Echo November 16, 1984

              V,     ff
A/
1
Augsburg College, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Vol.91, No. 9
Friday, Nov. 16, 1984
Marx and the Bible
In search of alternatives
Ghandi:
Assassination hits home
By BIRGIT OLSEN
Staff Writer
"If I die today, every drop of
my blood will invigorate the nation."—Indira Gandhi.
And so it has. Gandhi's shocking assassination set off a worldwide explosion of emotion. For
the Hindus of India a sense of
horrified outrage prevails. In the
rest of the world there is a feeling
of anger and disbelief. And for all
there is that nagging question:
Who will it be next?
Satya Gupta, professor of
economics from India, expressed
his feelings about the affair. He
stated: "1 was shocked, naturally;
I hate violence. And I was hurt;
she did not deserve to die that
way."
Gupta was also concerned
about what will happen in India
now. "Other powers could take
advantage of the situation,
espeeiallv with the lack of an actual leader," he continued.
Rajiv Gandhi is only a temporary prime minister of India until the elections can be held.
However, Gupta feels that Rajiv
will probably be elected. "They
will be nice; thev feel sorry for
him." Gupta stated. But he may
be able to use this sympathy to his
own advantage, as Gupta pointed
out." He may have more control;
they may listen to him more," he
added.
Manjula Shyam, a political
science professor who is also from
India, experienced similar emotions. "I was quite shocked. Of
course public leaders have become
vulnerable, but I was still horrified," she said. Shyam held
Gandhi in high esteem, describing
the prime minister as
"remarkable, resolute, determined, with a lot of charisma, a person who was not afraid of taking
action, despite the consequences."
Shyam feels that the violence
between the Hindu and the Sikhs
is mainly spontaneous outrage
and will probably not reach the
proportion of the violence that
took place when Mahatma Gandhi was killed.
Shyam stated that the one
criticism she may have had with
the prime minister would be that
Gandhi had popular support but
"she lacked the vision to translate
the mandate into something."
On the question of whether
Gandhi had done the correct thing
my moving into the temple and
removing the Sikhs, both Shyam
and Gupta responded in the affirmative. Shyam stated that the
whole situation presented a "cruel
Continued on page 7
By DAN ERICKSON
Was Jesus a Communist? Latin
American theologian Dr. Jose
Porfirio Miranda offered an
answer to this and other questions
concerning the relationship between Christian and Marxist
schools of thought in a two-day
conference sponsored by the
Center for Global Service and
Education entitled "Marx and the
Bible: Re-thinking the Bible
Message." Miranda asserted that
Jesus rejected a society with a
stratified capitalistic structure,
saying, "His disciples turned away
from material wealth, sharing
everything."
Highlights from Miranda's lecture in Si Melby on Nov. 10 entitled "Communism in the Bible" are
as follows:
"The poor man is not described
as especially virtuous in the Bible,
just poor," Miranda explained.
He illustrated with biblical
passages where Jesus refused to
accept the wealthy unwilling to
relinquish their riches, and stated,
"They have already received their
recompense. Jesus filled the poor
with good things and sent away
the rich with nothing." Miranda
qualified his statement: "According to these teachings one can
conclude the rich should be
punished. But it is differentiating
wealth that is condemned, not
wealth itself.
"The only solution against differential wealth is a classless society. Only if a society has no rich or
poor class can that society be condoned," he stated. Describing the
disciples, he said, "There was no
poor person among them. There
was no differentiating wealth
among them.
The logical supposition is that
differentiating wealth cannot be
acquired legitimately," according
to Miranda. The Bible distingush-
ed three modes of profit: 1.)
through commerce, 2.) through
lending, 3.) through making a
profit in production. The Bible,
according to Miranda, condemns
all three.
"The Kingdom of God was a
place where all injustice was to
be abolished. This was the plan of
Jesus.   This   was  the  first  com
munist plan on earth," remarked
Dr. Miranda.
Miranda's quote on the conference pamphlet reads: "Communism did not come from
atheistic materialism. It came
from the writers of the Old and
New Testaments. But, the
Biblical teachings about riches
and poverty have been muted and
modified by translater, exegetes,
and the official church."
Responding to Dr. Miranda's
lecture, Dr. David Tiede, Professor of the New Testament at
Luther Northwestern Theological
Seminary, remarked that a
"rethinking of fundemental questions is important. Miranda's lecture has profound implications. It
strikes at the quick of where we
are." Tiede posed the problem
like this: "How do you use scriptures written in a theocracy while
we live in a pluracracy?" (In
Christ's time, Jews were governed
by Sadducess and Pharisees under
the auspices of the Roman
Government. They were priests
ruling by divine sanction.)
Tiede continued, "Jesus means
freedom and forgiveness. But he
also has a vision of human dignity," a quality usually absent in the
life of the poor. "Mercy,
forgiveness, grace, love—all are
part of the gospel message." But
Tiede remarked that it was "an
escapist theology which supports
the capitalists and avoids justice."
He emphasized that "we must
carefully tend the sources of our
texts. The task of the Christian is
to do justice for God."
Dr. Janet Mathison of the St.
Joseph Catholic Worker House,
recently back from South
America, where she was confronted with the consequences of
poverty, stated: "Miranda encourages and challenges the people, especially the poor ... to attain strong belief that the gospel
means what it says literally," in
spite of the interpretation of intellectuals and academics, whose
opinions have prevailed, she said.
Mathison noted that "President
Reagan said it was okay not to feel
guilty (regarding the Administration's cut in social programs aimed to help the poor). The reason
people are drawn to Reagan is that
it's helping us not to feel guilty."
According to Mathison, America
interweaves materialism, idealism,
and theology for the creation of
convenient idols.
"Where is the meaning of
life?" she asked, and answered:
"In the shopping centers and at
football games—things we don't
need to make sense of." In our
consumer society Mathison insists
that "the poor aren't the deserving poor," contrary to Reagan's
statements that anyone who wants
to work in this country can find a
job. Mathison found Dr. Miranda's comments a welcome addition in the search for ideas showing "that there is another way."
Dr. Miranda's most recent
book, Communism and the Bible,
was published in 1981.
The Nov. 10 session, held in Si
Melby Auditorium, was interrupted for coffee, which was
followed by small group reflection
and concluding remarks. The
Nov. 9 session was entitled
"Justice and Justification"
followed by an afternoon session
entitled "Is God on the Side of the
Poor? How Western Interpretations Favor the Rich."
NSIDE:
page
Can you write? 3
Editorials   4, 5
Muichinaker reviewed 6
Volleyball finishes
season    7