I’m curious as what the theoblogosphere thinks of my following MA thesis:
I plan on writing on torture, more specifically, developing a political theology that subverts current American theology that seems apathetic or blasé on torture (since most do not seem explicitly for torture, but even if that were not case, the political theology I envision would cut against those pro-torture as well).
To distill the thesis I envision, I summarize it as such: 9/11, as a microcosm, is used by the privatizing nation-state as an identity-forming, eschatological event (a Christological event within a larger colonizing context) that supplants the cross and resurrection, and works with the commodifying market to breakdown the Christian call and community of Christians in America. The state’s story and justification for violence to ensure “safety” (the status quo) in the face of fear becomes the ruling narrative. Because the Christian body is no longer forged by the memory and promise of the cross and resurrection, if it indeed continues to exist as a body, the outcome is a breakdown and reversal of allegiance and relationships and the end result is a Christian public that is at least indifferent to violence by the state. The solution to engaging American Christianity against torture then is to bring to bear the Metzian idea of “dangerous memory” and an explication on the political implications of church movement – liturgical/sacramental theology. Metz reorients Christians to the identity forming memory of the Christological life and it is in liturgy that Christians solidify themselves and act out resulting in a prophetic movement by the church that is inherently political.
Any ideas? Praise and glory is welcome, helpful criticism even more so.