Thank you for asking "the dumb question," Pete. I love the idea that people who embody the prophetic are, for those of us with a stake in the dominant society--and who isn't by choice or force included in that?--all failures. Marc wouldn't suggest that others choose to embody the prophetic. And fundamentally, he doesn't seem understand embodying the prophetic as a choice (too much agency) or a calling (too much determinism). Marc's framing reminds me of Elijah's first response to Elisha: "Go back. What have I done to you?"
But not exactly failures in the long run. His reference here to the prophetic as "a gamble" is striking. There's a kind of accumulation, even a fellowship across time--a diaspora of prophets. He distinguishes himself from King's "we shall overcome" and Brueggemann's Christian resurrection, but I don't know if he would distinguish himself from all forms of Jewish messianism (e.g. Scholem or Benjamin). If he did, he would presumably do so out of a concern, with Scholem, that such a concept would fall into the hands of what Ellis calls "Constantinian Judaism." (Just thinking out loud here.)
His refusal to locate God in public life, even in the prophetic, seems much like the position of several other Jewish thinkers who deeply grapple with the Holocaust. This refusal seems also like a line in the sand drawn to avoid a Jewish version of immanentizing the eschaton.
I've read only one book and one article by Ellis. I look forward to more.
Easily the most clarifying and thought-provoking interview I've ever heard. Thank you.
This is absurdly well done! Just an incredible series. An edited down version deserves a much wider audience.
Thanks much, Nick--duly noted! :)
Thank you for asking "the dumb question," Pete. I love the idea that people who embody the prophetic are, for those of us with a stake in the dominant society--and who isn't by choice or force included in that?--all failures. Marc wouldn't suggest that others choose to embody the prophetic. And fundamentally, he doesn't seem understand embodying the prophetic as a choice (too much agency) or a calling (too much determinism). Marc's framing reminds me of Elijah's first response to Elisha: "Go back. What have I done to you?"
But not exactly failures in the long run. His reference here to the prophetic as "a gamble" is striking. There's a kind of accumulation, even a fellowship across time--a diaspora of prophets. He distinguishes himself from King's "we shall overcome" and Brueggemann's Christian resurrection, but I don't know if he would distinguish himself from all forms of Jewish messianism (e.g. Scholem or Benjamin). If he did, he would presumably do so out of a concern, with Scholem, that such a concept would fall into the hands of what Ellis calls "Constantinian Judaism." (Just thinking out loud here.)
His refusal to locate God in public life, even in the prophetic, seems much like the position of several other Jewish thinkers who deeply grapple with the Holocaust. This refusal seems also like a line in the sand drawn to avoid a Jewish version of immanentizing the eschaton.
I've read only one book and one article by Ellis. I look forward to more.
Easily the most clarifying and thought-provoking interview I've ever heard. Thank you.