Posted 457 days ago
Who Is Your Other?
By Eliacín Rosario-Cruz, Mustard Seed Associates
Interestingly enough, people sometimes get surprised and/or offended when they hear me say that I do not want to be tolerated or included.
At first glance, tolerance and inclusion appear to be favorable concepts, but on a deeper level, they are “softer” expressions of violence and ostracism. To be tolerated and included speaks of standards constructed and approved by the dominant group/culture in which the “other” clearly does not fit, can’t follow, is not part. Following these constructed guidelines creates the myth of the normative way of being, behaving, and expressing culture and leaves those who do not conform and fit as marginals who therefore need to be condescendingly included and tolerated.
The children of the Enlightenment inherited the meticulous process of scientific classification. Following this process, everything was given its own place. But this process did not belong to the sciences alone—our communities of faith adopted this hard model of categorization as well. Categorization of this kind is no different from the behavior we frown upon in the Gospels when teachers of the law tried to manipulate and domesticate Jesus. While in Jesus we see the completion of the law, this truth was not accessible to the priests, Pharisees, and other religious professionals. They were neck deep into the myth of being the only ones who truly knew the right teachings, the accepted societal rules, and correct spiritual behavior. And then a callous craftsman with sawdust still in his hair, from a little town that nothing good was known to come out of, came to be the Other who would disturb the boring parade of sameness. Take into consideration that Jesus was allowed to participate in the religious rituals of his culture. He was tolerated among the religious order and was even included in some of the higher educated conversations and discussions. In those instances, however, he was allowed to be in proximity with the Same in order to be ridiculed as the Other.
Have you ever said “Jesus was a friend of sinners”? If so, you are quoting the words of the Pharisees and teachers of the law who judged Jesus’ actions. We know that Jesus ate with sinners, of course. But I doubt Jesus would go around telling his friends, “You know, Pedro, tonight I am going to eat with a bunch of sin-infected people. That’s how I roll.” When we take a plunge into the story of the Gospels and use our imagination, we can see this hard-working, itinerant teacher with nasty-looking feet being an “other” magnet. In his own awkwardness as an other-side-of-town, unschooled spiritual teacher, Jesus was able to create a space for “others” to encounter God and each other.
While I appreciate Leonardo da Vinci’s painting The Last Supper, in my opinion it is overly sanitized. (I know there are time-related artistic and cultural issues at play.) If we pay close attention to the Gospels stories, it is not hard to imagine a table populated by a ragtag, ragamuffin group of “others.” If we live into the text and place ourselves as curious observers looking through a window into the next-door building in which Jesus is hosting this dinner party, we might see something more akin to a freak show in which Jesus would be unidentifiable from the “others” except by being the one giving new meaning to the everyday bread and table wine. This “othering” and unrecognizable feature of Jesus is still true to this day. Scripture speaks of Jesus as one whom no one would find attractive and will come to us in the encounter with the Other. Who is your Other? Who are those pockets of our societal constructs that you cannot stand? Who are those people you are including and tolerating just so you can measure them up to your mythical standards of purity and goodness? Jesus’ face is found in the face of those, in their humanity and dignity.
To encounter Jesus is to embrace the Other.
Add your comment or view comments » 2 people have responded




I appreciate the spirit of the article in the sense of asking the reader to not confine Jesus or overly identify with Him to the expense of connecting with others….but it seems like Mr. Rosario-Cruz is missing the boat because he assumes that tolerance is linked, even “softly”, to violence and ostracism. Why is it seen as such a rejecting notion when it is completely possible and true, as in my life, that one can deeply disagree with an “other’s” opinion or lifestyle but fundamentally view oneself on the same level of value as the “other” and respectfully extend a “welcome” to them to connect and relate. I hope the writer makes an extra effort to not pre-judge the dominant culture/group (in whatever context that shows itself) with negative motives so as to erect a double-standard….as if the “minority culture/group” is faultless or, even worse, pre-judged as identifying with the “Other” Himself, Jesus, while the dominant group continues to be viewed as violent/offensive. Ascribing “righteousness” to one’s minority group is exactly that….self-righteousness. I would think that our “Other” judges ALL of US with a similar standard.
It seems that Mr. Rosario-Cruz’s article comes off a bit paranoid and perhaps even a little arrogant. Da Vinci had his way/style of presenting Jesus, but maybe it was accurate in some ways. Maybe Mr. Rosario-Cruz’s version or take on Jesus is accurate in some ways.
Let’s not make Jesus into our own version and baptize it as right…..is it possible that Jesus is the “Other” and the “Same”? Now that’s Inclusive!
Conrad » 456 days ago » Link