Sam 5: 6-16. 205 Isa 2:2 and Mic 4:1. 206 Isa 25:6. 201 180 the mountain, the ancestor associated with the mountain, the deeds of the ancestor and the aphorism that expresses the significance of the mountain: Table 3: Mountains in the Old Testament Mountain Ancestor Significance Aphorism Mt Ararat Noah Noah’s Ark comes to rest on Mt Ararat Directed by God to sacrifice his son Isaac on this mountain God appears to Moses in a burning bush that is not being consumed by the fire. Moses receives the 10 commandments On the mountain of the Lord it shall be provided.207 The mountain of God.208 Un-named mountain Abraham in Moriah. Mount Horeb Moses Elijah Mount Nebo Moses Mount Hor Moses, Aaron, Eleazar Mount Carmel Elijah Mount Zion King David Experiences God in a wee small voice Moses views the Promised Land and then dies. Moses transfers the priestly role of Aaron to Eleazar. Aaron dies on Mount Hor and is buried on the mountain. Challenges and defeats the prophets of Baal Jebusite stronghold captured The city of David, by King David. the city of God. The joy of all the earth.209 Mount Tabor and Deborah Mount Hermon The Mount of assembly.210 (Isaiah 14:13) The prophetess Deborah Tabor and Hermon summons Barak to lead an joyously praise your army from Mount Tabor name.212 207 Gen 22: 14. Exod 3:1-12. 209 Ps 48:2. 210 Isa 14:13. 212 Ps 89:12. 208 181 Mount of Olives King David against Sisera and the Canaanites.211 David covers his head and The Lord’s walks barefoot as he mountain. His feet ascended the Mount of shall stand on the Olives weeping.213 Mount of Olives.214 The glory of the Lord ascended the mountain east of the city.215 Principally mountains are associated with God and the aphorism for each mountain speaks of God’s glory and goodness. They are places associated with prophets, kings, and the patriarchs. This theme continues in the New Testament and has Jesus associated with certain mountains. The first mention of a mountain in the New Testament is in Matthew’s version of the temptations. Matthew locates the third and final temptation up an un-named very high mountain where Jesus resists the final temptation to worship the devil.216 There is no information concerning the location of this particular mountain. Mark does not give any geographic features where the temptations took place other than the wilderness.217 Luke locates the temptations as beginning in the wilderness. The location of the second temptation to worship the devil, Luke simply gives as ‘lead him up’.218 He does not give any indication of what or where ‘up’ is. Only Matthew includes a mountain in his version as a location during the temptations where Jesus overcomes the final challenge. Another significant mention of a mountain is the Sermon on the Mount, which includes the Beatitudes. The sermon is a collection of sayings and teachings of Jesus. Spanning three chapters in the Gospel of Matthew, the sermon on the mount is the longest continuous discourse of Jesus anywhere in the gospels.219 The sermon is set early in Jesus’ ministry in Galilee, where he attracts enormous crowds of people. Jesus goes up ‘the mountain’ in Galilee with his disciples and begins teaching. There is a resonance in this narrative with Moses’ delivery of the law following his ascent of a mountain. Jesus is portrayed by Matthew as the new Moses who gives the new law on the mountain. 211 Judg 4:6. 2 Sam 15:30. 214 Zech 14:4. 215 Ezek 11: 23. 216 Matt 3:8. 217 Mark 1:12. 218 Luke 4:5. 219 Matt 5-7. 213 182 The Gospel of Luke contains its own succinct version of the Sermon on the Mount. But in this version, the sermon is given after Jesus descends from the mountain and reaches a level place.220 In Luke’s version, Jesus spent the night on the mountain in prayer, which is consistent with his theology of mountains being a place of solitude to engage in prayer. The next day Jesus selects from among his disciples twelve people whom he commissioned as apostles. Walking down the mountain, he begins teaching when he arrives at a level place where people are gathered waiting for him. Luke diffuses any Moses–Jesus typology by replacing the mountain with a level place. Luke is aware that in the Old Testament, people do not follow the prophets on to mountains. Both Moses and Elijah climbed Mount Hebron on their own and did not take any of their followers. In Matthew’s version Jesus breaks this convention by taking his disciples with him. Luke is consistent with the Old Testament convention that the only activity that takes place on a mountain is prayer. The theme of prayer and mountains is developed further in the narrative of the Transfiguration. This location of the Transfiguration, according to Mark and Matthew, is on a high un-named mountain.221 In this narrative, Jesus takes three disciples, Peter, James and John, when suddenly Jesus is transfigured before them. Miraculously they witness Moses and Elijah talking with Jesus. There is a subtle difference between the synoptic Gospels. Firstly, Luke describes the location as ‘the mountain’ not a high mountain.222 The inclusion of ‘the’ indicates that it is a specific mountain that has a special status. The reference to ‘the mountain’ is contained in an earlier narrative by both Mark and Luke when Jesus chose his twelve apostles.223 Mark has Jesus based in Caesarea Philippi six days before the Transfiguration. Luke has Jesus based in Bethsaida one week before the Transfiguration. Matthew has one reference to ‘the mountain’ which he locates in Galilee where he healed many people.224 In the third century, Origen of Alexandria speculated that Mount Tabor was the scene of the Transfiguration. Successive early church writers like Cyril of Jerusalem and Jerome continued the speculation, but scepticism remains that Mount Tabor is the location of the Transfiguration. John Lightfoot favours a hill or mountain that is much closer to CaesareaPhilippi as it has a logical progression that follows Peter’s declaration.225 William Hendriksen prefers Mount Meron in the upper Galilee region where Jesus spent the majority of his 220 Luke 6: 17-49. Mark 9:2-8; Matt 17: 1-8. 222 Luke 9: 28-36. 223 Mark 3:13-19; Luke 6: 12-16. 224 Matt 15: 29-31. 225 John Lightfoot, The Whole Works of the Rev John Lightfoot, Master of Catherine Hall, Vol I. (London: J F Dove, 1825), 293. 221 183 ministry.226 Harry A Whittaker proposes Mount Nebo as a possible site as Moses viewed the Promised Land from this mountain before his death and Moses is one of the characters who appear in the transfiguration scene.227 The only certainty is that ‘the mountain’ is in Galilee somewhere between Caesarea Philippi and Bethsaida. Another difference in the account of the Transfiguration is that Mark and Matthew do not offer any reason why Jesus took three disciples with him up the mountain. Luke provides the missing details in advising that Jesus went up the mountain to pray. In the Old Testament, mountains were places of prayer and communication with the divine in private. There are no crowds of people, there is no teaching, and no miracles performed up the mountain in Luke’s Gospel. In the Old Testament, only the prophets Moses and Elijah journey to the summit of the mountains where they commune with God. As noted earlier, while up the mountain, there is no teaching and no miracles are performed; their only activity is prayer. Only once does Moses take a small group of people up a mountain when Aaron transfers his priestly role to Eleazar. Luke and Mark concur with the theme of praying and mountains and has Jesus spending the night in prayer on a mountain before he makes his final selection of twelve apostles. The Gospel of John supports the theme of mountains as places of worship. The meeting between Jesus and the Samaritan woman takes place at a water-well on a mountain.228 The land and water-well are associated historically with Jacob. The Samaritan woman acknowledges that the mountain is a sacred site as her Samaritan ancestors worshipped on the mountain. John then takes the theology of mountains as places of worship and reintroduces this with an aphorism by Abraham that, on the mountain of the Lord, it shall be provided.229 The Synoptic Gospels give the location of Jesus’ feeding of the 5000 as a deserted place by Lake Galilee, John, however, changes the location to a mountain that is in the vicinity of Lake Galilee.230 In this scene, Jesus is sitting with his disciples which is the traditional rabbinic method of teaching. It is near to the time of the Passover, and the people are hungry and without food. Jesus provides food for the crowd from five barley loaves of bread and two fish. As God provided for Abraham on a mountain, Jesus provides for the people on a mountain. Mark and Matthew place Jesus in Caesarea Philippi, where he poses the question to his disciples about his identity. Luke does not give the location in his version except to say that 226 William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew. (Pennsylvania: Baker Book House, 1973), 665. 227 Whittaker, Studies in the Gospels, 354. 228 John 4: 1-42. 229 Gen 22:14. 230 John 6:1-15. 184 Jesus was in prayer before he poses the question, ‘Who do you say that I am?’.231 The answer from Peter is ‘you are the Messiah’. The following narrative of the Transfiguration of Jesus takes place up ‘the mountain’ where a voice from the cloud speaks to Peter and the two other disciples advising that Jesus is ‘my son’. Two voices identifying Jesus have spoken in successive narratives, the human voice of Peter and a voice from a cloud above the mountain. There is a Christological dimension in the gospels’ various references to mountains. Mountains are a place of solitude to communicate with God through prayer. They are also places of encounter with the unseen God. Consistent with this typical Old Testament significance of mountains, in the New Testament they become a place of Christological revelation, a place where the divinity of Jesus is confirmed in support of Peter’s declaration and the voice from heaven. Another significant New Testament mountain is the Mount of Olives. The synoptic Gospels agree that Jesus approached Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives in the vicinity of Bethphage and Bethany.232 For good effect, Luke adds that on the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus came down the path from the Mount of Olives to give a picture of Jesus descending from on high to Jerusalem. Walking down the mountain, people acknowledge Jesus as ‘the king who comes in the name of the Lord’. The Mount of Olives is the scene of Jesus’ eschatological teachings concerning the destruction of the Temple and the end times.233 Luke has the Temple as the teaching location of Jesus in his final week. Matthew and Mark have Jesus retiring to Bethany every night to rest. Luke and John have Jesus retiring to the Mount of Olives to rest and pray every night which is consistent with Lukan theology of mountains and prayer.234 The Mount of Olives is one of two named locations for the ascension. Luke gives Bethany as the location of the ascension in his Gospel.235 Luke is the acknowledged author of the Book of Acts which also places the ascension as taking place near the Mount of Olives which he locates in the vicinity of Bethany.236 Matthew gives an alternative location for the ascension as ‘the mountain’ in Galilee. 231 Luke 9:18-21; Mark 8: 27-30; Matt 16: 13-20. Matthew does not include Bethphage in his version. See: Matt 21:1-11; Mark 11:11; Luke 19: 28-40. 233 Matt 24; Mark 13; Luke 21. 234 Luke 22:.39. John 8:1. 235 Luke 24: 50. 236 Acts 1: 9-12. 232 185 Placing the information into a table similar to the Old Testament references to mountains, ancestors, historic events and aphorisms shows that the majority of mountains associated with Jesus are un-named and the only named mountain is the Mount of Olives: Table 4: Mountains in the Gospels. Mountain Person Significance Un-named mountain Jesus Scene of the third temptations Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.237 Jesus delivers his Sermon on the Mount Jesus spends night in prayer and then selects his final twelve apostles. Transfiguration of Jesus Jesus meets a Samaritan The living waters woman declaring to her that he gives the living waters. Jesus feeds five-thousand people. The triumphant entry of Jesus into Jerusalem begins as he descends on the path that leads down from the Mount of Olives. Un-named mountain Jesus in Galilee Un-named mountain Jesus in Galilee Un-named mountain Jesus Un-named mountain Jesus in Samaria Un-named mountain Jesus in Galilee Mount of Olives Jesus Aphorism Jesus weeps over Jerusalem while on the Mount of Olives. Jesus rests and prays on the Mount of Olives. Jesus teaches about the end times while on the Mount of Olives during his final week in Jerusalem. The ascension of Jesus takes place near the Mount of Olives. This is significant as Jesus becomes associated with the Mount of Olives more than any other mountain. 237 Matt 4: 10. 186 In the Old Testament the Mount of Olives is associated with King David who wept on the Mount when his son Absalom wrestled for control of Jerusalem.238 Similarly, Jesus also wept on the Mount of Olives for Jerusalem.239 The Gospel of John also has a reference of Jesus staying at the Mount of Olives after the Temple police refuse to arrest him.240 Luke also says that Jesus taught in the Temple every day and spent the night on the Mount of Olives.241 John also supports this theory.242 When in the vicinity of Jerusalem it was custom for Jesus to go to the Mount of Olives to pray and prior to his arrest he was engaged in prayer on the Mount.243 The synoptic Gospels all record Jesus speaking about the Destruction of the Temple and the end times. Matthew and Mark place Jesus on the Mount of Olives when he delivered his Olivet discourse. For Matthew and Mark this is a significant discourse that extends over two chapters in Matthew and one chapter in Mark.244 As a historic site the Mount of Olives has been used as a cemetery for three-thousand years and now contains approximately 150,000 graves.245 The prophets Zechariah, Haggai and Malachi along with Absalom son of King David are said to be buried on the Mount. The prophet Zechariah spoke about the importance of the Mount of Olives in the end times when God would stand on the Mount which would be split in two.246 Since then it is acknowledged by Judaism that the Mount of Olives is the place where the dead would be raised to life and the final judgement will take place. Significantly, of all the mountains in the canonical Gospels, the Mount of Olives is the only mountain that is specifically named. This was also the last mountain where Jesus was active before his arrest. This association between Jesus and the Mount of Olives points to the future eschatological role that Jesus has still to play. As the site of the events for the end times Jesus becomes the Lord of those end times whatever they may consist of. The Mount of Olives is where Jesus reveals that he has been given all authority in heaven and earth; this has an eschatological dimension that awaits fulfilment. The ascension of Jesus also takes place on the Mount of Olives. Prior to this Jesus speaks of returning to judge the living and the dead. Because he departs from the Mount of Olives it seems appropriate that he also return to this point of departure from his earthly ministry in order to resume the final part of his mission. 238 2 Sam 15: 1-30. Matt 23: 37-39. Luke 19:41-44. 240 John 8:1. 241 Luke 21:27. 242 John 8: 2. 243 Luke 22:39-46. 244 Matt 24-25: Mark 13:1-37 245 Mount of Olive, (accessed 10 January 2020), https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3981588,00,html 246 Zech 14:4. 239 187 Water: In pūrākau (origin narratives) land (Papatūānuku) is a parent to water (Tangaroa). Water is a younger sibling (teina) to the elder more senior (tuakana) land and air-based siblings.247 The water, land and air-based siblings are engaged in a perpetual rivalry. These stories explain the natural world of the Māori. The word for water is ‘wai’ and a root word in many Māori words such as wairua (spirit) and waiata (song). The Williams dictionary of the Māori language gives over 105 words where the word wai is a base word.248 The word wairua is a compound word consisting of, wai for water and rua meaning two. With that definition wairua as spirit means a combination of two waters. Wairua Tapu is the word for Holy Spirit that signifies that the Holy Spirit is a combination of two sacred waters. Water is an important symbol, image and metaphor for Wairua Tapu. Water is a significant component in the canonical Gospels with prominent themes and motifs forming around water in different contexts. The following tables shows the importance of water and the wide diversity of the contexts in which it is highlighted in the Gospels: Table 5: Water events in the Gospels Water Events Mark Matthew Luke John John baptises along the Jordan River Baptism of Jesus at River Jordan Calls first disciples by Jordan River Turning water into wine Teaches Nicodemus about being born of water and the Spirit Jesus and disciples baptising in Judea Calls first disciples by Sea of Galilee Crosses the Sea of Galilee and heals a paralysed man Jesus teaches on Sea of Galilee while seated in a boat 1:4 3:5 3:3 1:26-28 1:9-11 3:13-17 3:21-22 1:29-34. 1:35-42. 2:1-12 3:1-21 3: 22-30 1:16-20 4:18-22 5:1-11 2:1-12 9:1-8 5:17-26 4:1-9 13:1-9 5:1-11 Land-based siblings include Tāne (humans, trees, flora and fauna and birds), Rūaumoko (volcanoes and earthquakes), Haumiatiketike (Fern root), Rongo mā Tāne (Kumara and cultivated foods), Tūmatauenga (humans), Tāwhirimatea (Air and weather). 248 Williams, Dictionary of the Māori language, 474-478. 247 188 Jesus calms a storm on the 4:35-41 Sea of Galilee Jesus heals the Gerasene 5:1-20. demoniac Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the water-well Healing at pool of Bethsaida Jesus walks on water 6:45-52 8:23-27 8:22-25 8:28-34 8:26-39 4:1-42 5:1-18 14:22-33 6:16-21 The people seek Jesus 6:22-24 They find Jesus on the other side of the lake Jesus uses the lack of hospitality to offer water to guests to wash as a teaching point Jesus teaches on hospitality 9:41 and offering a glass of cold water Jesus heals a boy with a 9:14-29 demon who often falls in the fire or the water 6:25. Festival of Shelters and I am the living water saying. Jesus heals a crippled woman of the Sabbath with the verse: give it water on a Sabbath The Rich Man requests that Lazarus dip his finger in some water Jesus identifies the owner 14: 12-21 of the upper room for the Passover meal as the person carrying a jar of water. Healing at the Siloam pool Jesus crosses the Jordan River to where John had been baptising Jesus washes feet of disciples Pilate and hand washing Blood and water run from the side of Jesus 7:36-50 10:40-42. 17:14-21 Luke does not include the water in his narrative 7:37-39. 13: 15 16:24 Does not 22:7-14, include water in his text 9:1-12 10:40 13: 1-20 27:24 19:31-37 189 Jesus appears to disciples at Lake Tiberias after resurrection 21: 1-14 Water is mentioned in twenty-nine different narratives in the canonical Gospels. Analysing the references shows that water is important in baptism, discipleship, healing, teaching, hospitality, and attaining and living life in the Holy Spirit. Just as importantly it has a pre and post resurrection function surrounding discipleship and mission. The Gospel of Mark has eleven references to water that are all shared with the other three Gospels to some extent. Half of Mark’s references relate to the Sea of Galilee which shows the importance of the Sea as a geographic location in the ministry of Jesus. Two of the remaining references relate to the Jordan River and the activity of John the Baptist and the baptism of Jesus. The remaining references are shared with one of the other synoptic Gospels concerning healing and hospitality. The Gospel of Matthew shares the two common canonical narratives and the five common synoptic narratives. Matthew shares one common narrative with Mark and John, that of Jesus walking on water and one common narrative with Mark where Jesus teaches about the meaning of a glass of water in offering hospitality to a person. Matthew contains the narrative of selecting the upper-room for the Passover Meal, but omits the reference to the ‘man carrying a water jar.’ The narrative of Pontius Pilate washing his hands to disassociate himself from the decision to have Jesus crucified is unique to the Gospel of Matthew. After being questioned by Pilate, Jesus is presented with Barabbas to the public who are asked to choose which of the two should be released. This is a tradition maintained at every Passover Festival. Barabbas is chosen and freed while Jesus is sentenced to death by crucifixion. In response to the decision, Pilate washes his hands with water as a sign that he distances himself from the decision.249 The act of hand washing is a universal action that absolves responsibility for a decision or action to which the person washing their hands disagrees. It also has a Judaic basis in the case of a murder where the killer is unknown. The elders of the nearest village where the murder took place will slaughter a young heifer, and the Priest will wash their hands over the heifer claiming innocence in the death of the heifer requesting God to absolve them and redeem them of any guilt.250 249 250 Matt 27:24. Deut 21: 1-8. 190 As part of the synoptic Gospels Luke shares the seven common narratives with Mark and Matthew of Jesus’ activity around and on the Sea of Galilee and the baptism narratives at the Jordan River. Luke shares with Mark claiming water as a theme in Jesus sending the disciples to meet ‘a man carrying a jar of water’ in order to secure and ready a room for Jesus to celebrate the Passover during his final week in Jerusalem. While it appears as a minor detail it is a detail that has significance in order for it to be included in two Gospels and ignored in another. The fact that Matthew ignores the detail does not mean that it lacks importance. Luke exercises slightly more independence from Mark and Matthew with three independent narratives. In two of the narratives Jesus uses water to give a new interpretation to healing on a Sabbath and foot-washing. In the foot-washing narrative Jesus is invited to the home of a Pharisee and criticises his host for not offering him water to wash his feet. An unnamed woman appears and washes his feet with her tears and dries his feet with her hair and then anoints his feet with ointment. Jesus comments that this particular method of foot washing, similar to healing a crippled woman on a Sabbath is a demonstration of love that includes forgiveness.251 The Gospel of John is the water Gospel as it has a wider variety of water references than the synoptics Gospels. Water is the first geographical feature that is encountered at the beginning of the Gospel with the Jordan River. The only other River of significance mentioned in the Bible is the Garden of Eden account of creation where the Rivers function as a border between the Garden of Eden and the rest of the world. The only river named in the Gospels is the Jordan River which was the known area of operation of John the Baptist. The synoptic Gospels limit the activities of John the Baptist strictly to the Jordan River with Jesus not exercising his ministry within the vicinity of the Jordan River. This makes the Jordan River a border that is used as ‘a clear demarcation of the two spheres of activities’ between the work of John the Baptist and Jesus’’.252 Using the theme of water, John goes beyond the significance of the Jordan River as a location for the baptism of Jesus giving baptism a deeper meaning than a watery act. The synoptic Gospels have the baptism of Jesus as a stand-alone narrative that has a natural progression into the next narrative of the temptations located in the wilderness. In John’s version, the call of Andrew and Simon takes place following the baptism. A link is being built 251 252 Luke 7:36-50. Conzelmann, The Theology of St Luke, 19. 191 between baptism and discipleship. The narrative then moves to Galilee but the theme of discipleship remains. By having Jesus begin his ministry at the Jordan River, John is disputing the different spheres of ministry between Jesus and John the Baptist. Jesus does return to the Jordan River after the Festival of the Dedication and exercises his ministry in the same place where John had been baptising.253 An earlier narrative reports John baptising in Bethany on the east side of the Jordan River.254 The word ‘again’ in the text suggests that this is not the first time that Jesus had crossed the Jordan River and stayed in this place or worked the area. Jesus receives a message that his friend Lazarus has died in Bethany and as Jesus is working in the vicinity of Bethany he goes and raises Lazarus back to life, declaring that he (Jesus) is the resurrection and the life. Resurrection and life become part of John’s theology of baptism and discipleship. The Gospel of John uses water to give new meaning to old customs. Four days after leaving the Jordan River with his new disciples, Jesus attends a wedding in Cana. At the urging of his mother, he performs his first miracle of turning water into wine. The water had been designated for ritual washing or purification, which is an essential Jewish custom. To use this water that has been set aside for purification would be considered sacrilege, but Jesus considers the honour of the hosts more important than ritual purification. In the Old Testament wine is a symbol of God’s bounty and blessing. Having run out of wine is a symbol that God’s blessing on Israel has having dried up. The quantity and quality of the wine Jesus provides is a symbol of God’s continued blessing that comes in the person of Jesus Christ. After leaving the wedding, Jesus meets with Nicodemus, where water is part of the topic of conversation. Jesus talks of being born of water and the Spirit as a condition for entering the kingdom of God.255 The Pharisees practised baptism and Nicodemus would have understood the meaning of being born again by water as Baptism. Nicodemus struggles to understand the link between water baptism and being born again from above. Jesus again gives new meaning to old customs by introducing a connection between water, life and the Holy Spirit. After this meeting, Jesus takes his disciples to the province of Judea, where they engage in baptising people. John the Baptist was also baptising in the same area in Aenon not far from Salim because there was plenty of water in that place.256 Aenon and Salim are on the western 253 John 10:22-41. John 1:28. 255 John 3: 5. 256 John 3: 22-23. 254 192 side of the Jordan River. John may have moved from the eastern to the western side of the Jordan River, so his ministry activity was not confused with that of Jesus. Regardless both John the Baptist and Jesus exercise their ministries in the same area. As indicated above, the synoptic Gospels take a different approach to this matter. The Gospel of John continues the theme of water with the encounter between Jesus and a Samaritan woman taking place at a water-well. Jesus is travelling back to Galilee and stops to rest at a water-well on a mountain. The mountain and the water-well have historical significance associated with Jacob and as an ancestral place of worship. Water, like land, is also governed by social and cultural customs. This particular narrative is between a Jewish male and a Samaritan woman that takes place on a mountain at a water-well. The strained relationship between the Jews and Samaritans is historical dating back to before the separation of the northern and southern kingdoms. Secondly, culturally conversations are male to male and female to female. People only converse with the opposite gender when they are members of the same family. It is with this history and custom that the woman is taken by surprise when Jesus initiates a conversation with her asking her to give him a drink of water. 257 The giving and receiving of a drink of water at a water-well is more significant than a mere act of hospitality. It establishes a bond between the giver and receiver and, according to custom, they enter into a friendship contract for one year.258 In essence, Jesus is asking the Samaritan woman for a friendship contract. In this context, water becomes a catalyst to reconciliation between the estranged descendants of Jacob. The simple act of giving and receiving a drink of water between strangers is more than an act of hospitality; it comes complete with its theology that breaks down barriers that are both historical and cultural.259 In the encounter with the Samaritan woman, Jesus declares that he has the authority to provide people with ‘living water’. This reference to living water is repeated a second time during the Festival of Shelters in Jerusalem. On the last day of the festival, Jesus proclaims loudly and publicly that anyone who is thirsty and believes in him should drink from him the rivers of living water.260 His words created a scene with people debating if he was the messiah and the chief priests and Pharisees questioning the temple police why they did not arrest him. The Festival of Shelters includes the ‘Celebration of Water Libation’ a symbolic daily act that acknowledges the water miracles during the wilderness years that included; the parting 257 John 4: 9-54. Burge, Jesus and The Land, 105. 259 Mark 9: 41; Matt 10:42. 260 John 7:37-39. 258 193 of the Red Sea and Moses and Aaron drawing water from a rock. The water libation took place on days two to seven of the festival. On these specific days, water is required from the Pool of Siloam. This water was carried up the Jerusalem pilgrim road into the Temple. On the eighth day of the festival, the water ritual did not happen. It is on that day and in this context that Jesus filled the gap of having no water ritual collection or procession and cried out his statement of being able to dispense rivers of living waters to those who are thirsty. The text continues the theme of linking water analogously as a symbol of the Holy Spirit. Pools of water used for public bathing also figure in the Johannine Gospel showing another aspect of the importance of water in the ministry of Jesus. The healing of a paralysed man recorded as taking place beside a public bathing pool during a festival in Jerusalem. The story records that at the pool of Bethsaida, an angel would occasionally stir the water in the pool. The first person to enter the water would be healed of their ailments. The pool was a popular place for the ill to gather and wait for the waters to be disturbed by an angel. The Gospel of John records Jesus as healing a person who had been paralysed for thirty-eight years and waited patiently at the pool. The person was unable to enter the pool before others when the waters were disturbed. Jesus does what the waters cannot do; he healed the person by use of words. The scene of the healing is the pool of Bethsaida, and it took place on a Sabbath day which contravened the law of the Sabbath. The springs of Gihon are the source for the pool of Siloam. The water was carried into Jerusalem by two aqueducts built in the era of King Hezekiah in the eighth century. When the aqueduct and pool was constructed, it was the only source of freshwater within the walls of Jerusalem which highlighted its vital importance. The waters flowed through a humanconstructed under-ground tunnel which protected the city’s water supply when the city was under siege in times of war. The word ‘Siloam’ is the Greek transliteration of the Hebrew name Siloah which comes from the Hebrew verb shalah meaning ‘to send’.261 A rabbinic tradition identifies the pool of Siloam as the messiah’s pool. In the time of Jesus, the sick and the poor would bathe at the pool. The Gospel of John records Jesus using the pool of Siloam for the miracle of healing a man born blind. The text has in brackets the interpretation of the word Siloam as being sent. Jesus, who claims to be the messiah, ‘sent’ a man born blind to a pool called ‘sent’ also known as the messiah’s pool. Later in John’s gospel, of course, Jesus says to the disciples, ‘As the 261 Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. (Michigan: Baker House Books, 1983), 575. 194 Father sent me, so I am sending you.’262 The sending and being sent motif provides a further indication of Jesus’ identity and of the work that he is doing. Similar to the healing at the pool of Bethsaida, this healing also happened on a Sabbath. This healing too contravened the Sabbath law, allegedly, and added to the Pharisee’s dislike of Jesus. The Pharisees later investigated the healing. In response to their criticism however, Jesus explains that he is doing the work of his Father. Healing turns out to be Sabbath work for it gives to those who are afflicted relief from their burdens and the gift of new life. The custom of foot washing is an old biblical custom where a host would provide water for guests to wash their feet, provide a servant to wash the feet of guests, or even show humility as the host and wash the feet of the guests. The first biblical evidence of this custom is when Abraham provides water to his three guests who appeared by the oaks of Mamre.263 The same practice was observed by Lot when he received visitors in Sodom, and also by Laban when he received Abraham’s servant who was sent on a mission to find a wife for Isaac.264 The book of Samuel gives a further example of the foot washing custom when David sent his servants to bring Abigail, the widow of Nabal, to live as his wife. When the servants arrive, Abigail washes their feet as a sign of humility.265 The Johannine Gospel of John interprets Old Testament narratives through a New Testament lens giving a sacramental element to the historical custom of foot washing. John follows a similar sequence of events concerning the arrest of Jesus as is found in the synoptic Gospels. The pattern of events includes; Jesus’s preparation to celebrate the Passover, the Lord’s Supper, prediction of Judas’ betrayal, prediction of Peter’s denial, and then the arrest. The only difference between the synoptic Gospels and John’s version is the replacement of the Lord’s Supper with the foot-washing ceremony. In the synoptic Gospels, the central action of Jesus on Passover night was instituting the Eucharist which would become a sacrament in the early Church. In the Gospel of John, the foot-washing ceremony replaced the Eucharist as the central action of Jesus as he prepared to celebrate the Passover. This act, where water is the central element in the narrative, expresses the religious values of purification, humility and servitude. Another water narrative not recorded in the Synoptic Gospels but considered by John to be significant enough to include in his Gospel is water and blood running out from the side 262 John 17: 18; 20: 21. Gen 18:4. 264 Gen 19:2, 24:32. 265 1 Sam 25:41. 263 195 of Jesus after a spear has pierced it.266Jesus is already dead, and the breaking of his legs was not required. John says that these things occurred that the scriptures might be fulfilled. One such fulfilment scripture is an oracle from the book of Zechariah entitled, mourning for the pierced one: And I will pour out a spirit of compassion and supplication on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that, when they look on the one whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn.267 The text from John has a triple meaning, firstly to confirm and explain the practical human death of Jesus. Secondly, to fulfil a messianic prophecy. Finally, this particular narrative and scene act as a pre-resurrection climax to the motif of water in the Gospel of John. Water references from this moment in the Gospel of John anticipate a post-resurrection motif. In summary, water is an important theme in the canonical Gospels. Water-wells are places that have a historic memory where people meet, form relationships and reconciliation take place. Water is governed by social customs to which Jesus gives new meaning and interpretation. Water is used for physical sustenance and for public and ritual bathing where people are purified and healed. Finally, Jesus gives water a sacramental value in foot washing. In six of the narratives, water is associated with the Holy Spirit. Water is one of the signs that is used for the Holy Spirit. The canonical Gospels all agree that Jesus comes to his cousin John the Baptist to be baptised in the Jordan River. John the Baptist announces to the Pharisees and Sadducees that he baptises with water, but Jesus baptises with the Holy Spirit.268 Water signifies in this instance an important link between Christology and Pneumatology. In the next section, the theme and imagery of water becomes focussed on the significance of Lake Galilee as an essential motif in the mission of Jesus. The Sea of Galilee Situated in northeast Israel between the Golan Heights and the Jordan Rift Valley is the Sea of Galilee also known as Lake Galilee. It is fifty-four km in circumference, twenty-one kilometres in length, thirteen kilometres at its widest point, and reaches a depth of forty-three metres. It has a double source with the Jordan River flowing through it from north to south, and natural 266 John 19: 31-37. Zech 12:10. 268 Mark 1:8; Matt 3:11; Luke 3:16. 267 196 underground springs also feed it. As a Lake it is the second-lowest lake in the world after the Dead Sea and the lowest fresh-water Lake in the world. Many of the Old Testament references to the Sea of Galilee are related to tribal allocations where it is a boundary marker between different Israelite tribes. The Book of Numbers contains the first biblical reference to the Sea of Galilee as the eastern boundary of the land of Canaan. Numbers names it as the Sea of Chinnereth. There is no explanation for the name Chinnereth, but a fortified town named Chinnereth appears on another list for the tribe of Naphtali.269 The sea forms the eastern boundary of the land of Canaan with the eastern boundary running from Hazar-enan in the north to the Dead Sea in the south.270 The book of Joshua records Moses as providing an inheritance of land to the tribe of Gadites that included the lower end of the Sea of Chinnereth.271 Both Mark and Matthew call it the Sea of Galilee. John calls it the Sea of Tiberias. Only Luke calls it Lake Galilee. Luke is correct in his description as a lake is surrounded by land and has no connection to a sea. Lake Gennesaret is a Greek form of Chinnereth.272 Another Greek name is Tiberias that is used in the Gospel of John. The city of Tiberias stands on the western shore of the sea and is the name of the second Roman emperor. This city is built on the site of Rakkath, an ancient fortified town that appears on the same list as Chinnereth.273 In the first century CE, a continuous network of linked settlement and villages skirted the Sea of Galilee that aptly expressed its Hebrew name of Galîl meaning ‘ring’ or ‘circle.’ Geographically it describes a linked ‘circuit’ of towns and villages scattered around the Sea. Significant settlements around the Sea of Galilee included Capernaum, Chorazin, Bethsaida, Magdala and Tiberias. Capernaum was the central city of Galilee that supported a thriving commercial fishing industry. These coastal settlements offered Jesus a network of coastal towns and villages and several ports that provide access to inland villages. The following table provides information concerning references to the Sea of Galilee in the canonical Gospels. 269 Josh 19:35. Num 34:11. 271 Josh 13: 27. 272 Easton’s Revised Bible Dictionary Online, (accessed 25 June 2019), https://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/gennesaret 273 Josh 19:35. 270 197 Table 6: The Sea of Galilee in the Gospels. Sea of / Lake Galilee274 Mark Matthew Luke Jesus choses four fishermen beside Lake Galilee Jesus calls Levi and teaches 1:14-20 4:12-22 5:1-11 2:23-22 Does not locate this by the lake Does not locate this by the lake A large crowd gathers by the Lake and Jesus heals many people Jesus teaches while he is sitting in a boat on the Lake Jesus goes to stay in Capernaum a town by Lake Galilee Jesus calms a storm while out on Lake Galilee Jesus and his disciples cross the Lake to Gerasa and heals a man with evil spirits Jesus and disciples go back across lake and heals more people 3: 7-12 Jesus takes his disciples away in a boat and feeds 5000 people 4:1-9 13:1-9 4:13 4:35-41 8:23-27 8:22-25 5:1-20 8:28-34 8:26-39 5:1-20 9:1-8 8:40-56 6:30-44 14:13-21 No reference to going away in a boat. Jesus walks on water to his 6:45-52 disciples who are in a boat on Lake Galilee Jesus crosses Lake Galilee to 6:53 Gennesaret and heals people The crowd goes to look for Jesus across the lake The crowd find Jesus on the other side of the lake where he reveals to them that he is the bread of life. After encountering the Canaanite woman in Tyre/Sidon Jesus returns to Israel by Lake Galilee After feeding 4000 people Jesus hops in a boat and goes to the Magadan territory The disciples cross over to the other side of the lake 14:22-33 274 John 6:1-14 6:15-21 14:34-36 6:22-24 6:25-35 15:29-31 15:39 16:5 Also referred to as, Lake Tiberias 198 Jesus appears to the disciples at Lake Tiberias (Galilee) postresurrection Total 21:1-14 10 12 4 5 As the table shows, the Sea of Galilee is a prominent geographical feature in the mission and ministry of Jesus. In the synoptic Gospels it is a place where Jesus choses his first disciples. Other functions of the lake are as a teaching place for Jesus, a travel route and as a place where the manifestation of Jesus’ authority takes place. In the Gospel of Mark and Matthew, the Sea of Galilee is the departure point for the journey to Jerusalem. Post resurrection in the Gospel of John it takes on even more importance as the place of arrival where the risen Jesus goes to meet his disciples. The Sea of Galilee is an important geographical feature for the first six chapters of the Gospel of Mark who sketches a picture in which the Sea of Galilee is the centre of Jesus’ teaching and healing ministry. Mark disperses his sea narratives equally between teaching and healing while the remaining two narratives, the calming of the storm and the walking on water may be understood as manifestations of Jesus identity as sovereign over creation. In the seaside teaching texts, Mark provides images of large crowds of thousands of people jostling each other for a space to listen as Jesus taught.275 In the second teaching episode Mark gives an image of Jesus sitting in a boat on the sea, teaching a crowd. The size of the crowd forced Jesus to leave the foreshore and teach while seated safety in a boat on the sea. Sulphur springs in Tiberias made the Sea of Galilee a popular place for the ill and infirm. This explains why there was always a large number of unwell people waiting to be healed in those areas that Jesus visited by boat.276 In the seaside healing passages, Mark provides scenes of people bringing the sick to Jesus, of people jostling to get physically closer to him, of people reaching out to touch the fringe of his cloak in the hope of being healed, and of people ostracised for being possessed by demons. The Gospel of Matthew contains more references to the Sea of Galilee than any other Gospel. The references are spread out consistently over the twelve chapters in total from chapter four to sixteen. The Sea of Galilee provides a vital inland waterway that Jesus takes advantage of to extend his mission. On different occasions Jesus uses the sea to ‘cross over to the other side of the lake’,277 Alternatively Jesus uses the sea as an access way to get to deserted 275 Mark 2:13, 4:1-9. Mark 2:1-12, 5:1-20, 9:14-29. 277 Matt 8:18, 14:34, 16.5. 276 199 places with his disciples278 or to go to a different territory.279 By using the sea in this manner it becomes an essential tool for evangelism. Of the canonical Gospels, Luke has the least references to the lake, mentioning it in only two chapters. References to the lake in the Gospel of Luke references are sandwiched between other narratives. In chapter five Jesus appears on the shore of the lake and chooses his first disciples. After this, no further mention is made of the lake until chapter eight. The lake then makes a second cameo appearance as Jesus makes a return trip across the lake, calming a storm in route. After this trip the lake disappears entirely from the Lukan Gospel. The Gospel of John has condensed Jesus’ ministry around Lake Tiberias into one-third of chapter six. John fits references adequately into his substantial package of water-based narratives. The Johannine Gospel has Jesus using the lake mainly as a travel route with large crowds following him. Despite putting distance between himself and the crowd, they still track Jesus and manage to follow him, regardless of what side of the Lake he is on. The echo of Psalm 23 is noteworthy here. In preparation for the feeding of the five thousand, Jesus has the crowd recline on the green grass (See John 6: 10). Immediately thereafter, Jesus walks on the water and stills the choppy water. This follows the Psalmist’s sequence: the Lord, makes me lie down in pastures green; he leads me beside still waters. John makes it clear in Chapter 6, that the Lord is at work again here, feeding the five thousand and stilling the waters of Lake Galilee. John has only one manifestation on the lake with Jesus walking on water. John’s most significant contribution concerning the Lake is that it is a meeting place of Jesus and the disciples after the resurrection. The lake, along with Emmaus and Bethany are the only named locations post-resurrection where Jesus meets his followers. The first disciples: Attention to the location where Jesus calls the first disciples and to where this event fits in the structure of the Gospel raises a number of issues. Mark as the earliest Gospel locates the event at the Sea of Galilee. The synoptic Gospels agree and Matthew and Luke both add more details to their version as the following chart shows. 278 279 Matt 14:13. Matt 8:28; 14:34; 15:39. 200 Chart 4: Flow of events in the Synoptic Gospels. The Gospel of Mark: Baptism Jordan River Temptations Wilderness Call of first disciples Sea of Galilee The Gospel of Matthew: Baptism Jordan River Temptations Wilderness Call of first disciples Capernaum: Sea of Galilee The Gospel of Luke: Baptism Temptations Jordan River Wilderness Begins Ministry in Galilee Rejection Nazareth Call of first disciples Lake Gennesaret Matthew adds to Mark’s version by naming Capernaum as the sea coastal town where the event took place. Luke makes extensive additions including that Jesus was teaching beside the lake and on the lake seated in a boat belonging to a fisherman named Simon. Jesus asked Simon to take him out onto into deep waters and cast the net. Simon also had partners in the fishing trade named James and John, the sons of a person named Zebedee. The draught of fish was too large for two people to haul in so Simon had to call on his partners for help. Luke’s additions are also structural adding five narratives prior to the call narrative. The first narrative after the temptations says that Jesus had built up a reputation with his ministry as a report was spread throughout the surrounding country.280 Jesus ventured on a mission tour of Galilee and arrived in his hometown of Nazareth speaking in the synagogue. He receives a good reception but criticised those listening which results in Jesus being run out of town.281 Jesus continued on his mission tour healing people in Capernaum. He quietly leaves the area but is confronted by a crowd of people who try to prevent him leaving the area. After explaining his purpose however, he is allowed to commence a preaching tour of synagogues in Judea. Attention to the geography brings these additions to the forefront showing that Luke’s version is a separate scheme of events from the mission tour. Attention to the geographic descriptions and their placement in the flow of events allows for other details to be noticed. Mark and Matthew have the call narrative following immediately after the baptism and temptation narratives. Theologically the flow of events between the two Gospels is, baptism and then discipleship. From the additions in Luke extra 280 281 Luke 4:14-15. Luke 4:16-30. 201 depth is added to the theology of baptism and discipleship. These are now associated with acts of charity,282 and include the evangelistic element of preaching and catching people.283 Through attention to the geography we see that the Johannine Gospel challenges many of the synoptic views and offers an alternative theology. This is evident in the final part of the chart below: Chart 5: Flow of events in the Gospel of John. The Gospel of John: Baptism/ First disciples River Jordan Ministry/ Death/ Resurrection Galilee / Judea / Lake Post-resurrection Sea of Tiberias The lake does not feature until chapter six, about one third of the way into the Gospel and even then, it is a cameo appearance as it exits the story at the end of the chapter with a final encore appearance at the end of the Gospel. The lake appears in the context of Jesus’ mission sandwiched between many other narratives centred around water. The call of the first disciples is still based around water but it is the Jordan River in the context of the baptism of Jesus. This geographic location and order of events ties baptism and discipleship together into one package rather than treating them as separate entities. What is significant is that the lake figures prominently post-resurrection as a meeting place between the risen Jesus and his disciples. The lake becomes a key to understanding Jesus’ evangelistic legacy and his new commandment to ‘love one another’ in a post-resurrection era. Pre-resurrection Jesus had built his community of followers around the shores of Lake Galilee while the Jordan River also plays an important part because that is where he selects his followers. The Sea of Galilee becomes, in turn, a valuable teaching and training venue. Postresurrection, the Sea of Galilee features again as ‘the disciples had to return to the place where they first met Jesus in order to be restored and continue his mission’.284 Manifestations on the Sea of Galilee: There are two narratives where Jesus manifests his authority over the Sea of Galilee, the first where he calms a storm and the second where he walks miraculously on the sea. The synoptic Gospels record the calming of the storm while the narrative of Jesus walking on the sea is recorded in Mark, Matthew and John, but not in Luke. 282 Luke 4:31-41. Luke 4:43, 5:10. 284 Orlando E Costas, Liberating News, A Theology of Contextual Evangelization. (Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989), 59. 283 202 In both narratives, there are too many questionable elements to say that the narratives are a historical event. In the narratives, Jesus becomes a hero figure who saves lives. This heroism is questionable for two simple reasons. Firstly, Jesus is from inland Nazareth, and there is no evidence provided in the text that suggests that he was familiar with the water or with sailing. Without a fishing background he cannot be assumed to have knowledge of water currents and weather patterns of the Sea of Galilee. Secondly, some of the disciples supposedly struggling in a boat on the Sea of Galilee were professional commercial fishermen who made a living from the lake. As fulltime fishermen who practice their trade they would have been well acquainted with seamanship, sail craft, water currents and weather patterns on the Sea of Galilee. Their knowledge and experience would have informed them that it is unreasonable to set out to sea in a boat, in the evening, rowing against the wind to get to the other side of the sea many kilometres away. Their knowledge and understanding of the moods of the lake and weather patterns, wind strength and direction, would have given them insight into conditions when sudden storms were likely to happen. These inconsistencies point to both narratives as being theological creations by the writer or editors of the Gospels. More supporting evidence for the narratives being a theological creation rather than simply reporting a historical event is the selection of words used in the text. In each of the narratives, the land and sea are held in contrast and Mark takes great care in his text to distinguish between the land and the sea. In the narrative of Jesus teaching on the Sea of Galilee Jesus is placed sitting in a boat on the sea. In contrast the people are gathered together beside the sea on the land.285 Of the words Mark has at his disposal he selects his words carefully to show the sea as a barrier between Jesus and the crowd. Jesus is seated in a boat on the sea teaching a crowd gathered on the land. A large part of the content of his teaching is a parable about a sower, seeds, soil and the ground. The scene and the content bring land and water into contrast not as opposition but as counterparts. The land is a stable environment that does not move. The mention of land orientated language produces memories of the land that come layered with history, ancestors, genealogies, events, gifts, covenants, laws, obligations, promises, blessings and curses. The sea, in contrast, ebbs and flows and is capable of changing its mood from calm and passive to a force of nature capable of destruction. The mention of the sea brings memories of watery chaos in the creation story. 285 Mark 4:1-9. 203 Jesus concludes his teaching session and embarks on his next episode, which results in him calming a storm while in a boat on the Sea of Galilee. After calming the storm, the narrative concludes with Jesus disembarking the boat in the country of the Gerasenes.286 Luke substitutes the word ‘country’ for ‘land’ saying ‘Jesus stepped out on land’.287 The land is more of a feature in the narrative of Jesus walking on the Sea of Galilee. Mark gives a vivid picture of the disciples sitting in a boat on the sea in a problematic situation while Jesus is standing alone on the ‘land’.288 At the end of the story, Jesus and the disciples come to ‘land’ at Gennesaret.289 In the Matthew text, the boat, battered by the waves, was far from the land.290 Similarly, in the Johannine version, the land is still a feature when the boat reaches the land toward which they were going.291 Any combination of ‘sea’ words could have been used without compromising the storyline. The word ‘land’ has been included in these sea-based narratives to show the land and sea are counterparts and, echoing the separation of the dry land from the sea in the story of creation, Jesus is ordering them again to his purpose. From Genesis 1:1 we learn that the sea and land have been in a relationship where they are mutual counterparts, not opponents. Water is often depicted as representing chaos, constant movement, instability, a threat and a danger. This is the opposite of how the land is viewed as a stable entity, well ordered, and promising security. According to Elizabeth Malbon, Jesus mediates the opposition of sea and land by manifesting the power of God.292 In both narratives, Jesus reconciles the land and sea as counterparts rather than as forces in opposition. Jesus walks on water as he walks on land. Jesus teaches on land and on the sea; he offers manifestations of his true identity on the sea as he also does on the land, and while he is up a mountain. Jesus thinks laterally and utilises the sea as a barrier between him and the crowds. He uses the mountain in the same way when in need of personal space from the crowds. Jesus also travels by sea as he travels by land using the sea as a well- connected travel route that provides access to distant inland settlements. In the narrative of the feeding of five thousand people, Jesus uses elements from both the land (loaves of barley bread) and sea (two fish). Jesus treats the sea the same as he treats the land walking on the sea in the same way that 286 Mark 5:1; 8: 28. Luke 8: 27. 288 Mark 6:47. 289 Mark 6:53. 290 Matt 14:24. 291 John 6:21. 292 Elizabeth Struthers Malbon, ‘The Jesus of Mark and the Sea of Galilee’. Journal of Biblical Literature, vol 103, issue 3, September 1984. 363-377. 287 204 he walks on the land. During stormy weather, Jesus sleeps peacefully in a boat as he would sleep in a bed in a house during a storm. Jesus’ mediation of the land and sea as counterparts is consistent with the Genesis creation narratives that show water and land as mutual counterparts. On day three of creation, the water gives space to the land to emerge. In order for the land to produce life, it needs water. Accordingly, the water rises from the earth and waters the ground allowing the land to produce life. This contrasts with the watery chaos of tohu wa-bohu. The Gospel of Matthew promotes the land, the sea and the mountain as being in a triangular inter-relationship. After Jesus feeds the multitudes, he sends his disciples across to the other side of the Sea and remains to pray on a mountain.293 After completing his prayers on the mountain, Jesus walks on water to his disciples. After his encounter with a Canaanite woman, Jesus went along by Lake Galilee and climbed a mountain where he heals many people.294 When Jesus begins the process of selecting his disciples, he begins his selection by the water, either the Sea of Galilee or by the Jordan River. In the synoptic Gospels, the mountain is the location where the final selection of the twelve is completed. The land, the water and the mountain all have a fixed biblical meaning that Jesus brings into theological unison as working together to reveal his identity, nature and characteristics. Conclusion: In this chapter I have examined the Christological aspects that the geography brings to Gospel narratives. Land and water have been major features in the Biblical story since the opening verses of the Bible. In his mission Jesus shows that land and water are counterparts and not opposites striving against each other. When viewed as counterparts, water and land support the Christological claim of Jesus Christ. It shows him to be sovereign over both land and sea. In his use of water in different contexts Jesus brings a new understanding that water is not a raging chaos to be feared or brought under control. Instead Jesus adds a sacramental value to water in baptism, foot washing and in offering hospitality. The land consists of mountains, deserts, the wilderness, fields and a level place. They are all significant places where parts of the identity of Jesus are revealed, his values are taught, people are healed and are fed, physically and spiritually. 293 294 Matt 14: 22-33. Matt 15:29. 205 Details in the text extend beyond the human characters and the immediate storyline to reveal something about who Jesus is and about the work he does, namely, the work of the Father. This becomes evident when we see the links between the geography in the text and the Christological themes of the gospels. Christology is enriched with a wide variety of new words, images, concepts and metaphors that express and illustrate the identity of Jesus Christ and what it means to have faith in him. We have paid particular attention to the land which is layered with stories of people who have interacted with the land and developed new ways to express themselves in relation to the land. In the Old Testament, it was Canaanites in particular who were identified as ‘people of the land’. Jesus is a descendent of these people and so in the next chapter we will explore more fully how Christology might be developed through the lens of the people of the land. 206 CHAPTER EIGHT The people of the land and Jesus Introduction: This research project began in chapter two with a self-reflection on my own Christological influences. The thesis then widened in chapter three to listen to and incorporate other Māori Christological reflections. Chapter four then identified and expanded on two major themes from the previous chapters with the first theme being, whakapapa (genealogy), and the second theme being, land, people and God. The thesis then applied a Māori epistemology of whakapapa to the genealogy of Jesus contained in the Gospel of Matthew and found that a commonality between the women named in the genealogy was their indigeneity as ‘Canaanite women of the land.’ A Māori epistemology of whakapapa was also applied to the genealogy of Jesus contained in the Gospel of Luke and land emerged as a central feature of the genealogy. In the previous chapter a Māori epistemology of land was applied to the land in the Bible to ascertain and evaluate the significance of land for Christology. This chapter returns to the findings from chapter five and revisits the significance of the term ‘people of the land’ in the biblical context. I will begin by giving an outline of the significance of the term people of the land. Secondly, selected Old Testament texts will be analysed to identify who is defined as being the people of the land in Israel’s story. Thirdly, the Old Testament discourse concerning the Canaanites as the people of the land will be examined. Fourthly, the encounter that takes place between Jesus and a Canaanite woman in the Gospel of Matthew will be analysed for its Christological significance for the people of the land that gives a missional context for mission to indigenous peoples. Tangata Whenua: The Old Testament contains references to a select group of people who are described as ‘people of the land’.1 This term resonates with me as a person who describes himself as ‘tangata whenua’ meaning people of the land. Tangata means person while tāngata is plural meaning people. Tangata also means people as a group with a singular identity.2 Whenua, in one context, means land but, in another context, means placenta. A custom still practised today is to bury the placenta of a new-born baby in a significant place. This practice signifies the relationship 1 Gen 23:7, 12. Herbert W Williams, A Dictionary of the Māori Language. (Wellington: R E Owen, Government Printer, 1957), 379. 2 207 between the land and the new-born child. Tangata whenua can have a double meaning of, people born of the placenta and born of the land. In pūrākau (origin narratives) there are many tribal narratives about the relationship between the people and their land. These narratives provide a person with tūrangawaewae, a place to stand in the world which is a birth-right that connects and empowers people with the landscape, with mountains, hills, valleys, rivers, lakes, waterways. These geographical features are associated with ancestors becoming an expression of an internal sense of security and foundation. In 2020 many Māori brought up outside their culture have little understanding of what it means to be tangata whenua and their connections to the land are based on the lands economic value rather than identity. Tangata whenua entails belonging to the land rather than the land belonging to people. Identity is attached to the land, which is part of the criteria of personhood and non-personhood. According to Sister Tui Cadogan of Ngai Tahu, a landless person is a non-person as they have no tūrangawaewae, no place to stand in this world.3 Land is integral to personhood, the more land they have the greater their mana (status, prestige or authority). The opposite is correct when they have no land, their mana diminishes. To be tangata whenua is to be born from the land and continually be reborn through intimate relationships with the earth. The inclusion of the words ‘people of the land’ allows me as a person of the land in Aotearoa New Zealand to enter into the biblical world of the Old Testament and explore what it means to be a person of the land in a historical and theological biblical context. It is not an invitation to be a cultural tourist viewing the text from the outside but an invitation to be an active participant in the text as an observer. The reader is given the privilege to experience first-hand what it means to see, hear and feel words and actions from the perspective of a person of the land. One of the sad realities of being tangata whenua in Aotearoa New Zealand is that the connection with the land also comes with the pain of alienation from the land. The loss of land came through, treaty, conquest and colonisation. From having total land ownership of sixty-six million acres before the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 tangata whenua were left with less than two million acres by the 1930s. Most of the land that remains in Māori ownership is inaccessible and so heavily regulated that it is impossible to develop. Being tangata whenua Cadigan, Tui, “A Three-Way Relationship: God, Land, People A Māori Woman Reflects” in Land and Place He Whenua, He Wāhi: Spiritualties from Aotearoa New Zealand, eds. H. Bergin, & S. Smith, (Auckland: Accent Publications. 2004), 29-43. 3 208 today means having a theology of activism that is expressed through various methodologies including protests, pickets, petitions, legal challenges, rallies, demonstrations, occupations, hīkoi (marches), vigils, civil disobedience, lockouts and boycotts. What makes activism a theology for many Māori is that activism is informed and inspired by biblical models. Activism is inspired by the stories of the prophets who pursued justice, and by the stories of Jesus who publicly challenged officials over their lack of care for the least in society and who advocated for a more just society. These models inform a theology of activism in which the search for justice is indispensable. This type of active theology follows in the traditions of Te Whiti o Rongomai and Tohu Kākahi the Pai Mārire prophets of Parihaka who created the strategy of non-violent passive resistance. Mention must also be made here of Rua Kenana the prophet of Maungapōhatu who also met extreme violence with non-violence. In 2019 one-hundred and three years after the murder of his son and nephew by armed constabulary, Te Rua was given a pardon for crimes that he did not commit and an apology from the Crown for his unjust trial and prison sentence. All three of these Māori prophets were publicly labelled radicals and activists but they found their inspiration in the scriptures, in the Old Testament prophets, and in the person of Jesus Christ. This experience of land alienation and public disobedience equips Māori readers of the bible with further critical and analytical tools to explore the world of the biblical text. Such tools include the capacity to identify in the text words, actions and details, whether attitudinal or structural, that dehumanise people. The modes of dehumanisation can include racism, stereotyping, racial profiling, prejudice, discrimination, and coercion. These critical tools demand a level of conscientisation so that the scholar can identify and critique the misuse of power, and the lack of power in relationships between individuals, between different ethnic groups, and people of different gender, within the text. It is with these points in mind that my attention turns to the people of the land in Scripture, to their conscientisation of Jesus as tangata whenua, and to his radical actions of resistance to bring about change. As we will see later in this chapter Jesus himself undergoes a process of conscientisation in his encounter with the Canaanite woman that led him to adopt a theology of activism. People of the land in Old Testament discourse: In its original usage, the Hebrew word for the people of the land is ‘am-hā’areş. This word originated to distinguish between the Jewish community and the rest of the population of 209 Palestine.4 The first reference to the ‘people of the land’ in Old Testament discourse appears in the book of Genesis. When Sarah died at Hebron in the land of Canaan, her husband Abraham successfully negotiated with Ephron, a Hittite leader, to purchase the cave of Machpelah as a burial place for his wife. In the negotiations, Abraham twice acknowledges Ephron and his Hittite people as the ‘people of the land’.5 By genealogy, Hittites are part of the Canaanite family. The text recognises, as does Abraham, that a person of the land can exercise ownership over the land in their territory. The next recorded account of the term, people of the land, is in the book of Exodus. Moses and Aaron negotiate with Pharaoh to have their people released from slavery. Pharaoh’s response to their request is to describe the Hebrews as being more numerous than his own Egyptian people whom he describes as the people of the land.6 Pharaoh is the landowner, and with his people, he exercises ownership over the land of Egypt making them the people of the land in their own country. The text shows that the term people of the land is used widely in the Ancient Near East by the Israelites, Canaanites and Egyptians. At this stage in history, Israelites are not considered to be people of the land as they do not have any land to call their own nor have they attained recognition as a sovereign people or nation. They have status at this stage only as slaves of another people. The Book of Leviticus is primarily about maintaining ritual, legal and moral practices. Leviticus contains two references to the people of the land within the context of the holiness code that places limitations and prohibitions on specific practices and associations. One such prohibition concerns the making of child sacrifice to the Canaanite God, Molech. This section names three groups of people, all the people of Israel, the aliens who reside in Israel, and the people of the land. All three groups of people are prohibited upon punishment of death from sacrificing their children to Molech. The people of the land are responsible for administering punishment to those breaking the prohibition. Failure to carry out their duty would result in God turning his face against them and isolating them and their family. 7 The text does not suggest a change in the identity of the people of the land from the Canaanites who are neither Israelite or aliens in their own land. The text implies that the people of the land have a place with an enforcement role in wider Israelite society. 4 John Gray, I & II Kings, Old Testament Library Collection. (London: SCM Press, 1977), 577-578. Gen 23: 7. 6 Exod 5:5. 7 Lev 20: 2, 4. 5 210 The Book of Numbers contains one reference to the people of the land.8 As Israel arrives on the border of the Promised Land, Moses sends a small group of men to spy out the land of Canaan. When they return, they provide a favourable report about the richness of the land but they also report on the size and strength of the Canaanite people which strikes fear into the Israelites. God requires of them two things, firstly to remain faithful and not rebel against God. Secondly, they are not to fear the people of the land. God reassures the Israelites that the protection covering the people of the land has been removed. This is confirmation that the people of the land in the Book of Numbers are the Canaanite people who live in the land. The references in the Pentateuch to people of the land take place in a changing context that also effects relationships. Abraham describes Ephron the Hittite and the Canaanite leaders as the people of the land. This description of the Canaanites remains unchanged as Abraham and his family settle amongst the Canaanites and start to develop into a distinctive and acknowledged tribe of their own. When the descendants arrive back in the land of Canaan after a long absence it is by force of arms that they win their place in the land and the positive relationship that their ancestors had with the people of the land becomes a violent relationship. The era of the monarchs is covered in the Books of 1 and 2 Kings and contains five references to the people of the land in the second Book. What is of interest in these references is the role that the people of the land play in the political aspects of Israelite society. At the coronation of Joash who becomes the tenth monarch in unbroken succession, the people of the land are mentioned. Being mentioned in a coronation text means that they have a prominent role in proceedings. They are depicted as rejoicing at the coronation of the new monarch by blowing trumpets in celebration.9 On such occasions the blowing of trumpets in celebration is affirmation of the coronation and its triumphant completion. The blowing of trumpets dates back to the accession of Solomon to the throne when the trumpets were blown in celebration after his anointing with people chanting ‘long live King Solomon.’10 After the coronation of Joash as a demonstration of their loyalty to the new King, the people of the land tear down the altars and images of Baal and kill the priest of Baal. Six generations after the death of Joash, his descendant Manasseh ascends the throne at twelve years of age with a reign spanning fifty-five years. Manasseh was loyal to the practices of the original inhabitants of the land who the Israelites had dispossessed.11 After his death, his 8 Num 14: 9. 2 Kgs 11:14, 18. 10 1 Kgs 1:39. 11 2 Kgs 21: 2. 9 211 son Amon took the throne and continued his father’s practises which proved unpopular leading to conspiracy and his assassination after a brief two-year reign. The people of the land play a prominent role in ensuring that hereditary succession continues in an unbroken line to Amon’s son Josiah.12 Firstly, they took revenge on those who had conspired against Amon and secondly, they ensure that Josiah becomes King. There is nothing in the narratives of Manasseh, Amon or Josiah to suggest that the people of the land are not the Canaanites. When Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon captured Jerusalem, he took the treasures of the Temple and a selection of people. Taken into captivity were ten thousand captives that included the officials, the nobility, the warriors, the artisans, the smiths and the King’s family, including his wives. The people listed are all Israelite. Left behind to rebuild their nation were the poorest people of the land.13 This group of people became the vinedressers and tillers of the land.14 As a final act of conquest sixty people of the land were taken and executed in the land of Hamath.15 Debate exists among various commentators over whom 2 Kings defines as being people of the land. According to John Gray, the people of the land were a “sacral community of free men, provincial notables.”16 Their significance is that they appear at critical times. When the monarchy is under threat or when the monarchy changes hands, the people of the land intervene to ensure that hereditary succession takes place and that the rightful heir ascends to the throne and continues the line of David.17 This extra responsibility adds another aspect to the role ascribed to the people of the land in “taking part in political and constitutional emergencies.”18 Marvin A Sweeney uses the monarchical role that the people of the land have as evidence that the people of the land changed from the Canaanites to a new group who were “leading Judean figures.”19 Volkmar Fritz agrees that they were “full citizens of Judea who were tasked to maintain the dynasty by their choice.”20 Both Sweeney and Fritz seem to be unaware that the people of the land are also safeguarding the line of David to ensure that the 12 2 Kgs 21:24. 2 Kgs 24: 13-17. 14 2 Kgs 25: 12. 15 2 Kgs 25: 19-21. 16 Gray, I & II Kings, 769 17 See: 2 Kings 14:21, 21:24, 23:30. 18 James A Montgomery and Henry Snyder Gehman, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Kings. (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1951), 421-423. 19 Marvin A Sweeney, I & II Kings, The Old Testament Library. (Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 2007), 468. 20 Volkmar Fritz, 1 & 2 Kings, A Continental Commentary. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 394. 13 212 prophecies that the messiah would be a descendant of David have the best possibility of coming to fruition. 2 Kings does not explicitly state that the people of the land were not Canaanite. The various texts do say who the people of the land are not. They are not the nobility, civic or religious officials, officers or soldiers in the military. As a grouping of people, their importance is shown when they are assigned a significant political role connected to the monarchy. If they are not Canaanite but Israelite then this is a significant change and means that the Israelites have colonised an identity that until this stage in their history belonged to the Canaanite people. The only change in the identity of the people of the land is that they are classified as being the poorest people of the land who are physically made to work the land for their subsistence. This is consistent with people in history who have been colonised as they are normally the people consigned to the lower echelons of society. The book of 2 Kings ends with the deportation of many Israelites into exile in Babylon. The Book of Ezra picks up the story with the return of the exiles to Israel. Resettling the Babylonian exiles back into Israelite society is the central theme of Ezra. The Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar when he captured Jerusalem. One of the first projects of the exiles was to take part in rebuilding the Temple. This project encountered opposition from some sections of Israel, including a group called, the people of the land. This group of people are identified by the synonym ám haâreç meaning the ignorant or the vulgar. It is a term also used by Ezra to describe the Samaritans who he identifies in the text as the antagonists who discouraged the Judeans from rebuilding the Temple.21 As a prophet, Ezra exhorted the people to follow the Torah and to keep themselves separate from non-Jewish people and their religious practices. This separatism includes the prohibition of mixed marriage. In this context, the people of the land are the original inhabitants of the land of Canaan whom Ezra names as the Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites, Ammonites, Moabites, and Amorites.22 In this list, Ezra also includes Egyptians. As an ethnic grouping, the Israelites consider themselves as containing the holy seed and inter-marriage pollutes the holy seed.23 Ezra reminds the Israelites that a condition of their inheritance of the Promised Land was that they were to maintain their racial purity as described in the Torah.24 21 Ezra 4:4. Ezra 9: 1. 23 Ezra 9:2. 24 Ezra 9:11. 22 213 These few verses are the beginning of the distorted idea that racial purity must be maintained in Israel. In response to Ezra’s prohibition of mixed marriages, Shecaniah pointed out that the prohibition had already been broken by the men who had married foreign women from the peoples of the land.25 Given that the law had not been obeyed, Shecaniah was willing to make amends by having the men send their wives and daughters away. In response, Ezra gathers together the returned exiles before the Temple in Jerusalem and commands that they are to keep themselves separate from the people of the land and the foreign wives.26 Failure to follow this law would mean having to face the wrath of God. The ruling by Ezra was not universally accepted, however; a minority of leaders objected. What followed was a detailed examination by the exiles, and a list like a wall of shame was composed of people who had already broken the anti-mixed marriage law.27 The prophet Nehemiah was a contemporary of Ezra and shared in rebuilding Israel after the return of the Babylonian exiles. Nehemiah served two terms as Governor of Judah. In his first term, he took measures to re-establish marriage laws and the Sabbath observances. In his second term, Nehemiah took much stronger action beginning with the provision of a summary of the Covenant. He broke up mixed-marriages, and religious officials had to adhere to Ezra’s prohibitions. The religious officials joined with the nobility in committing themselves to obey the commandments and separated themselves from the people of the land.28 They vowed to disallow any intermarriages between their children and the children of the people of the land. Trade with the people of the land was regulated and trading on the Sabbath and holy days was prohibited. The references to the people of the land in Jeremiah are ambiguous in providing an indefinite identification of who the people of the land are. Jeremiah gives the reasons for the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem as divine punishment for breaking the law concerning the keeping of slaves. Israelites were forbidden by law to keep other Israelites as slaves. King Zedekiah who instigated the laws later ignored his own law. The people of the land, along with several groups, are implicated in breaking the anti-slavery laws but there is no clear definition of who the people of the land are in this context. In his condemnation, Jeremiah includes the 25 Ezra 10:2. Ezra 10:11. 27 Ezra 10: 18-44. 28 Neh 10:28-31. 26 214 people of the land with the officials from Judah and Jerusalem, the eunuchs and the priests, and warns of their impending punishment.29 The two references to the people of the land in the book of Ezekiel are also ambiguous in providing a definitive identification of who the people of the land are in his writings. Ezekiel delivers to the city of Jerusalem the words of judgement and punishment for wrongful acts that have been committed by its various leaders.30 The leaders include the prophets who make false prophecies while the nobility prey on the people. The priests no longer distinguish between what is sacred and what is common while civic officials are dishonest in their practices. The people of the land are not exempt from judgement as Ezekiel holds them accountable for extorting the poor, the needy and the alien without any redress.31 Fidelity to God, the law and the Covenants is a consistent message throughout the prophetic books. Obedience brought many blessings on the land and the people while disobedience brought severe consequences for both. The prophet Haggai had an encouraging message of obedience to the people of the land reassuring them that God was a constant presence throughout history.32 Haggai introduces an inclusive way of viewing the people of the land. He uses three terms in his oracles: the people, the remnant of the people, and all the people of the land. The first term ‘the people’ can refer to any group of people within Israel or all the people of Israel. The second term, the remnant of the people refers specifically to those who have returned from exile in Babylon. Tim Meadowcroft argues that “a clear distinction between the local populace and the returning exiles cannot be a part of an understanding of the audience of these oracles.”33 Both groups, he concludes, are represented in Haggai’s selected audience. Kessler agrees with Meadowcroft that there is nothing in the text that appears to differentiate between people, thus “Haggai adopts an inclusive stance and the totality of the community is called to work.”34 This makes the people of the land a unifying and inclusive term. The last Old Testament reference to people of the land is in the book of Zechariah. The prophet is directed to deliver his message to two distinct groups, the people of the land and the priests.35 “The people of the land are equated with being the laity.”36 This highlights that 29 Jer 34: 18-20. Ezek 12:19. 31 Ezek 22:23-31. 32 Hag 2:4-5. 33 Tim Meadowcroft, Haggai. (Sheffield: Phoenix Press, 2006), 155. 34 John Kessler, The Book of Haggai, Prophecy and Society in Early Persian Yehud. (Leiden: Brill, 2002), 168169. 35 Mark J Boda, The Book of Zechariah. (Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2016), 442. 36 Boda, The Book of Zechariah, 442. 30 215 different people use the term in different ways making it inaccurate to compile all people into one grouping. Zechariah introduces a future tense to the term, people of the land. A question posed to Zechariah is a reflective question on the past. In response to a question he “all the people of the land depicting the future when all nations and people of every language will seek the Lord.”37 As a prophet, Zechariah was interested in renewing spiritual practices making them more consistent with the original intention. The rebuilding of the Temple provided an opportunity to review the attitudes toward and the practice of fasting. The people of the land are criticised and questioned about the purpose and reason for their fasting.38 The meaning of fasting had become lost, and Zechariah reminded the people that the purpose of fasting was to demonstrate loyalty to God, the law and the covenants. Having the right attitude towards fasting would result in prosperity for the people and the land. In summary, the people of the land in its original context was used to clearly distinguish between the Abrahamic family and the original inhabitants of the land as listed in Exodus 3:8.39 The list appears several times throughout the Old Testament with slight variations. The original inhabitants exercised authority over the land they occupied, and anyone who was not one of them had to seek their permission and consent on matters associated with the land. Through their interactions with the people of the land, the Abrahamic family become another settled tribe among the thirty-one city-states in Canaan. When the later generation of the Abrahamic family migrates to Egypt, the bones of their ancestors remain in the land of Canaan. Centuries later the descendants return to the land where their ancestors Abraham and Sarah are buried. As the Israelites settled into the land by right of conquest and achieved their nationhood, the people of the land became negatively stereotyped and labelled as aliens or strangers by the more powerful invaders. It was a constant reminder of the ‘otherness’ of those who inhabited the same lands. Even their kin, the Samaritans are labelled as people of the land.40 With the establishment of the monarchy, the people of the land take on a particular political role. Commentators John Gray, Marvin A Sweeney, Volkmar Fritz, James A Montgomery and Henry Snyder Gehman, argue that the people of the land are a unique sub- 37 Edgar W Conrad, Zechariah. (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999),137. Zech 7: 4-7. 39 Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, Jebusites. This list is repeated three times in the book of Exodus; 3:17; 33:2; 34:11. A variation of the list exists in Deuteronomy 7:1 which adds the Girgashites, while Nehemiah 9:8 includes the Girgashites but deletes the Hivites. 40 Ezra 4:1-4. 38 216 set of Judean society with designated political power and influence.41 The various passages from 2 Kings offer another theory about who the people of the land could be. Norman C Habel classifies the people of the land as the labour force. 42 When Israel is invaded by Babylon, the people of the land are relegated to being the poorest people who are forced to work the land as vinedressers and tillers of the soil. As the exiles return from Babylon, Israel reforms as a nation. The term ‘people of the land’ is applied in a stereotypical negative sense to distinguish between the people of Israel and the Canaanite as the original inhabitants of the Promised Land. A policy of separation is to provide sharp and clear boundaries banning mixed marriages. The ban also extends beyond humans to include forbidding the mixing of animals, crops and material.43 Once the reformation is completed by Ezra and Nehemiah, the term ‘people of the land’ is applied by the later prophets in a way that could have a double meaning referring either to a descendant of an original inhabitant or to an Israelite.44 The Canaanites as the people of the land The difficulty of researching the Canaanite people in the Old Testament is that the account of the Canaanites has a bias to it. The Old Testament is not the voice of the original inhabitants of the land known as the ‘land of Canaan’.45 It is the voice of the Israelites who usurped them in their land and eventually renamed the land that belonged to the Canaanites as the ‘land of Israel.’ The Old Testament is not a record of how the Canaanites viewed or described themselves instead it is an Israelite reflection of how they perceived the nature and identity of the Canaanites. The origins of the Canaanites are found in the book of Genesis narrative of Noah. The introduction of Canaanites into the Biblical story is negative and shows the seeds of an antiCanaanite agenda being developed. Canaan is the grandson of Noah and is the recipient of his grandfather’s curse for the actions of his father and two uncles who witnessed their own father’s 41 See: John Gray, I & II Kings, Old Testament Library Collection. (London: SCM Press, 1977); Marvin A Sweeney, I & II Kings, The Old Testament Library. (Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 2007); Volkmar Fritz, 1 & 2 Kings, A Continental Commentary. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003); James A Montgomery and Henry Snyder Gehman, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Kings. (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1951). 42 Norman C Habel, The Land is Mine, Six Biblical Land Ideologies (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1995), 135. 43 Lev 19:19. 44 Hag 2:4 and Zech 7:5. 45 The term ‘land of Canaan’ first appears in Genesis 11:31. The first mention is when Terah takes his family and heads to the land of Canaan. Abraham, the son of Terah, finally reached the land of Canaan in Genesis 12:56 and found Canaanites living there. 217 nakedness after a drunken episode. Canaan, the grandson, receives a curse to be the lowest of slaves to his brothers. Noah blesses the line of Shem and Japheth brothers of Canaan. The line of Israel descends through Shem. The emphasis of the curse is to show the extreme degree of servitude to his brothers that Canaan will experience.46 Following the Noah-Canaan narrative is a list of nations who descend from Noah. The Israelites conveniently descend from Shem, the firstborn of Noah making their line the senior line. This line of descent from Canaan includes the people who become known as Canaanites, Amorites, Girgashites, Hivites, Arkites, Sinites, Arvadites, Zemarites and the Hamathites. Collectively they are called Canaanites after their common ancestor Canaan. This line of descent is the junior line. Revisioning this genealogy and relatedness through a Māori lens, while there is emphasised placed on the senior and junior lines there is equal emphasis placed on the relatedness. At many marae when two closely related iwi gather at an event evidently there will be debates on which iwi is the more senior by genealogy. This point is, the more the relationship is publicly debated it shows the importance of the connections and the value of the association. The following genealogy shows the descent of the Canaanites from the ancestor Canaan but the genealogy also shows the closeness and the relatedness between the Canaanites and the Israelites who are both descendants of two brothers and have a common ancestor in Noah. Genealogy 9: Genealogy of Israelites and Canaanites. Noah Shem Ham Arpachshad Cush Egypt Put Shelah Eber Japheth Canaan Sidon Jebusites Amorites Girgashites Arkites Hivites Heth Arvadites Sinites Hamathites Zemarites Abraham ISRAELITES CANAANITES 46 J Harold Ellens and Wayne G Rollins, Psychology and the Bible, A New Way to Read Scriptures (Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2004), 54. 218 As the descendants of Noah spread out to populate the earth the territory of the Canaanites extended from Sidon to Gerar as far as Gaza and in the direction of Sodom to Lasha.47 This territory is known as the ‘land of Canaan.’ The book of Genesis lists among the original inhabitants of the Promised Land the Canaanites, Amorites, Hittites, Hivites, Perizzites, Jebusites, Moabites, Edomites and Philistines.48 The land that they inhabit is referred to by various names including; the land of Canaan,49 Land of the Philistines,50 Land of the Amorites,51 Land of the Moabites,52 and the land of the Edomites.53 The origins of the Canaanites lay in the land of Canaan while the origins of the Israelites lay outside the same land. The following map shows the placement of the people who inhabited the land of Canaan before the arrival of the nation of Israel: Map 1: Map of the Land of Canaanite and the Canaanite tribes. 54 47 Gen 10: 15-20. Josh 9:1, 11:3, 12:8, 49 Multiple references from Genesis 11:31 to 1 Samuel. 50 Zeph 2:5. 51 Josh 24:8. 52 Judg 11:17-18. 53 Judg 11:17-18. 54 Bible History Online, (accessed 5 December 2019), https//www.bible-history.com/maps/ 48 219 Included in the map are the nations that the Israelites would encounter when they entered and took possession of the land of Canaan. The first reference to the land being called ‘the land of Israel’ is in the book of Samuel.55 When referred to as the land of Israel, the conquest of the land and the people is complete. The most frequently used terms to describe the land and this natural grouping of people are the land of Canaan and the Canaanites. The land of Canaan is the host land for the biblical story of Israel to take place once a patriarch is selected. The God revealed in this land becomes the host God in the story. Canaanites and the land of Canaan are mentioned more than one hundred and sixty times in the Bible. Most of these references appear in the Pentateuch and the books of Joshua and Judges.56 The term Canaanite is used as an all-encompassing ethnic term for all non-Israelite inhabitants of the land of Canaan.57 From Shem, it is nine generations to Abraham, the progenitor of the nation of Israel. The territories that the descendants of Shem inhabit extended from Mesha in the direction of Sephar, the hill country of the east.58 Abraham is led to the land of Canaan by the God who resides in Canaan and then reveals his names to Abraham in Canaan. Along with finding a God in Canaan, Abraham also finds Canaanite people living in the land. Promises concerning land and descendants result in a covenant relationship between God and Abraham. The land promise is that Abraham, who labels himself a stranger or an alien in the land, will eventually become the owner of the land. In analysing the land promise, we see that there is no mention of violent dispossession of the Canaanite people from their land. A peaceful symbiosis between Abraham and those living in the land of Canaan takes place. Abraham acknowledges them as ‘people of the land’ while they acknowledge him as a prince amongst them. The respect towards Abraham is shown when Melchizedek, the King of Salem, blesses Abraham.59 Abimelech, the Philistine King of Gerar, shows his respect for Abraham when he agrees that Abraham and Sarah can settle in his land wherever they please and then gifts them money and livestock in exchange for loyalty and peace.60 Abraham’s son Isaac also has a similar experience with Abimelech and settles in the land digging various wells saying, the Lord has made room for us, and we shall be fruitful in the land.61 Other peaceful relationships include Esau the son of Isaac who marries Adah and 55 1 Sam 13:19. Ann E Killebrew, Biblical Peoples and Ethnicity (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005), 96. 57 Gen 12:6; Num 21:3; Judg 1:9-10. 58 Gen 10: 30. 59 Gen 14. 60 Gen 20 61 Gen 26:22. 56 220 Oholibamah from the Canaanites.62 Judah, the grandson of Abraham, marries the daughter of Shua a Canaanite. They have three sons and Judah marries his firstborn son to Tamar, a Canaanite woman.63 Within these relationships lay the seeds of discontent that develops into an antiCanaanite agenda. An example is when Abraham instructs his servant to find a wife for Isaac. His choice is that his son’s future wife not come from the daughters of the Canaanites but from amongst Abraham’s kin in his country of birth.64 Another section in Genesis 26 explains why there is a dislike of Canaanites; it is because the Hittite wives of Esau made life bitter for his parents Isaac and Rebekah.65 Rebekah becomes wary of the Hittite women instructing her husband that their son Jacob is not to marry a woman of the land. 66 Isaac agrees to this demand and instructs Jacob that he is not to marry a Canaanite woman.67 The anti-Canaanite agenda progressively and systematically develops as the story of Israel is played out in its entirety. Davis and Rogerson pursue a line of thought that the biblical writers created the story of Noah cursing Canaan “to justify the Israelites driving out and enslaving the Canaanites.”68 Donald E Gowan agrees adding that, the narrative functions doubly as “a rationalisation for Israel’s conquest of Canaan”69 as a fulfilment of the curse by Noah. According to Niels Lemche, the Genesis narrative expresses “a fundamental rejection of the Canaanite culture and nation.”70 From the origin narratives, whenever the word ‘Canaanite’ appears it is often accompanied by stereotypical negative connotations that raise strong emotions and uncompromising attitudes towards the Canaanites. To test the validity of the claim that an anti-Canaanite agenda exists in the Old Testament, data has been collected and arranged in the following two tables. The data collected examines references to the land of Canaan and to the Canaanite people as a racial group of people and then more selectively as male and female in the second table. Three different sources have been used to collect the data.71 The first table has been arranged to highlight the 62 Gen 36. Gen 38. 64 Gen 24: 1-4. 65 Gen 26: 34-35. 66 Gen 27:46. 67 Gen 27: 46-28:1. 68 Philip R Davis and John Rogerson, The Old Testament World (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005), 121-122. 69 Donald E Gowan, Genesis 1-11, Eden to Babel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 110-115. 70 Niels Peter Lemche, The Canaanites and Their Land, The Tradition of the Canaanites (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991), 115. 71 Glenna Jackson, Have Mercy On Me (London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002), 155-159; Edward W Goodrick and John R Kohlenberger, The NIV Complete Concordance (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 110; NRSV Reference Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1993). 63 221 number of biblical books the Canaanites appear in. Secondly, the references are grouped according to the nature of the references being neutral, negative or positive portrayals of the Canaanites. Table 7: Nature of Canaanite references in the Old Testament Books of the Bible Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges 2 Samuel 1 Chronicles Nehemiah Psalms Isaiah Ezekiel Hosea Obadiah Zephaniah 1 Esdras 2 Esdras Judith Baruch Susanna 1 Maccabees Matthew Acts Totals Neutral 41 1 1 10 2 4 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 69 Negative 11 5 1 8 3 15 21 0 0 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 85 Positive 5 5 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 Total 57 11 3 19 5 21 21 2 4 2 3 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 2 169 References to all things Canaanite appear in twenty-two Old Testament books and two New Testament books. Examining the figures further, the Book of Genesis contains the most references with forty-one of the fifty-seven references being neutral. Although strongly neutral the negative references are double the positive which gives a slightly more negative view of the Canaanites. As the Biblical story progresses in the Pentateuch, the portrayal of things Canaanite becomes less neutral and more negative. An identifiable pattern in the table is that the majority of references are contained in the first seven books of the Bible. The Pentateuch concerns origins, encounter and establishing identity, status and relations. The Canaanites figure more prominently in the Book of Genesis as they existed as a recognised people long before the establishment of the Israelites as a nation. 222 The majority of references are neutral but the negative references outnumber the positive references at the ratio of 2:1. The Books of Exodus and Leviticus give a balanced view of the Canaanites but from the book of Numbers onwards the negative references begin to increase. The Book of Joshua is about Israel taking possession of the land of Canaan and dispossessing the Canaanite people of the land. References to Canaanites would negatively reflect the people they are actively involved in trying to dispossess. The Book of Judges is about Israel developing permanent settlement, putting down roots and developing relationships with the land and neighbours. References to the Canaanites are increasingly negative as the Israelites either try to replace those that have survived or uncomfortably incorporate them into Israelite nationhood. The Book of Judges and the Book of Joshua show an extreme partially against Canaanites. In the Pentateuch the Israelites were a people looking for a land. In the Book of Joshua and Judges the Israelites take the land and the Canaanites are the enemy to be dispossessed of their land. When their land is conquered, the Canaanites are portrayed as hostile pagans. The Old Testament carefully distinguishes between the ‘idol-worshipping Canaanites and the Yahweh worshipping Israelites’.72 They are Israel’s perpetual enemy and the major obstacle and main antagonists to Israel’s claim to the Promised Land. The language used in association with Canaanites is politically, symbolically and ideologically charged and expresses uncompromising attitudes and strong emotions. Words used in association with Canaanites and other people who inhabited the land include wickedness,73 demolish, smash, dispossess,74 utterly destroy,75 prostitution, let nothing that breathes remain alive, and you shall annihilate them.76 These strong words and statements reflect hatred toward and violence against Canaanites. These violent words equate to the deliberate and systematic genocide, according to the rules of warfare set out in Deuteronomy, of the original inhabitants of the land of Canaan who were living peacefully in their land. Joshua and Judges provide distinctly different versions of how Canaan came into Israel’s possession. The first half of the book of Joshua describes a successful campaign that sees them victorious in various battles. The second half of the book of Joshua provides details of the division of the land into tribal allotments. The book of Judges gives an alternative account of a fragmented, long drawn out campaign that was fraught with difficulties. Victory 72 Killebrew, Biblical Peoples and Ethnicity, 93. Deut 9: 4-5. 74 Exod 34: 11-16. 75 Lev 26: 44; Num 21:2; Deut 7:2, 12:2, 20:17. 76 Deut 20:16-17. 73 223 by Joshua was not complete, and sections of the Canaanite population remained defiant, ensuring that they are not assigned permanently to the pages of history.77 A biblical characteristic of the Canaanites is that they are survivors and show remarkable resilience using different methods and strategies. While they suffer defeat, they retain control of enough fortified cities to remain a threat.78 Strategies of survival include the Gibeonites using diplomacy to trick Joshua into making a peace treaty with them.79 When Joshua realised the deception, he kept to the agreement, with the added condition of their servitude as woodcutters and water carriers. Another strategic method was co-operation and compromise that included intermarriage and conversion to Judaism. In the book of Joshua, Rahab negotiates with the spies for the safety of her family. With the safety of her family confirmed she becomes the mother of Boaz and becomes an ancestor of King David. A controversial method of survival among the Canaanites was acceptance of their fate as a workforce. While the divine decree was for Israel to obliterate the Canaanites, the book of Judges provides many examples where that was not possible, and instead, the Israelites chose another tactic of living amongst those they conquered as their masters. Various books of the Old Testament give examples where the Canaanites were placed into forced labour. 80 The Canaanites are the people reduced to a state of villeinage.81 In the practice of villeinage, serfs are tied to the land in a feudal system. Villeins occupied the social space between a free person and a slave. They enjoy more rights and social status than those in slavery but are under several legal restrictions which differentiated them from the freemen.82 Villeinage describes the situation of the people of the land in 2 Kings who are put into forced labour. The book of 2 Kings defines who are, and who are not, part of the people of the land. When the Babylonians take people into exile, the poorest people of the land are made to work the land as vinedressers and tillers of the soil.83 The weakest members of society are those placed into forced labour or villeinage The second pattern that emerges is the minimal number of references to Canaanites after the Book of Judges. In the prophetic and wisdom books the Canaanites are noted due to their lack of presence. They move from high visibility within the story to near invisibility. Either they have been successfully assimilated into Israel or they have been deliberately 77 Judg 1:1-2:5. For unconquered areas and tribes see Joshua 11:13, 15:63, 16:10, 17:12-13. 79 Josh 9. 80 Judg 1: 28-34; Deut 20:11; Josh 9:27, 16:10, 17:13, 1 Kgs 9: 20-21. 81 Lemche, The Canaanites and Their Land, 120. 82 Villeinage (accessed 14 November 2020), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/villein 83 2 Kgs 24: 13-17; 25:12. 78 224 relabelled and worked out of the story. Whatever the reason, however, the Canaanites never seem to fully go away; instead they linger as an uncomfortable memory. The third pattern is the lack of Canaanite presence within the New Testament. The sole narrative of a Canaanite in the Gospels appears in Matthew. This narrative of a Canaanite woman is a reworking of an earlier narrative by Mark of an encounter between a Syrophoenician woman and Jesus. Matthew reworks Mark’s version and changes the identity of the Gentile woman of Syrophoenician origin to a Canaanite woman. The two references to Canaanites in the Book of Acts are a reflective text that succinctly retells the story of Israel. In the second table the information from the first table has been further analysed and separated into component parts of gender (male and female), people and land. These references are examined in terms of the nature of the bible references. The second table shows the results. Table 8: Canaanite gender-land-people references Male Female Male/Female People Land Land / People Total Negative 8 8 1 46 8 9 98 Positive 0 0 0 2 11 4 44 Neutral 11 3 0 8 50 1 51 Total 19 11 1 56 69 14 169 The table shows the majority of Biblical references to male and female Canaanites are very negative. The majority of references to the people as a specific group are negative with very few positive references. This is further shown when examining the male and female references as there are no positive references to either Canaanite women or men. The men fare slightly better than the females as they have more neutral references than the females. Seven of the nineteen references concern the ancestor Canaan, his curse and his descendants which are included in the genealogy in the two references in 1 Chronicles.84 The next set of four significant references to men are in the Book of Judges in the narrative of Deborah and Barak. The Israelites are punished for their disobedience and given into the hands of Jabin a Canaanite King. Deborah the prophetess and a Judge of Israel works with Barak to destroy the Canaanite King and liberate the Israelites.85 84 85 Gen 9:18-10:15; 1 Chr 1:8-13. Judg 4-5. 225 Canaanite women first appear in Genesis when Abraham makes his servant pledge that he will not find a wife for Isaac from amongst the daughters of the Canaanites.86 His servant is sent to Abraham’s country of birth and choses Rebekah as a wife for Isaac. The dislike of Canaanite women continues with Rebekah who describes them as ‘women of the land.’ They become labelled as dangerous because they exercise an influence that Israelite women do not have over their own men. The Canaanite women are able to persuade the Israelite men to do things that are contrary to their traditions and beliefs. An example of this was witnessed while the Israelites were camped at Shittim during the Exodus. By invitation the men engaged in sexual relations with Moabite women but the invitation to sex was a trick that succeeded in getting the men to turn from their God and bow to Baal of Peor, the Moabite God.87 A second incident occurred when Cozbi the daughter of a prominent Midianite named Zur, influenced Zimri her Israelite husband to worship Baal.88 When Canaanite women are named in the early texts they are stereotyped as being sexually promiscuous. Beginning with Tamar, Canaanite women are stereotyped as prostitutes. When the covenant is renewed, marriage to Canaanite women is banned due to their practice of prostituting themselves to their Gods and for fear that they would make their Israelite husbands prostitute themselves to these pagan Gods.89 This negativity toward Canaanite woman is a common theme in the Old Testament. Lemche says that in the text, we see a “fully developed anti-Canaanite programme which is connected with Yahweh’s promise to destroy the Canaanite inhabitants of Israel’s future country.”90 A significant part of the agenda is to discredit Canaanite women by losing their status as ‘women of the land’. The narrative takes place in their land where they figure prominently and are named and remembered. Degradingly, their status is reduced from ‘women of the land’ to prostitutes. Tamar, as an example, is reduced to masquerading as a prostitute. The next Canaanite woman to figure prominently in the Bible is Rahab. Among her achievements, Rahab is the first prophetic figure in the historical books of the Old Testament. As Israel prepared to enter the Promised Land, Rahab is the first Canaanite to join Israel and show allegiance to Israel’s God.91 Despite her loyalty, the biblical text still introduces her as a 86 Gen 24:3. Num 25:1-3, 17. 88 Num 25: 6-18. 89 Exod 34:15-16. 90 Lemche, The Canaanites and Their Land, 113. 91 Trent C Butler, Joshua 1-12 (Michigan: Zondervan, 2014), 259. 87 226 prostitute. 92 Rӧsel agrees that Canaanite women are stereotyped negatively saying that “when it comes to Rahab, the text is focussed on the prostitute motif.”93 Sex typing stereotyping is evident in the terminology used in narratives of Canaanite women. Words used in narratives containing Canaanite women are often negative like, do your duty, remain a widow, prostitute, the house of a prostitute, a whore and whoredom. The narratives of Adah, Oholibamah, Tamar and Rahab enable us to hear the voices of Canaanite women of the land crying out for recognition and justice. References to Canaanites as a group of people are overwhelmingly negative and stereotypical. They are carefully described as a sinful, idol worshipping people who are wicked because they practise child sacrifice and temple prostitution. In contrast, the Israelites are portrayed as a faithful, God-fearing, and worshipping people. These contrasts amount to propaganda used to support the Israelite claim to the land which was the real issue. References to the land are largely positive rather than negative. The largest section of land references are neutral and when combined with the positive references it shows that the Israelite interest was in the land, not the people. Paul Copan and Matthew Flannagan point to another factor that land, not morality, was the main issue. They write: However immoral the Canaanites were, the real problem isn’t what they did, but where they did it. They were contaminating the land that God had set aside for the Israelites since the days of Abraham.94 The goal of the Biblical text is to create reasons to justify the removal of the people from their ancestral land. With the people removed, the land is available for possession. These two tables support the theory that an anti-Canaanite agenda exists in the Old Testament. The ancestor Canaan is introduced into the biblical story negatively and subsequent references to all Canaanite people are highly critical and negative. After the Book of Judges, the presence of the Canaanites is a reminder to the Israelites that their historical roots do not lie in the land but come from somewhere else. Israel claims to have received the land by divine gift but never seem to be entirely secure in the land. The Canaanites as the insiders who became the outsiders are a symbol of that insecurity.95 92 Josh 2:1, 6:22. Hartmut Rӧsel, Joshua, Historical Commentary on the Old Testament (Leuven: Peeters, 2011), 50-53. 94 Paul Copan and Matthew Flannagan, Did God Really Command Genocide? Coming to Terms with the Justice of God (Michigan: Baker Books, 2014), 51. 95 Robert L Cohn, “Before Israel: The Canaanites as Other in Biblical Tradition,” in The Other in Jewish Thought and History, ed. Laurence J Silberstein and Robert L C John (New York: New York University Press, 1994), 77. 93 227 Jesus and the Canaanite woman The New Testament presents a vastly changed picture of the world of Israel from that given in the Old Testament. Important features of the Old Testament world include kings, kingdoms, empires, nations, tribes, prophet leaders, covenants, exiles, a temple, synagogues and religious officials. In the New Testament, the monarchy has long since ended, and Israel is part of the subservient global network of the Roman Empire. Israel is known as the province of Judea under its Roman governor, Pontius Pilate. Rome also supported a subordinate client king in Judea named Herod the Great. Herod did have a genealogical tie to the Israelites but was not accepted as he was considered to be a puppet ruler of Rome. The prophet had an essential place in Israel but there had not been a recognised prophet for four hundred years. While Judaism continued as the dominant religion in Israel, it had to contend with the growing influence of Hellenism which came with the Roman Empire and with the Herod dynasty. In the world of the New Testament, gone are references to the land of Canaan, the people of the land, the Canaanites and the seven nations who originally inhabited the land. The New Testament did not preserve the Canaanite memory. Social and cultural memory retains and transmits the history of a group telling important stories of people and events. The group which owns the land writes the history and determines who and what is remembered and how they are to be remembered. Canaanites who were a major feature of the Old Testament have mostly disappeared from the Canonical Gospels. Matthew alone reclaims the Canaanite memory when he re-presents the Gentile woman of Syrophoenician origins from the Gospel of Mark as a Canaanite woman.96 The New Testament introduces a new word into biblical language, ‘Gentile.’ This word does not exist in the Old Testament as a separate and exclusive word. Gentile is not a Hebrew or Greek word but taken from the Latin word denoting belonging to a nation, tribe, people or family. The equivalent word in the Old Testament is goy or goyim referring to nations or peoples both Israelite and non-Israelite.97 In the synoptic Gospels, Gentile is used as a generic term to describe anyone who is not Israelite or Jewish. The Canaanites who still inhabit the land of Canaan are placed alongside the Romans and other foreigners and once again relabelled, redefined, reconstituted and recolonised in this New Testament ‘Gentile’ terminology. 96 97 Matt 15:21-28; Mark 7: 24-30. Gentile (Accessed 15 September 2019), https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/6585-gentile. 228 Jesus defines his mission as to gather in the lost sheep of Israel. 98 On a number of occasions he categorially states that Gentiles are not the focus of his mission.99 The synoptic Gospels portray Jesus as having a polarised view towards Gentiles. When sending his disciples out on a mission, Jesus instructs them to avoid entering Samaritan and Gentile towns but to concentrate their efforts on the lost sheep of the house of Israel.100 Jesus warns the disciples before they embark on their mission that they will be persecuted, dragged before their Roman governors and kings and made to testify before Gentiles. Persecution is reason enough to warn his disciples to avoid contact with Gentiles.101 Jesus also links Gentiles to his future persecutions in Jerusalem. They will take an active part in mocking, flogging and crucifying him he says which makes his dislike of Gentiles personal.102 He also rejects the Gentile model of leadership as hierarchical and tyrannical.103 Finally, Jesus harshly criticises the Gentiles for what he sees as unethical behaviour and standards.104 When the ethnic identity of individual Gentiles is clarified the problem that Jesus inhibits towards them dissipates. An example of this is while he is in Capernaum, a Roman Centurion needing help for his ill servant receives a sympathetic hearing from Jesus. The person is introduced into the story as a Roman centurion and not as a Gentile.105 Another example is in Gadarene where two demoniacs are healed after they are introduced into the narrative as Gadarenes and not Gentiles.106 Samaritans, Jesus classified at the same level as Gentiles, but he adjusts his attitude towards them. While he is travelling on the border between Samaria and Galilee Jesus heals ten lepers.107 One of his teaching parables centres on portraying a Samaritan traveller as a model of goodness and kindness.108 On another occasion, Jesus is sitting at a water-well and initiates a life-changing conversation with a Samaritan woman.109 When Jesus decides to begin his final journey to Jerusalem, he sends messengers ahead to prepare towns and villages to receive him when he passes through those places. The first village his messengers arrive at is 98 Matt 10:6. Matt 10:5, 15:24; Mark 7:26. 100 Matt 10:5. 101 Matt 10:18. 102 Mark 10:33; Matt 20:19; Luke 18:32. 103 Mark 10:42; Matt 20:25; Luke 22:25. 104 Matt 5:47, 6:7, 6:31-32, 18:17. 105 Matt 8: 5-13; Luke 7:1-10. 106 Mark 5:1-10; Matt 8:28-34; Luke 8: 26-37. 107 Luke 17:11-19. 108 Luke 10:25-37. 109 John 4: 4-26. 99 229 a Samaritan village which shows that Jesus does not oppose visiting and staying with Samaritans.110 In spite of his varying attitude to towards Gentiles and Samaritans, Jesus reveals that he has a problem with Canaanite people, especially the women. In the Gospels of Mark and Matthew is a narrative of an encounter between Jesus and a woman. Mark gives the location of the meeting as ‘a private house’ in Tyre while Matthew gives the site of the contact as ‘in public.’ Mark introduces the woman as a Syrophoenician woman while Matthew introduces her as a Canaanite woman. The Gospel of Matthew contains much of Mark’s material; Matthew often takes over vital Christological texts from Mark and changes the story he found in Mark, giving evidence of his concerns.111 The change in the identity of the woman is one such example of Matthew highlighting one of his concerns. Canaanite people come with an uncomfortable and challenging presence in the history of Israel. In particular Canaanite women were to be avoided due to their subversive nature. In changing the ethnicity of the woman, Matthew is descending into the archives of history to confront some uncomfortable truths. The narrative of the Canaanite woman and Jesus has to be one of the most challenging passages to exegete. Published responses to this narrative tell us two things. Firstly, the story exposes the underbelly of Israel and its racist and dehumanising treatment of the Canaanite people of the land. Secondly, in the contemporary context, it stirs deep emotions that make some readers of the text feel uncomfortable. The narrative draws the reader into the story and presents the reader with two options; respond to the racism within the text or be complicit with it. No longer can meaning be understood to be a stable determinate content that lies buried within the text, the meaning becomes a dynamic event in which we participate.112 Engaging with the text, we are called on to declare where we stand on the issue of racism. The meaning of the story lies not within the text but in the dynamic relationship between reader and scripture.113 In Aotearoa New Zealand the country is still in recovery from the terrorist attack of 15th March 2019. On this fateful day, a lone gunman shot and killed fifty-one Muslim worshipers and critically wounded another fifty worshipers gathered in the Al Noor and Linwood mosques 110 Luke 9:51-56. Christopher Mark Tuckett, Christology and the New Testament, Jesus and His Earliest Follower (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 119. 112 Robert Fowler, Let the Reader Understand, Reader-Response Criticism and the Gospel of Mark (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991), 3. 113 Fernando Segovia and Mary Ann Tolbert, Reading from This Place, Vol 2, Social Location and Biblical Interpretation in Global Perspective (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995), 7-15. 111 230 in Christchurch. Since that day, signs, posters and t-shirts have appeared with the slogan, give nothing to racism.114 The narrative of the Canaanite woman and Jesus shouts those words with a loud voice. The voice of the Canaanite woman crying out Lord, help me is the voice of a distant memory of the past that has been subsumed into a new Gentile identity that tries to harmonise historical identities. This voice that will not be silenced makes the reader focus on the inherited injustices in the present context that the reader has become deaf and blind. The Canaanite woman is a blind-spot in the life of Jesus that he does not see coming. She appears unexpectantly and successfully pleads for her request to be heard and not ignored or explained away. Two examples of this text convicting people to stand up to racism come firstly from a recovering white racist in Australia and secondly from a European-American. After engaging with the narrative, Daniel Patte a European-American, concluded that neither Jesus nor the woman are transformed; it is the reader who is convicted.115 This narrative led Patte to speak with and read stories of borderless and border-crossing Mexican women in the United States. The narrative made him aware of his white privilege and social status in comparison to those living a marginal existence. Patte counters the view that the woman is modelling submissive discipleship which he believes to be quite dangerous. This type of discipleship reflects the values of a hierarchical community that forces those who do not have access to the centre of power into being submissive disciples. Matthew Anslow describes himself as a white Australian and recovering racist. Anslow grew up in a white enclave in Sydney and was dismayed to find that some of Australia’s worst race riots led by white supremacists took place in his neighbouring suburb in 2005 as they tried to reclaim ‘their beach’. Anslow still struggles with anti-racist sensibilities and finds that he has to be vigilant about any of his own casual prejudiced or racist thoughts. Eight years after the Cronulla Beach race riots Anslow presented a paper to an Anabaptist conference suggesting that the narrative of Jesus and Canaanite woman is a seminal text for “understanding the nature of their (white Australian) practices of exclusion in a multi-faith world”.116 Anslow finds Te Roopu Māori, the Māori students association at Otago University, of which I am a member, proudly took the lead in this campaign at Otago University throughout 2019. 115 Daniel Patte, “The Canaanite Woman and Jesus, Surprising Models of Discipleship” in Transformative Encounters, Jesus and Women Re-viewed ed. Ingrid Rosa Kitzberger (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 33-53. 116 Matthew Anslow, “A (Recovering) Racist’s Reading of Matthew 15: 21-28.” Paper presented at the National Conference of the Anabaptist Association of Australia and New Zealand, January 2013. 114 231 comfort in finding in the narrative that like him, even Jesus was forced to confront his prejudices and make space for others. Two other examples exist of two men finding inspiration from the Canaanite woman in her quest to attain wellness for her daughter. Native American scholars, Robert Allen Warrior117 and William Baldridge118 enter into a brief written conversation concerning the narrative of Jesus and the Canaanite woman. Warrior views the bible as a contradiction that describes God as loving and then shows a violent side of this loving God, especially to people of the land who he wants to exterminate. Warrior believes that the teaching point from the narrative is to show how unjust Christianity is towards indigenes. Like the Canaanite woman, Native Americans, he says, “must go begging to the people who colonised us in order to secure the bare minimum of justice.”119 Baldridge like Warrior was ready to walk away from Christianity and shake the dust from his feet until he remembered the story of the Canaanite woman. Baldridge responds to Warrior that Jesus, who exhibits nationalist exclusivism against the Canaanite woman, is set free from his restriction due to the woman’s faith.120 In his narrative a mother is pleading for her daughter. Faith, as expressed like her faith, becomes a model of Christian faith. Baldridge takes encouragement from the Canaanite woman who changed the heart of God. Because she can achieve the impossible, Baldridge believes it is possible to change the heart of Christians to be more considerate of Native Americans. Racism remains in all its subtle forms ranging from having the attendant ignore you and serve the two Pākehā (European New Zealander) people standing behind you in the line at the St David’s café at Otago University, to the sentencing of a Māori male in the Dunedin Court to two years imprisonment for a string of minor crimes in which no person was physically injured. In comparison, the same Judge in the same courtroom on the same day suspends the drivers’ license of a Pākehā male for six-months after he had pleaded guilty to killing a person while driving under the influence of alcohol. But the narrative of the Canaanite woman and Jesus also remains to give hope that racists can find their redemption and to show those affected 117 Robert Allen Warrior, is an Osage Native American and distinguished professor of American literature and culture. 118 William Baldridge is a Cherokee Native American, an ordained Baptist minister and is a professor at Central Baptist Theological Seminary. 119 Warrior, “Canaanites, Cowboys, and Indians, 93-104. 120 William Baldridge, “Native American Theology, A Biblical Basis,” in Native and Christian, Indigenous Voices on Religious Identity in the United States and Canada, ed. James Treat (New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, 1996), 93-104. 232 by racism that powerlessness can be an effective and powerful tool in the campaign to ‘give nothing to racism.’ To be complicit in racism in the text leads to bad scholarship that defends, justifies or normalises the racism of Jesus and his disciples towards an unnamed Canaanite woman. Examples of unprofessional scholarship appear in the strategy of ignoring the woman and the words of Jesus that liken her to a dog. Several commentators suggest the reference to the woman being a dog was “jokingly said by Jesus with a wink in his eye just for the woman to see.”121 William Barclay could see that Jesus had “a smile on his face and the compassion in his eyes robbed the words of all insult and bitterness.”122 Calling her a dog was not literal or metaphoric as Jesus used a “soft tone of voice or looked at her in such a way to show playfulness.”123 The worst example of bad scholarship is in the discussions about whether Jesus is comparing the woman to wild, untamed dogs or domestic house dogs which were more acceptable. The conclusion is that Jesus was comparing the woman to a domestic dog, evidence that his remark was not harsh.124 In trying to protect or defend Jesus, these examples of bad scholarship instead convict Jesus and the disciples as racist and result in normalising racism in the scholarly community. The principle of give nothing to racism must apply in all facets of biblical scholarship. Heather McKay poses the question that people were too afraid to ask: was Jesus racist in calling her a dog?125 If Jesus and his disciples are racist, then they too must be held to account. Being addressed as Lord, son of David in the narrative is not an acceptable defence for racist behaviour. Being awarded several Christological titles means that Jesus has a privileged position, but it is no protection against being called out for unacceptable behaviour. While Jesus says that he came to fulfil the law this does not place him above the law. Take away the See: Acosta B Milton, “Ethnicity and the People of God,” Theologica Xaveriana, vol. 29, no. 168, (2009): 309-330; P Bonnard, Mateo (Madrid: Cristianded, 1976), 351; R T France, Matthew (Leicester: Inter Varsity Press, 1985), 247; Leo Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 404-405. 122 William Barclay, The Gospel of Mark, Daily Study Bible (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1956), 122. 123 See: David E Garland, Mark (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 291; David Rhodes, “Jesus and the Syrophoenician Woman in Mark, A Narrative Critical Study’. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 62 (1994): 343-375. 124 See: Allen Black, Mark (Joplin: College Press, 1995), 136; W D Davis and Dale C Allison, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991), 548; John Noland, The Gospel of Matthew, A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 634; David Rhodes, “Jesus and the Syrophoenician Woman in Mark, A Narrative Critical Study’. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 62 (1994): 343-375; Bas van Iersel, A Reader-Response Commentary (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 250; 125 Heather McKay, “The Syrophoenician Woman of Mark 7 and the Canaanite Woman of Matthew 15, Two readings of what could have taken place”. Paper presented to the Conference of the Society of Biblical Literature, Vienna, Austria, 2014. 121 233 Christological titles and what is left is a human person who remains accountable for rudely ignoring a mother looking for help for an ill daughter. Good scholarship acknowledges that racist overtones exist in the text and holds it to account. Examples of textual accountability are shown by Gerd Theissen, who describes the words spoken by Jesus as “morally offensive.”126 Mary Ann Tolbert speaks of his words and actions as “an unacceptable act on the part of Jesus.”127 Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza considers the narrative “theologically difficult.”128 Sharon Ringe complaints that it is “insulting in the extreme.”129 Lilly Nortjé-Meyer describes it as “discrimination at its worst.”130 Beverley Moana Hall-Smith calls Jesus “a coloniser who marginalises Canaanite woman.”131 Walter Brueggemann says “the ethnocentrism of Jesus is being challenged by summoning Jesus from below. The Canaanite woman becomes a paradigm for indigenous people who transgress boundaries.”132 These commentators engage with this narrative even when it makes them feel uncomfortable. This type of academic rigour maintains the integrity of both the text and the person who exegetes the text. The people who shaped and edited the Gospel of Matthew included this particular narrative complete with the words and actions for a reason. Good scholarship engages with the text uncovering the reason why it has been included and written in such a manner. Patience is required in exegeting this particular text. Miroslav Volf warns that this is a text concerning which sometimes too hasty Christological conclusions are drawn.133 The starting point in any Gospel text is to explore the Christology within the narrative. The justification for the use of a Christological framework to critically analyse the story appears in the first words spoken by the Canaanite woman in the text ‘Lord, son of David’ which is a Christological statement. The Canaanite woman is the first person in Matthew’s account of Jesus to call him Lord. This word Lord is formulaic in foundational Christian 126 Gerd Theissen, The Gospel in Context, Social and Political History in the Synoptic Tradition (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991), 61. 127 Mary Ann Tolbert, Sowing the Gospel, Mark’s World in Literary-Historical Perspective (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 185. 128 Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, But She Said, Feminist Practises of Biblical Interpretation (Boston: Beacon Press, 1992), 160. 129 Sharon Ringe, “A Gentile Woman’s Story Revisited, Re-reading Mark 7: 23-31” in A Feminist Companion to Mark, ed. Amy Jill Levine with Marianne Blickenstaff (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 89. 130 Lilli Nortjé-Meyer, “Gentile Female Characters in Matthew’s Story, An Illustration of Righteousness” in Transforming Encounters, Jesus and Women Reviewed, ed. Ingrid Rosa Kitzberger (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 54-76. 131 Beverley Moana Hall-Smith, “Matthew 15:21-28 Through the lens of the Treaty of Waitangi” in Mai i Rangiātea Journal vol 4 (2009): 31-36. 132 Walter Brueggemann, “The God of Joshua, give or take the land. A Journal of the Bible and Theology. Vol 66, Issue 2, April 2002. 164-175. 133 Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrace, A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness and Reconciliation (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996), 214. 234 confessional statements. The words, Son of David, are a title that is used exclusively to identify Jesus as the healing and miracle-working Messiah of Israel.134 Jesus is addressed as Son of David by two blind men,135 by a demoniac,136 by the Canaanite woman and by two blind men in Jericho.137 These four words ‘Lord, son of David’ are vitality important to understanding the deeper Christology in the narrative. But this is Christology not through Jewish or Christian eyes but through the story of a Canaanite woman. To people who have suffered conquest and land loss these four words, Lord, son of David come with negative connotations that include; genocide, power, control, hierarchy, submission, servanthood, slavery, vassalage, rule, superiority and domination. The Canaanite woman’s Christological statement and then her action of kneeling at the feet of Jesus to plead her case shows what compromise looks and sounds like for people of the land seeking help for the welfare of one of their children. Her words and actions show the extent of powerlessness that women of the land have to endure in unjust situations. In such times the only aid or appeal they have is the power of powerlessness to unsettle the powerful. These four words do not pass the lips of a Canaanite mother easily, and the effect of saying those words comes at a cost that she must bear. As a woman she is met with silence, suffers rejection and endures a group of men talking about her as if she is invisible. As a mother she falls to her knees at the feet of a male begging to have her request agreed to. She juggles the duality of patience and persistence while waiting for her request to be responded to. When her request is not approved, she must beg like a dog accepting the indignity of being satisfied with eating the scraps of another person’s food. Sadly, she is ridiculed and likened to a dog and has centuries of commentators doing her further violence and injustice by debating if she is a wild dog, a house dog or a doggie. This is what the word Lord looks and feels like for an indigenous woman of the land who is pleading for her daughter’s life. This narrative also has an ugly side that unwittingly shows a pack or gang mentality by Jesus and his disciples. Whether this is consciously intended by the people behind the creation of the text is unknown. The narrative depicts one lone woman isolated out in the open. Realising her situation, she starts shouting loudly when she sees a pack of thirteen strange men suddenly appear. She approaches the leader of the group of men asking him for mercy as her daughter is ill. The leader of the pack ignores her request. His followers urge him to do something about 134 Ulrich Luz, Studies in Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 86, 111. Matt 9:27. 136 Matt 12:23. 137 Matt 20:30. 135 235 her as they become agitated by her presence. He rejects her pleas and tersely calls her a dog. She accepts her predicament and falls to her knees begging for mercy. The leader of the pack comes to his senses and grants her mercy allowing her to leave. This Christological narrative is delivered through the experience and words of a Canaanite mother seeking a cure for her ill daughter. The narrative could easily have had a different unpleasant ending and escalated into a scene of violence or a gang-pack-rape scene. Certainly, the Canaanite woman was exposed to harsh words and attitudes that made her fall to the ground asking for mercy. Sadly, this is how many real-life experiences end when a woman finds herself isolated amongst a pack of agitated strange men. This reflection comes from experiences suffered by Māori and Pākehā women during the New Zealand land wars. The Christology in the narrative demonstrates that non-Israelite, non-Jewish people can view Jesus Christ through their lens of culture and land. In their context it is possible to see the essence of what other people see but see and experience it differently. The Christology in the narrative is not controlled by the writers and editors of the story, nor is it controlled by any of the characters in the story. The controlling agent of the narrative is the community that continues to tell the narrative. What is seen, heard, felt and interpreted is controlled by the reader of the story who enters the world of the text as an active participant. Jesus has a missional concern of reconciling different groups in Israel as a pre-requisite to the breaking in of the kingdom of God. Jesus talks salvation in a land where broken relationships exist between Jews and Samaritans, between Jews and Canaanites, between religious officials and the people. The challenge to Jesus is to address these fractured relationships that exist in his land. Jesus must demonstrate from this encounter that he is aware of the ambiguity of the good news for a people oppressed in their land. Through the experiences of a Canaanite woman of the land, the community of believers preserve the narrative showing the depth of what the words of Jesus mean for her people when he speaks of salvation, redemption, justice, forgiveness and reconciliation. The story also shows what Lordship and Lordship language sounds like for Canaanite people. Writing as a Palestinian Christian born in Bethlehem and also the current Lutheran pastor in his home town, Mitri Raheb proposes that identity is the central issue of the bible as the entire bible is a collection of diverse and contextual narratives of land, peoples and identities.138 The change in identity from Syrophoenician to Canaanite makes identity ‘the 138 Mitri Raheb, “Land, peoples and identities, a Palestinian perspective,” in Land Conflicts and Land Utopias, ed. Marie Theres Wacker and Elaine Wainwright (London: SCM Press, 2007), 61-68. 236 issue’ of the narrative. The response by Jesus shows that her identity as a Canaanite woman is the reason that prevents him from helping her daughter. Not only is the woman’s identity in question but so too the identity of Jesus is under the microscope for examination. The woman’s identification of Jesus as Lord, son of David, makes the identity of Jesus an issue if not ‘the issue’ of the narrative. The location of the story is in the structural centre of Matthew’s Gospel less than one chapter away from the definitive proclamation by Peter, which is fundamental to Christology. By being located close to Peter’s confession, this encounter is significant for understanding the identity of Jesus. It is too close not to have an impact on Matthew 16:13-20. Peter’s confessional statement is by a Jewish male who is at the centre of his community of followers. The Christological statement by the Canaanite woman is from a female, a mother with an ill daughter, an un-named person from a different culture, society and land. She is not part of the Jesus community of followers but is familiar and fluent in their religious understanding. It is one thing to welcome into the fold a respected person that looks and sounds like you, but when that person comes with a disputed history, people are not as welcoming as the text shows. Identity, according to Miroslav Volf, is constructed in relationship to the other.139 The identity of Jesus is being constructed outside his community of believers by someone unexpectedly different, a complete outsider. When asserting identity, boundaries become clearly defined and fixed. They either allow the other to exist conditionally in the space you occupy or, alternatively, they inhibit others from entering your personal space. The location of the narrative in Tyre and Sidon is worthy of note. As far as we can tell, Jesus and his disciples had entered her land without an invitation. This company of travellers occupied her cultural and historical space. These invaders did not allow this lone woman in need to share the space they occupied in her land. They are the outsiders, the others, and it is the leader of their group whose identity is being constructed by the Canaanite woman in her land. She is the normalised person, the host of the narrative in her host land. It is inevitable in encountering someone different from you that your identity will be reshaped in relation to the other. Identity and otherness are at the Christological centre of the narrative, and the author of this encounter is trying to find an acceptable way of being for Jesus that addresses his dislike of the Canaanite woman. Dislike of Canaanite women in the bible is historically based on cultural, spiritual, political or sexual reasons. His own dislike of the woman is based on spiritual and political reasons which make her ineligible to qualify as a 139 Volf, Exclusion and Embrace, 91. 237 member of the household of Israel. The encounter challenges Jesus’ sense of self to the point that the person who emerges from the encounter has changed considerably from the person who entered the contact. Jesus is conflicted in many ways in the narrative. He has unresolved issues from previous generations to deal with that have influenced his dislike of Canaanite women. Secondly, Jesus is conflicted about his terms of mission that has become frayed around the edges. He has no problem in modifying his field of vision and his sense of purpose to include a Roman centurion who is a person with influence and power, as the centurion points out to Jesus. The Canaanite woman does not fit the description of a lost sheep of the house of Israel, nor does the text allude to her being a person of power or influence over others. This is a reality check where Jesus can make a strategic decision to maintain his mission without change or step outside the constraints of expectation. His conflict is to maintain his mission to the lost sheep of Israel or to radically change the terms of his mission to be a light to the Gentiles.140 This narrative provides Jesus with space to confront these issues and come to terms with them. Who we will listen to in the narrative is correlated to who we will ignore and not listen to. In the story, there are a number of different voices speaking, that of Israel - Canaanite history, the voice of Jesus’ disciples, the sound of the Canaanite woman and voices in Jesus’ own consciousness. This is the reality of being a person of the land, and often you have to compete to have your voice legitimately recognised, heard and respected. Having your voice heard on Christology is no different than having to compete with other voices who claim to speak for you, over you, at you, about you, around you, with you, but never allowing you to claim your voice. The Canaanite woman claims her Christological voice and does not relent when under pressure. This is a vital connection to the later narrative in Matthew 16:13-20 in that Jesus asks his disciples to listen to what others are saying about who he is. He then requests the disciples to claim their voice and say who he is for them. Peter accepts the invitation and speaks. The narrative of the Canaanite woman and Jesus follows the same theme of the Canaanite women mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew’s Gospel. Overcoming great obstacles, these women in the genealogy of Jesus enter into negotiation for the welfare of their people. The ancestress Tamar takes extreme action to gain her freedom from the constraints of levirate marriage. Another ancestress, Rahab, takes radical action to ensure that a section of her people survives against the impending onslaught against her people. The un-named and 140 Isa 9:1; Matt 4:15-16. 238 unaccompanied Canaanite woman takes extreme action in coming out to meet Jesus and then putting up a verbal defence against his rebuttals. To answer back to a male in authority is extremely dangerous as many women in history and in the contemporary context have been and still are being brutalised for such actions. Like her ancestors Tamar and Rahab, the Canaanite woman is the person who brokers hope for those treated like dogs and gives them a voice which Jesus eventually listens to. In other healing narratives, those who have been healed become followers of Jesus. On other occasions, Jesus sends them to the Pharisees to testify to their healing. Sometimes, of their own free will, those who have been healed go and tell other people of their healing, while some even stop to thank Jesus. After the Canaanite woman receives what she requested, there is no thank you moment at the end of the narrative. There is no record of her becoming a follower of Jesus or of her telling others or of presenting her healed daughter to the Pharisees to verify the healing. She simply disappears and is never heard from again. The missional teaching point in this is that people who have suffered historical and contemporary trauma should receive the Christological claim of Jesus Christ without any conditions being placed on them by the giver of the message. The people receiving the message should be allowed to walk away unconditionally and work out what it means for them in their way, in their own time and in their own space. They should be allowed the freedom to choose their method of expression if they do respond. Jesus ends his stay in Tyre and Sidon after this encounter. There are no other recorded encounters, teaching, healings, exorcisms, debates or events in the land of the Canaanite woman. Jesus walks away from the meeting back to his land and home in Galilee. The evangelistic teaching point is that to achieve her objective, the Canaanite mother is bruised first by the healer. The healer and his disciples are both abuser and healer. There is no point in having the healer, and his disciples linger any longer looking for further encounters and continuing to make similar if not worse mistakes. Regardless of how many times the text is interpreted or new hermeneutic theories are published, the actual text and its details will never be altered. The Gospel of Matthew carries the Canaanite memory into the New Testament world of Jesus. In other Gospels, the Canaanites are written out of the story and assimilated into a Jewish created identity termed ‘Gentiles’. Matthew reclaims the Canaanite status of the ‘Gentile woman of Syrophoenician origin.’141 141 Mark 8: 26. 239 Matthew writes back into the account of Jesus’ life and mission the memory of the Canaanites in the form of a Canaanite woman seeking assistance for her ill daughter. By preserving the memory of the Canaanites, Matthew provides another crucial dimension to Christology through the people of the land. If Christology is to be meaningful to the contemporary world, it must move beyond ideological speculation and objectivism and place the narrative of the Canaanite woman and Jesus at the centre of Christological reflection (and political action). It must be equal, if not more prominent, than the confessional statement of Peter which follows closely after this narrative. The only obstacle to this equality is the stereotyped racism of appearing in someone else’s text as a ‘woman of the land.’ Conclusion: This chapter is about tangata whenua, people of the land, within the biblical context and it is about how a Christology of the people of the land exists in the narrative of Jesus and the Canaanite woman. Using biblical scriptures as the base document to develop a Christology of the people of the land, exegetical skills are required that include the ability to identify and confront racism within the text and in the person exegeting the text. A Christology from the people of the land has the primary task of addressing the inherent injustice and systematic violence in the text and among those who exegete the text. Notions of what is considered normal, acceptable behaviour are challenged within the text and in the world of the reader. Jesus proclaims that he is the bringer of the Good News, yet the presence of the Canaanite people of the land questions if the Good News is really for all people or is it another exclusive doctrine? The Canaanite people of the land challenge the very heart of the Good News and raise the fundamental question about the nature of the gospel itself. The presence of Canaanite people of the land and the Canaanite woman in the Gospel of Matthew leaves you with an uncomfortable feeling, a bitter taste and a sense of justice unfulfilled. A further area of research prompted by in this chapter is a fuller exploration of a theology of activism. A major factor in the New Zealand Land Wars was the rise of Māori prophetic movements as a method of resistance and a means of seeking redemptive justice. This developed into passive resistance movements initiated by Te Whiti o Rongomai and Tohu Kākahi who developed their own community of Parihaka on these foundations. Their model of meeting injustice and violence with non-violence was also modelled by Rua Kenana in his community of Maungapōhatu. Both the peaceful communities of Parihaka and Maungapōhatu were invaded by Crown forces and people of those communities were wounded and killed. 240 The pursuit of recognition, justice and reparation endured through the following century. In 2017 the Parihaka community received an official apology from the Crown and nine million dollars compensation for the atrocities committed by the Crown in 1881. In 2019 Rua Kenana was granted a pardon for his wrongful arrest, trial and imprisonment one-hundred and three years earlier. Three days after the pardon was granted the Governor-General of Aotearoa New Zealand visited the community of Maungapōhatu and delivered an apology to the community on behalf of the Crown. In seeking justice both faith movements remained committed to their biblical values of seeking justice through peacefulness means. Central to hīkoi (protest marches) and land occupations has been the support and participation of Churches in the 1976 Māori land march, the 1977 occupation of Takaparawha (Bastion Point), the 1984 hīkoi to Waitangi, the 1995 occupation of Moutoa (Pākaitore) Gardens, the 2014 Foreshore and Seabed hīkoi to parliament and the current occupation of Ihumātao. These historical and contemporary examples of activism, the Churches’ role in protest movements along with the biblical interpretation of redemptive justice provides plenty of scope for further research into the theology of activism. 241 CHAPTER NINE Conclusion In the introduction to this thesis one of the stated goals of this doctoral research was to contribute to research and literature of Māori Christological reflections. With the completion of this thesis for examination this goal has been partially achieved. What has been establishing is that a significant body of Christological reflection by Māori does exist. The body of this thesis contains valuable theological writings and Christological reflections from Māori writers, their background and a description of their reflections. This information and knowledge build a valuable resource for future researchers who have an interest in theology and Christology in a Māori context. Identifying these resources is also valuable for the academy who may wish to develop papers on Māori theology and religion. Māori Marsden says that: “the route to Māoritanga through abstract interpretation is a dead end. The only way can only lie through a passionate, subjective approach.”1 Chapter two establishes my social location and theology that are both informed by my cultural and religious background. These factors shape and inform my Christological views that are based on my subjective and passionate lived experiences from within the culture that I write. This privileged position brings certain benefits that include access to information, awareness of issues, personalities and politics that can widen the parameters of research. Chapter three captures a variety of scholarly Christological reflections by thirteen Māori theologians. Each of the theologians write from a subjective and passionate approach based on their lived experiences from within the culture. Father Henare Tate says that: “Māori people are crying out for a theology that is theirs, one that is couched in the language, imagery, symbols, systems, stories, values, theology and liturgy that speaks to them as to who they are in this land.”2 The writings by the theologians reflect Tate’s statement and contain a wealth of information that demonstrates a different way of doing theological and Christological reflection. The voice of the researcher-writer is the key component that takes ownership of the topic in their own context and with their own words, free of constraints. Their reflections achieve a theology that Tate describes by drawing on concepts that come from deep within their culture. After Jesus 1 2 Marsden, The Woven Universe, 2. Tate, He Puna Iti i te Ao Marama, 13. 242 Christ has been fully immersed in ‘the well-springs of the Māori world’3 it is possible to develop a faith statement that captures a theology that is by Māori for Māori and possibly for the rest of the world. Following these reflections two key themes of whakapapa (genealogy) and land, people and God are identified for further exploration and application. Whakapapa is a foundational concept within Māori society and considered to be the pinnacle of knowledge. In chapter five, I apply a whakapapa analysis to the four women included in the genealogy of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew. Scholarship has posited five reasons for the inclusion of the women as being; Gentiles, sinners, foreigners, woman who showed initiative or scandalous sexual relationships.4 A whakapapa analysis concludes that the reasoning for the inclusion of the women is due to a common link as ‘women of the land.’ This is a new category in which to explore the women in the genealogy of Jesus. To this finding I have composed a faith statement that expresses the importance of woman and land to understand the genealogy of Jesus Christ. In the Old Testament land is viewed as gift and promise that is regulated by faithfulness to covenantal obligations and regulated by the law. In chapter six I explore the genealogy of Jesus as recorded in the Gospel of Luke as re-centring the land in Jesus as the fulfilment of the gift, promises, covenants and the law. I have focussed attention on the Adam – Jesus typology with the conclusion that the land cannot be ignored for its significance in the typology. Rather than composing a faith statement as in previous chapters I have instead created my own Christological model using the koru from Māori art to express the relationship between God, land and people. The benefit of this model is that it is non-hierarchical and shows that God as Atua is the origin and source of land and people. Throughout this thesis I have maintained the stance in chapter five and six that ‘the genealogy of Jesus is the starting point of Christology.’ Since the opening verses of the Book of Genesis, land and water are major features of the Biblical story. Like genealogy the geography is layered in stories and relationships. In chapter seven I examine the intersection between geography and Christology with the view that the geography is more than a passive backdrop to narratives but has its own distinctive voice in supporting the claim by Jesus to be the Christ. In different contexts Jesus gives a sacramental value to water in some of the old customs of foot washing, hospitality and healing placing them alongside baptism. Mountains, fields, deserts and the wilderness are places where 3 4 Hollis, “Te Atuatanga, 10. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, 71-74. 243 certain aspects of the identity of Jesus are revealed, his values taught and where people are healed and nourished physically and spiritually. The ‘who do you say I am?’ question posed by Jesus to his disciples is a question of identity. In the final chapter the politics of identity is explored in the relationship between land, people and God. This chapter shows that an anti-Canaanite agenda exists in the bible to discredit the original inhabitants of the land of Canaan after the Israelites conquer the land and people. Land is important for personhood and status while landlessness equals nonpersonhood. The biblical concern is to show the personhood of the Israelites as the owners of the land and to discredit the Canaanites as subjugated landless non-persons. Jesus is forced to address the non-personhood of Canaanite people in Israel in his mission when he is confronted by an un-named Canaanite woman requesting his help. In this encounter Jesus is conscientized to address his own racism and that of his followers. This narrative is strategically placed in the chapter immediately prior to Jesus posing the question of his identity to his disciples. The encounter between Jesus and the Canaanite woman develops a Christology of contestation of legitimacy for the people of the land that addresses systemic injustice and challenges the reader of the narrative to examine their own values and actions. Areas of Further Research: One of the stated goals of this doctoral research has also been to identify further areas of research that could be beneficial to theology and Christology. Three areas have been identified in the body of this thesis for further research. The first subject of interest is God expressed as Atua, the second area of investigation is the influence of the Paipera Tapu (The Māori language Bible) on the Māori language and thirdly, research into a theology of activism within Māori theological praxis. These three areas deserve more focussed in-depth attention as an independent subject of investigation. The first area of possible future research is Atua Māori and how this relates to the Christian understanding of God as revealed in Jesus Christ. All of the writers surveyed in chapter three freely use the term Atua Māori without fear or trepidation of offending a conservative Christian view of monotheism and trinitarianism. In some areas the use of Atua Māori is still considered to be controversial and classified as paganism. With the renaissance of the Māori language and customs use of Atua Māori has become more popular and wide spread. At times it is used to challenge the Christian concept of God. Further research into the correlation between Atua Māori and the Christian concept of God as revealed in Jesus Christ I believe is justified. 244 The second area of interest is the influence of the Māori language translation of the Bible (Paipera Tapu). In 1827 thirteen years after the first Christian missionary arrived in Aotearoa New Zealand selected texts from Genesis, Exodus, Matthew and John were translated and published in the Māori language. The brothers Henry and William Williams who were both missionaries were key translators of the texts. Henry Williams was also a leading figure in the translation of the Treaty of Waitangi more than a decade later. Henry was challenged about his choice of some words in the translation of the Treaty of Waitangi into the Māori language. Some people did not believe his choice of words accurately conveyed the true intent of what the British were trying to achieve. Both the Williams brothers and William Colenso who also helped publish a later edition of more selected Biblical texts were all shrouded in controversy surrounding their acquisition of large tracts of land. Due to these controversies and the allegations of dishonesty against the missionaries I believe that research into the selected biblical texts would provide information on the theology that the missionaries were trying to convey to their converts. Another area of possible research concerning the influence of the translated Bible are loan words from the Pacific. Some missionaries came to these shores from the Pacific and introduced words from the Pacific as they felt that the Māori language did not have the depth of words to explain some Christian and biblical concepts. Two words that were imported as mentioned in chapter five are whakamoemiti (praise) and whakawhetai (thanksgiving).5 These words were imported from Tonga where some of the Methodist missionaries had served previously to coming to Aotearoa New Zealand. These loan words have become a permanent part of the Māori language without people being aware that they are loan words. Further research of loan words may uncover other words that were introduced into the Māori language. Chapter five also raises questions about the words and concept of tangata whenua (people of the land). Tangata whenua is a self-descriptive term commonly used by Māori. The translation of ‘people of the land’ appears in the Book of Genesis and throughout the Old Testament. It is possible that with the translation of the Bible into the Māori language from 1827 and 1868 that the words tangata whenua and the concept of being tangata whenua may have been introduced into the Māori language and world. I believe that further investigation of this is warranted. The final area of future research is to explore more fully a theology of activism. The history of Christianity and Māori has involved constant negotiating for power and legitimacy 5 Whakamoemiti is spelt fakamoemiti and whakawhetai is spelt fakafetai in Tongan. 245 that make activism theologically implicit. Whether it is Māori in the mainstream churches or indigenous faith movements like Ringatū, Iharaira, Pai Mārire and Ratana activism is the structure by which the biblical text organises itself. Regardless of what side of the religious spectrum they stand in Māori Churches have been active in supporting and participating in hīkoi (protest marches) and land occupations. The Churches role in protest movements along with the biblical interpretation of redemptive justice provides plenty of scope for further research into the theology of activism. Outcomes of this Doctoral Journey As mentioned in the introduction to this thesis studying theology was often an unpleasant experience due to the invisibility of Māori people as staff and students and the lack of Māori of even Pacific content in the curriculum. Since I began this PhD journey on 1st March 2017 at Otago University, I have been a witness to a number of positive changes in Theology that I will claim as outcomes for this Thesis. The first outcome has been part of a new cohort of Māori completing their PhD in theology through the Department of Theology at the University of Otago. Previously where Māori came through in small number there have been five Māori including myself who are completing their doctorate in theology as fulltime and part-time students. All five candidates are completing their research in an area of Māori theology. One student is writing his thesis completely in the Māori language with no English translation which will be a first in theology. Aligned with the increase in Māori at post-graduate level are two Pākehā students pursuing their PhD in theology using a kaupapa Māori methodology and mātauranga. While I do not claim these positive changes as an outcome of this thesis, I do claim to be proudly a part of this exciting change. There are definitely four developments that I do claim directly to my PhD journey and the research that has gone into this thesis. The first of these developments is the establishment of a Māori chaplaincy at the University of Otago. The number of Māori students at the University of Otago has steadily increased every year to over two-thousand Māori students enrolled in 2019. At the same time, I was the only ordained Māori minister in Dunedin and was often called upon in the community and at university when the need arose. Due to this continuous increase it was decided to establish a Māori chaplain on campus in Dunedin. This was the first appointment of its kind in the one-hundred- and fifty-year history of the University. I was appointed Māori ecumenical chaplain in 2018 at 0.2 hours per week. I resigned in mid-2019 after having established the position to allow myself the space needed to 246 complete my PhD. The chaplaincy is now into its third year with a new chaplain and an increase in hours to 0.4 which shows the importance and value of the position. A second direct outcome I will claim for this thesis is the establishment of a 200-300 level paper in Māori theology and religion. Theology at Otago had always wanted to deliver this paper but lacked the capacity to teach it with a Māori pedagogue. In 2019 I took up a Teaching Fellowship with Theology Otago to design and deliver this paper along with my Supervisor. This was a paper with a difference, it was a one-week intensive marae live-in. Staff and students lived, ate, slept and learnt in a marae setting. The paper was a success with good numbers enrolled and will be delivered again in 2020 under the same conditions. With the increase in Māori enrolled in a PhD in theology with the University of Otago it was decided to hold a 2-day symposium on the ‘Foundations of Māori Theology.’ The theme for this symposium was based on a statement from the Rev Dr Henare Tate in his book He puna iti i te Ao Māori. It was planned to give those Māori enrolled in post-graduate theology and those Pākehā using kaupapa Māori methodology and mātauranga an opportunity to put their research out into the public arena. My role in this was as the co-initiator, organiser and facilitator along with my Supervisor. Of the twelve presenters, ten are completing their doctorates in theology through Otago, Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiarangi and Oxford University. Over the two-days sixty people attended which showed its popularity. This was only the second time a symposium on Māori theology has been hosted by Theology at Otago. It is planned from the presentations to work towards a second edition of the book, Mana Māori and Christianity. One final positive development that I will claim for this thesis is the planned establishment of a lectureship in Māori theology at the University of Otago. This was as a result of an offer of funding being made by an independent source after the Māori theology symposium in 2019. This is an exciting possibility that is still in process and will be established in mid-2020. The opportunity of contributing to teaching Māori theology as a subject that stands alongside other theological subjects in a University setting is something that I would not have thought possible in 1995. These exciting and positive developments in the last three years have transformed an often unpleasant and isolating experience into an exciting three-year doctoral journey that I have thoroughly enjoyed and look forward with eagerness to the future. 247 Bibliography Books: Anderson, Janice Capel. “Matthew, Gender Reading.” In Matthew, A Feminist Companion, ed. Amy Jill Levine with Marianne Blickenstaff, 25-51. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. Andrew, Maurice. The Old Testament in Aotearoa New Zealand. Wellington: Deft Publishers, 1999. Baldridge, William. “Native American Theology, A Biblical Basis,” In Native and Christian, Indigenous Voices on Religious Identity in the United States and Canada, ed. James Treat, 93-104. New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, 1996. Barclay, William. The Gospel of Mark, Daily Study Bible. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1956. Barth, Karl. Christ and Adam: Man and Humanity in Romans 5. New York: Collier, 1957. Best, Elsdon. Tūhoe, Children of the Mist. Wellington: Reed Publishers, 1972. Binney, Judith, Gillian Chaplin. Ngā Mōrehu The Survivors: The Life Histories of Eight Māori Women. Wellington: Bridget Williams Books, 1986. Binney, Judith. Encircled Lands, Te Urewera, 1820-1921. Wellington: Bridget Williams Books, 2009. -------- Redemption Songs, A Life of Te Kooti Arikirangi Te Turuki. Auckland: Auckland University Press and Bridget Williams Books, 1995. --------- Stories Without End: Essays 1975-2010. Wellington: Bridget Williams Books, 2010. Black, Allen. Mark. Joplin: College Press, 1995. Boda, Mark J. The Book of Zechariah. Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2016. Bonnard, P. Mateo. Madrid: Cristianded, 1976. Brown, Raymond E. The Birth of the Messiah, A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. New York: Doubleday, 1993. Brueggemann, Walter. The Land, Place as Gift, Promise and Challenge in Biblical Faith. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977. Burge, Gary M. Jesus and the Land, The New Testament Challenge to Holy Land Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2010. Butler, Trent C. Joshua 1-12. Michigan: Zondervan, 2014. 248 Cadigan, Tui, Tangata Whenua, People of the Land. in Oceania and Indigenous Theologies, ed. Elaine Wainwright, Diego Irarrazaval and Dennis Gira, 60-65. London: SCM Press, 2010. -------- ‘A Three-Way Relationship: God, Land, People A Māori Woman Reflects.’ In Land and Place: He Whenua, He Wāhi: Spiritualties from Aotearoa New Zealand, ed. H. Bergin, & S. Smith, 29-43. Auckland: Accent Publications. 2004. Chopp, Rebecca. “Theology and the Poetics of Testimony.” In Converging on Cultures: Theologians in Dialogue with Cultural Analysis and Criticism, ed. Delwin Brown, Sheila Greeve Davaney and Kathryn Tanner, 56-70. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. Calvin, John. Institutes of Christian Religion. London: SCM Press, 1961. Carter, Warren. Matthew and the Margins, A Socio-Political and Religious Reading. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2000. Cohn, Robert L. “Before Israel: The Canaanites as Other in Biblical Tradition,” In The Other in Jewish Thought and History, ed. Laurence J Silberstein and Robert L C John, 65-80. New York: New York University Press, 1994. Conrad, Edgar W. Zechariah. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. 1999. Costas, Orlando E. Liberating News, A Theology of Contextual Evangelization. Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989. Conzelmann, Hans. The Theology of St Luke. London: Faber and Faber, 1960. Copan, Paul and Matthew Flannagan, Did God Really Command Genocide? Coming to Terms with the Justice of God. Michigan: Baker Books, 2014. Creed, J M. The Gospel according to St Luke, The Greek text with Introduction, Notes and Indices. London: MacMillian and Co, 1950. Crowe, Brandon D. The Last Adam: A theology of the obedient life of Jesus in the Gospels. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2017. Darragh, Neil. “Homeplace, Paradise and Landscape.” In Land Conflicts, Land Utopias, ed. Marie-Theres Wacker and Elaine Wainwright, 118-125. London: SCM Press, 2007. Dauphinais, Michael and Matthew Levering, Holy People, Holy Land, A Theological Introduction to the Bible. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2005. Davis, Philip R and John Rogerson, The Old Testament World. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005. Davis, W D. The Gospel and the Land, Early Christian and Jewish Territorial Doctrine. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974. Davis W D and Dale C Allison. Matthew, The International Critical Commentary on Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1997. 249 Dembski, William A. Intelligent Design, The Bible between Science and theology. Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 1999. Doherty, Wiremu, “Mātauranga ā Iwi as it applies to Tūhoe, Te Mātauranga a Tūhoe.” In Enhancing Mātauranga Māori and Global Indigenous Knowledge, 29-45. Wellington: New Zealand Qualifications Authority, 2014. Edwards, S, “Nā te Mātauranga Māori ka Ora Tonu te Ao Māori: Through Māori Knowledge Te Ao Māori will Resonate”, in Conversation in Mātauranga Māori, ed. T Black, D Bean, W Collings, W Nuku, 37-58. Wellington: New Zealand Qualifications Authority, 2012. Ellens, J Harold and Wayne G Rollins, Psychology and the Bible, A New Way to Read Scriptures. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2004. Fiorenza, Elisabeth Schüssler. But She Said, Feminist Practises of Biblical Interpretation. Boston: Beacon Press, 1992. Fowler, Robert. Let the Reader Understand, Reader-Response Criticism and the Gospel of Mark. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991. France, R T. Matthew. Leicester: Inter Varsity Press, 1985. Freire, Paolo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Penguin, 1972. Fritz, Volkmar. 1 & 2 Kings, A Continental Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003. Garland, David E. Reading Matthew, A Literacy and Theological Commentary on the first Gospel. New York: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1993. --------Mark. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996. Gaventa, Beverly Roberts. Mary, Glimpses of the Mother of Jesus. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995. Gondarra, Djiniyini. Series of Reflections of Aboriginal Theology. Darwin: Bethel Presbytery, Northern Synod of the Uniting Church in Australia, 1986. Gonzalez, Justo L. Luke, Belief, A Theological Commentary on the Bible. Louisville: Westminster, John Knox Press, 2010. Gowan, Donald E. Genesis 1-11, Eden to Babel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988. Gray, John. I & II Kings, Old Testament Library Collection. London: SCM Press, 1977. Habel, Norman C. The Land is Mine, Six Biblical Land Ideologies. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1995. Henderson, Jim M. Ratana: The Man, the Church, the Political Movement. Wellington: A H & A W Reed, Polynesia Society, 1972. 250 Hendriksen, William. Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew. Pennsylvania: Baker Book House, 1973. Jackson, Glenna. Have Mercy On Me. London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002. Jacobs, Mignon R. Gender, Power & Persuasion, The Genesis Narrative and Contemporary Portraits. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007. Jeremias, Joachim. Jerusalem in the time of Jesus. London: SCM Press, 1969. Johnson, Marshall D. The purpose of the biblical genealogies with special reference to the setting of the genealogies of Jesus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969. Kessler, John. The Book of Haggai, Prophecy and Society in Early Persian Yehud. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Killebrew, Ann E. Biblical Peoples and Ethnicity. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005. Kirk, J R Daniel. A man attested by God: The Human Jesus of the Synoptic Gospels. Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2016. Kuhn, Thomas. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962. Lee, Yongbom. The Son of Man as the last Adam: The early church tradition as a source of Paul’s Adam Christology. Oregon: Pickwick Publications, 2012. Lemche, Niels Peter. The Canaanites and Their Land, The Tradition of the Canaanites. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991. Lightfoot, John. The Whole Works of the Rev John Lightfoot, Master of Catherine Hall, Vol I. London: J F Dove, 1825. Lilburne, Geoffrey. A Sense of Place, A Christian Theology of the Land. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1989. Lockyer, Herbert. All the Women of the Bible, the life and times of the women of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1967. Luz, Ulrich. Studies in Matthew. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. Mahuika, Apirana. “Leadership: Inherited and Achieve.” In Te Ao Hurihuri, The World moves on, aspects of Maoritanga, ed. Michael King, 86-114. Wellington: Hicks Smith and Sons, 1975. Manson, William. The Gospel of Luke, The Moffatt New Testament Commentary. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1930. Marcus Aurelius. Meditations. Middlesex: Penguin, 1964. 251 Marsden, Māori. The Woven Universe: Selected Writings of Rev Māori Marsden. Te Ahukaramu Charles Royal, ed, Otaki: Estate of Rev Māori Marsden, 2003. Matamua, Rangi. Mātāriki, The Star of the Year. Wellington: Huia Publishers, 2017. McKinlay, Judith E. Reframing Her, Biblical women in postcolonial focus. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2004. Mead Hirini Moko, Grove Neil. Ngā Pepeha a ngā Tupuna, The Sayings of the Ancestors. Wellington: Victoria University Press, 2001. Mead, Hirini Moko. Tikanga Māori, Living by Māori Values. Wellington: Huia Publishers, 2016. Meadowcroft, Tim. Haggai. Sheffield: Phoenix Press, 2006. Menn, Esther Marie, Judah and Tamar (Genesis 38) in Ancient Jewish Exegesis, Studies in Literary and Hermeneutics. Leiden: Brill Publishers, 1997. Moon, Paul. A Tohunga’s Natural World, Plants, gardening and food. Auckland: David Ling Publishing Limited, 2005. Morris, Leo. The Gospel According to Matthew. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992. Metge J and Jones S. He Taonga Tuku Iho Nō Ngā Tūpuna Māori, Proverbial Sayings, a Literary Treasure. New Zealand Studies No 5 Issue 2, Wellington: Victoria University, 1995. Meyers, Carol, Toni Craven and Ross S Kraemer. Women in Scripture, A Dictionary of Named and Un-named Women in the Hebrew Bible, The Aprocryphal / Deuterocanonical Books and the New Testament. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2000. Montgomery, James A and Henry Snyder Gehman. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Kings. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1951. Newman, Keith. Ratana Revisited, An Unfinished Legacy. Auckland: Reed Publishing Ltd, 2006. Ngata, Apirana T. Rauru nui a Toi lectures and Ngati Kahungunu origin. Wellington: Victoria University, 1972. Nielsen, Kirsten. Ruth, A Commentary. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1997. Noland, John. The Gospel of Matthew, A Commentary on the Greek Text. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005. Nortjé-Meyer, Lilli. “Gentile Female Characters in Matthew’s Story, An Illustration of Righteousness.” In Transforming Encounters, Jesus and Women Reviewed, ed. Ingrid Rosa Kitzberger, 54-76. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Page, Charles R. Jesus and the Land. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995. 252 Patterson, Malcolm. Ngāti Whatua o Orakei Heritage Report. Auckland: Ngāti Whatua o Orakei Corporate Ltd, 2014. Patte, Daniel. “The Canaanite Woman and Jesus, Surprising Models of Discipleship.” in Transformative Encounters, Jesus and Women Re-viewed, ed. Ingrid Rosa Kitzberger, 33-53. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Perry, Simon. Resurrecting Interpretation, Technology, Hermeneutics and the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2012. Plummer, Alfred. St Luke, The International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1901. Pomare, Maui and James Cowan. Legends of the Māori. Auckland: Southern Reprints, 1987. Raheb, Mitri. “Land, peoples and identities, a Palestinian perspective,” In Land Conflicts and Land Utopias, ed. Marie Theres Wacker and Elaine Wainwright, 61-68. London: SCM Press, 2007. Rakena, Rua. The Māori Response to the Gospel. (Auckland: Wesley Historical Society, 1 971). Ringe, Sharon. “A Gentile Woman’s Story Revisited, Re-reading Mark 7: 23-31” In A Feminist Companion to Mark, ed. Amy Jill Levine with Marianne Blickenstaff, 79-100. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. Romance, James, Linda Startford. Revisioning: Critical methods of seeing Christianity in the history of Art. Oregon: Casade Books, 2013. Rӧsel, Hartmut. Joshua, Historical Commentary on the Old Testament. Leuven: Peeters, 2011. Rubin, Miri. Mother of God, A History of the Virgin Mary. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009. Segovia, Fernando and Mary Ann Tolbert, Reading from This Place, Vol 2, Social Location and Biblical Interpretation in Global Perspective. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995. Shectman, Sara. Women in the Pentateuch, A Feminist and Source-criticism Analysis. Sheffield: Phoenix Press, 2009. Smith, Graham, “The Dialectic Relation of Theory and Practice in the Development of Kaupapa Māori Praxis,” in A Kaupapa Māori Reader: A collection of readings from the Kaupapa Rangahau Workshop Series, 2nd edition, ed. Leonie Pīhama, Sarah-Jane Tiakiwai and Kim Southey, 18-27. Hamilton: Te Kotahi Research Institute, 2015. Stendahl, Krister, Quis et Unde? An analysis of Matthew 1-2. In The Interpretation of Matthew, ed. Graham N Stanton, 69-80. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995. 253 Sweeney, Marvin A. I & II Kings, The Old Testament Library. Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 2007. Tate, Henare. He Puna Iti i Te Ao Marama: A Little Spring in the World of Light. Auckland: Libro International, 2012. Tchapé, Jean Bosco. “Conflicts over the Holy Land, Israel’s Acquisition of the Land of Canaan According to Deuteronomy.” In Land Conflicts, Land Utopias, ed. Marie-Theres Wacker and Elaine Wainwright, 47-54. London: SCM Press, 2007. Te Rangihīroa. The Coming of the Māori. Wellington Māori Purposes Fund Board, 1949. Thayer, Joseph Henry. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Michigan: Baker House Books, 1983. Theissen, Gerd. The Gospel in Context, Social and Political History in the Synoptic Tradition. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991. Thomas, Nicholas, Mark Adams, James Schuster and Lionel Grant. Rauru, Tene Waitere, Māori Carving, Colonial History. Dunedin: Otago University Print, 2009. Tolbert, Mary Ann. Sowing the Gospel, Mark’s World in Literary-Historical Perspective. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996. Tuckett, Christopher Mark. Christology and the New Testament, Jesus and His Earliest Follower. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001. Van Iersel, Bas. A Reader-Response Commentary. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998. Volf, Miroslav. Exclusion and Embrace, A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness and Reconciliation. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996. Wainwright, Elaine. Towards a Feminist Critical Reading of the Gospel According to Matthew. New York: De Gruyter, 1991. Walker, Ranginui. He Tipua: The Life and Times of Sir Apirana Ngata. Auckland: Penguin Books, 2001. --------Ka Whawhai Tonu Matou, Struggle Without End. Auckland: Penguin Books, 1990. -------- Ngā Pepa a Ranginui, The Walker Papers. Auckland: Penguin Books, 1996 --------“Reclaiming Māori Education.” In Decolonisation in Aotearoa: Education, Research and Practice, ed. Jessica Hutching and Jenny Lee-Morgan, 19-38. Wellington: NZCER Press, 2016. --------"The relevance of Māori myth and tradition.” In Tihei Mauriora, Aspects of Māoritanga, ed. Michael King, 170-182. New Zealand: Muthuen, 1978. 254 Warrior, Robert Allen “Canaanites, Cowboys, and Indians, Deliverance, Conquest, and Liberation Theology today” In Native and Christian, Indigenous Voices on Religious Identity in the United States and Canada, ed. James Treat, 93-104. New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, 1996. West, Cornel. Keeping faith: Philosophy and Religion in America. New York: Routledge, 1993. Westerman, Claus. Genesis 1-11, A Commentary. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1990. White, John. Ancient History of the Maori; His Mythology and Traditions. Wellington: George Didsbury, Government Printer, 1897. Whittaker, H A. Studies in the Gospels. Staffordshire: Biblia, 1984, 495. Ziccardi, Costantino Antonio. The Relationship of Jesus and the Kingdom of God According to Luke-Acts. Rome: Gregorian University Press, 208. Journals: Andriolo, Karin R. “A Structural Analysis of Genealogy and Worldview in the Old Testament.” American Anthropologist, vol 75, no 5, (1972): 1657-1669. Brueggemann, Walter. “The God of Joshua, give or take the land.” A Journal of the Bible and Theology, vol 66, issue 2, (April 2002): 164-175. Cram, F. “Marginalisation, Talking Ourselves Up.” Alternative, An International Journal of Indigenous Scholarship. Special supplement, (2006): 28-45. Gudeon, W G. “Te Tipua-Kura and other manifestations of the spirit world.” Journal of the Polynesia Society vol. 15, (1906): 27-29. Jones, Pei Te Hurinui. “Māori genealogies.” Journal of the Polynesian Society, vol. 62, no. 2, (June 1958): 162-165. Jørstad, Marid. “The Ground that Opened its Mouth: The Ground’s Response to Human Violence in Genesis 4.” Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 135 no, 4, (2016): 705-715. Milton, Acosta B. “Ethnicity and the People of God.” Theologica Xaveriana, vol. 29, no. 168, (2009): 309-330. Kaa, Hone. “A Journey of Hope and Liberation.” First Peoples Theology Journal vol. 1, no. 1, (July 2000):48-63. --------------“A Stained-Glass Window: What do you see when you look through it?” First Peoples Theology Journal vol.1, no.3, (January 2005): 9-15. 255 Malbon, Elizabeth Struthers “The Jesus of Mark and the Sea of Galilee.” Journal of Biblical Literature, vol 103, issue 3, (September 1984): 363-377. Melbourne, Te Waaka. “Māori Spirituality in the new Millenium.” First Peoples Theology Journal vol. 1, no. 3, (January 2005): 101-113. Palmer, Russell W. “The Christology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer.” The Evangelical Quarterly, vol 49 issue 3 (July-Sept 1977). London School of Theology: 132-140. Pāniora, Riki. Ko wai au? Te Kōmako, Issue 4, 2008: 52-55. Karyn Paringatai. “Maori identity development outside of tribal environments.” Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work, issue 26, vol 1 (2014): 47-54. Plum, Karin Friis. “Genealogy as Theology.” Scandinavian Journal of Theology, vol. 3, issue. 1, (1989): 66-92. Rhodes, David. “Jesus and the Syrophoenician Woman in Mark, A Narrative Critical Study.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 62 (1994): 343-375. Smith, Percy. “Te Kauae-Runga, ngā korero a Te Mātorohanga rāua ko Nepia Pōhūhū.” Memoirs of the Polynesian Society vol 3, (1913):169-218. Beverley Moana Hall-Smith. “Matthew 15:21-28 Through the lens of the Treaty of Waitangi.” Mai i Rangiātea Journal, vol. 4, (2009): 31-36. Te Rito, J. “Whakapapa: A framework for understanding identity.” MAI Review, Issue 2, Article 2 (2007): 1-10. -------- “Whakapapa and whenua: An insider’s view.” MAI Review, Issue 3, Article 1 (2007): 1-8. Volschenk, G J. “The Land, Primary Category of Faith.” HTS Theological Studies, vol 60, no 1/2 (2004): 625-639. Reference Books: A New Zealand Prayer Book, Auckland: William Collins Publishers Ltd, 1989. Collins Paperback Dictionary and Thesaurus Glasgow: HarperCollins Publishers, 2002. Goodrick, Edward W and John R Kohlenberger, The NIV Complete Concordance. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981. Hendel, Ronald S. “Adam”, Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, ed. David Noel Freedman, Allen C Myers and Astrid B Beck. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishers, 2000. NRSV Reference Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1993. 256 Richardson, Alan, John Bowden. A New Dictionary of Christian Theology. London: SCM Press, 1983. Roget’s 21st Century Thesaurus, 3rd Edition, New York: Harper Collins, 2013. Ryan, P. M. The Reed Pocket Dictionary of Modern Māori Auckland: Reed Publishing Ltd, 1999. Te Matariki, Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori, rev. ed. Auckland: Oxford University Press, 1996. Williams, Herbert. W A Dictionary of the Māori Language. Wellington: R E Owen, Government Printer, 1957. Williams, H W. Dictionary of the Māori language. Wellington: Legislation Direct, 2011. Published Papers: Anslow, Matthew. “A (Recovering) Racist’s Reading of Matthew 15: 21-28.” Paper presented at the National Conference of the Anabaptist Association of Australia and New Zealand, January 2013. Lee, Jenny. “Māori cultural regeneration: Pūrākau as pedagogy.” Paper presented as part of a symposium ‘Indigenous (Māori) pedagogies: Towards community and cultural regeneration with Te Kawehau Hoskins and Wiremu Docherty. Centre for Research in Lifelong learning International Conference, Stirling, Scotland, 24th June 2005. McKay, Heather. “The Syrophoenician Woman of Mark 7 and the Canaanite Woman of Matthew 15, Two readings of what could have taken place”. Paper presented to the Conference of the Society of Biblical Literature, Vienna, Austria, 2014. Royal, Ahukaramū. “Te Ao Mārama: A Research Paradigm in Te Pūmanawa Hauora.” Proceedings of Te Oru Rangahau: Māori Research and Development Conference. Palmerston North, NZ: School of Māori Studies, Massey University, 1998. Degrees, Masters and Doctoral Thesis: Peter Buck, “Medicine amongst the Māori in Ancient and Modern Times.” (A Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Medicine, University of Otago, 1910. Moeawa Makere Callaghan, “Te Karaiti in Mihingare Spirituality: Women’s Perspective.” Ph.D. diss., University of Auckland, 2011. Graham Cameron, “That you might stand here on the roof of the clouds: The development of Pirirākau theology from encounter to the end of conflict.” MTheol thesis., University of Otago, 2015. Jenny Te Paa Daniel, “Contestations: Bicultural Theological Education in Aotearoa New Zealand. Ph.D. diss., Graduate Theological Union, Berkley, 2001. 257 Jubilee Turi Hollis, “Te Atuatanga: Holding Te Karaitianatanga and Te Māoritanga Together Going Forward.” Ph.D. diss., University of Canterbury, 2013. Hirini Kaa, “He Ngākau Hou: Te Hāhi Mihingare and the Renegotiation of Mātauranga, c.1800-1992.” Ph.D. diss., University of Auckland, 2014. Kāhautu Maxwell, “Te Kōpura”, MA diss., University of Waikato, 1998. T M Nepe, “Te Toi Huarewa, kaupapa Māori, an educational intervention system.” Masters diss., The University of Auckland, 1991. Aroha Yates Smith, “Hine! E Hine! Rediscovering the Feminine in Māori Spirituality.” Ph.D. diss., University of Waikato, 1998. Jonathan Te Rire, “The Dissipation of Indigeneity Through Religion.” MIS diss., University of Otago, 2009. Karen J Wenell, “Jesus and Land, Constructions of sacred and social space in second Temple Judaism.” Ph.D. diss, University of Glasgow, 2004. Internet Sources: Bible History Online, https//www.bible-history.com/maps/ (accessed 5 December 2019). E Kui Kumara, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_dmNxMG-W8. (12 February 2020). Easton’s Revised Bible Dictionary Online, https://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/gennesaret. (25 June 2019). Gentile, https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/6585-gentile (15 September 2019). Māori designs, https://www.pinterest.nz/pin/622059767259682975/ (18 December 2019). Māori Dictionary Online: https://maoridictionary.co.nz/ (27 June 2017). Mount of Olive: https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3981588,00,html (10 January 2020) Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand: https://www.presbyterian.org.nz (19 October 2017). Te Ahukaramū Charles Royal, Māori creation traditions, Te Ara, the Encyclopaedia of New Zealand. New Zealand Ministry for Culture and Heritage / Te Manatū Taonga. https://teara.govt.nz/en/photograph/2422/the-koru, 19 April 2018. Stats NZ, Tatauranga Aotearoa: https://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/snapshots-ofnz/nz-social-indicators/home. (15 November 2017). 258 Strong’s Greek: https://biblehub.com.greek/3977.thm. (29 September 2019). Taonui, Rāwiri, ‘Whakapapa – genealogy – What is whakapapa?’ Te Ara – the Encyclopaedia of New Zealand, http://www.TeAra.govt.nz/en/whakapapa-genealogy/page-1. (11 May 2018). Images of Māori wharenui, http://www.quizlot.com/1025943/nga-wahanga-o-te-wharenuiparts-of-wharenui-flash-cards/alphabetical (21 September 2017). Villeinage, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/villein (14 November 2020). Whenua to Whenua in Home Birth Matters, Published by Home Birth in Aotearoa, Issue 1.3, Spring 2014: https://homebirth.org.nz/magazine/ (14 November 2018) Unpublished Papers: Gnanasunderam, “Māori Theology and Black Theology or a Theology of Liberation.” Paper presented to the National Council of Churches in New Zealand, Church and Society Commission, Auckland, New Zealand, 1966. Personal Conversations: Kereopa, Hohepa, Takatūtahi Church Centre, Whakatane, April 1995. Lyndon, Pierre, Queenstown, 29 August 2018. Paul, Rangitukehu, Uiraroa marae, Te Teko, 2010. Rakuraku, Rev Rangiora, Māori Synod meeting, Ohope Marae, November 2003. 259