Tag Archives: The Reavers

Baptists are the Reavers: my thoughts on #protfuture

Image from fireflyfans.net

A while back, I reviewed a book on science fiction and social theory. Surprisingly, this little book had a lot to teach me about how we view eschatology. Essentially, our views of the futures are often times shaped by notions of exclusion. Which ever tribe (usually tribe, in the case of First Nations persons) we see as not being able to make it is based usually on historical circumstances, like for instance, genocide and war to continue on with my example.

Recently, I watched the conversation held at BIOLA University on The Future of Protestantism sponsored by First Things magazine. Dr. Peter Leithart, who originally wrote the provocative essay The End of Protestantism re-introduced us to his idea of Reformational Catholicism, going back to the Reformers and their Catholic view of theology, the sacraments, honoring the Church Fathers. Protestantism is a movement and a theology that doth protest too much, a project that was found to be susceptible to tribalism, nationalism and anti-intellectualism.

The responses offered by Evangelical Wesleyan theologian Fred Sanders and Reformational theologian Carl Trueman were concise and highly critical of Leithart’s project. What I found interesting is that there was this over-arching theme fretting that the culture wars, for a particular band of Christians, had been lost. I will leave you to read up and believe why that was the case, and the cultural biases behind that belief.

What I want to talk about is the BoogeyMen, who are the Reavers to this Brave New World called the Conservative Evangelical Protestantism of the Future. First Things and this conversation are running a first-class Firefly spaceship, and they are trying to avoid the cannibals we call The Baptists. The notion of a Reformational Catholicism precludes any adherence to traditional Free Church ecclessiology. Autonomous, local congregations are derided as “cults of personality.” Word-Centered worship services being replaced by the Table-Centered/Eucharist traditions. I think that in and of itself is something that cannot be called being faithful to the Reformation, or the Old and New Testaments.

I also found it odd that both parties were willing to give our Catholic sisters and brothers grace, but aren’t willing to extend it to mainline Protestantism. This I find absolutely hypocritical. Forget about the leadership and direction of mainline Protestant denominations; there are many persons with conservative, evangelical beliefs in these churches. The Unity that #ProtFuture is in search for is a political hegemony, one where Conservativism is the same as preaching the Gospel. I’ll reserve my comments concerning the cultural hegemony of where the conversation went, and where it usually goes, but suffice to say that it takes a similar approach to “Third-World Pentecostalism” as “progressive” emergent church leaders.  Maybe rather than asking how can we teach the new Christian majority, Charismatics from Global South to accept how we see things, how about asking, “what can these Christians teach us about the faith?”

I like that this discussion started an important conversation.  It’s a conversation that Dietrich Bonhoeffer commented on, that American Protestantism is a Protestantism without reformation.  This is primarily due to the particular cultural milieu the U.S. finds itself in, the national culture wars among other things. I guess what I envision as a possible future of Protestant Christianity is a commitment to  A) the Theology of the Cross that Martin Luther first built the movement on with the 95 theses,  B) The Three Baptisms of the Radical Reformation– Immersed in Water, Immersed by the Holy Spirit, Immersed in Bodily Existence within the World (baptism of blood), and lastly  C) Word-Centered woship services where the Word is preached through sermons and prayers by the priesthood of all believers, women and men alike; where the Bible is the norming norm where we affirm and interpret the creeds and historic Christian writings and statements in light of the testimony of the Holy Scriptures, and where the story of God and humanity is seen as begotten by YHWH at the Exodus in the election of Israel, and begins anew with its inclusion of the Gentiles, and rightfully towards its TELOS in the Death and Resurrection of Christ Jesus.   

The Future of Protestantism conversation has helped me gain a little clarity in what I see as my hopes for the future of Christianity.  I am known to joke on occasion that here in Texas, everyone is a Baptist.  We wear our faith on our sleeve, we go to retail centers bragging about our congregations, and we’re just deeply stubborn to protest anything.  From the fifth grade students in a classroom, to your grocery shopper contending for what he believes is the right price of an item, we are all Baptists, even the Catholics.  I kinda think that’s what the future of Christianity could look like.  Not as a religion that hijacks notions of marginality and de-historicizes the real experience of exiles and refuges, but as a pure and undefiled religion that reveals the Holiness of God in the creative dis-location of our very bodies to be present-with the least of these, the Reavers of the world, a Church free to serve God and set the prisoners free.

Firefly & Theology, Part 1: The Alliance and The Reavers

A-Theodicy and the Problem of Evil

A few months ago, I was introduced to an excellent t.v. series and film, Firefly and Serenity. For those that are unfamiliar, Firefly was the invention of Buffy the Vampire creator Joss Whedon. Imagine the last three episodes of the Star Wars saga, intermixed with the greatness of the film Tombstone (“Im ya Huckleberry”) and you get the science fiction legend that is Firefly. In fact, the western frontier setting, though taking place in outer space and on terraformed planets, Whedon admits in interviews that he was inspired by the history of the Civil War, and it shows.

I enjoyed Firefly very much, as a political thinker, as a lover of history, and as a theologian. So, today begins my theological interpretation of the series + the movie, and minus the comic books, which I have not read. The reader should be aware that Joss Whedon, in interviews, rejects any notion of a “sky bully” but there are many religious themes that play out, especially in Buffy (the movie and the series).

This is part ONE of SIX.


The problem of existence of evil is a theme that looms large in the world of FIREFLY. Several questions come to mind: What is the face of evil? Where does evil come from? How can humanity respond to it? The last question will be addressed in the last five posts, for in the FIREFLY universe, Whedon’s response to the problem of evil comes in the form of the crew of Serenity, the space ship.

What does evil look like? In, my interpretation of FIREFLY, wickedness looks like human domination. It comes in the disguise of good intentions such as civilizing other cultures and bringing technological advances, but on the inside, the good deeds turn out to be the worst of all wickedness in the drive to control the minds and bodies of other human beings.

Our saga begins when the Earth is overpopulated (according to the film Serenity). Humanity must create terraformed planets that take decades to form. Out of these planets, there are the core planets, the center, or what becomes known as the Alliance, which becomes the “beacon of civilization.” The outer planets [the people groups on the margins ;-)] are seen as “not enlightened.” In the name of a safer universe, the Interplanetary Parliament decrees the War for Unification. The Independents lose, and the Alliance rules the galaxy, so to speak. The Operative (the nameless antagonist in the film Serenity) represents the ideology of the Alliance. Inara calls him dangerous, for he is a true believer, “intelligent, methodical,


.” The Operative, speaking in the royal we, announces, “We’re making a better world. All of them. Better worlds.”


What makes the Operative (and therefore the Alliance) represent Joss Whedon’s notion of evil is that the Operative is an assassin who works for the Parliament. At one point, he persuades a scientist to commit suicide, for it is “an honorable death” for the purpose of hiding the Alliance’s dirty secret (unknown to T.O. at the time). The Operative believes in the creation of “a world without sin” (a utopia consisting in hegemonic control behind the threat of lethal force) and he even goes as far as killing children in order to achieve this end. Yes, the Operative (and therefore the Alliance are wicked), but they are not incapable of change, as one discovers in the film [i.e., in Christian terms, the possibility of repentance].


While the crew of Serenity run into a number of criminals (they themselves are no better than fugitives on the run), the most compelling and interesting criminal mind, in my opinion is the bounty hunter Jubal Early. His character reminds me much more like Heath Ledger‘s Joker in the movie The Dark Knight.


In my subjective Christian opinion, Jubal Early, while not affiliated with the Alliance also represents the face of evil in the FIREFLY universe, for his vision of the world is in direct contradiction to Whedon’s gospel. For Joss Whedon, the human body takes center stage in his work; it is the body that performs gender, race, nationality, and ultimately, human freedom can only be obtained in bodily form. Thus, human liberty is not something left in the abstract (just watch a few episodes of Buffy and Dollhouse, it’s there). Jubal Early, on the other hand, has an utter disregard for the human body. He plays mind games, and would prefer intellectual manipulation than hand-to-hand combat. Take note that in the episode, “Objects in Space,” I do not believe that it was a coincidence that Early is wearing red (as opposed to the Independents’ preference for Brown or the Alliance color blue). In a comical but serious conversation with Simon Tam, Early tells Simon Tam the ship’s doctor, “I don’t think of myself as a lion. You might as well though. I have a mighty roar.” 1st Peter 5:8 gives the image of the evil One as a lion, no? That was the first passage that came to my mind.

Early’s disdain for humanity’s embodiment is revealed in his misogyny. In his interactions with Kaylee the mechanic, he threatens her with rape, as if it were nothing. Through his conversations with Inara the Companion, he makes the following comment, “Man is stronger by far than a woman. Yet only a woman can create a child. Does that seem right to you?” Jubal Early, time and again asks, “Does that seem right to you?” relying on the error of common sense, as if the others know what he is thinking. His egoism (in contrast to the individualism of other members of the crew) is extremely narcissistic. But in the end, River Tam (Simon’s teenage sister) exposes J.E. as a “liar, a a bad liar” whose own mother “saw a darkness” in him”- “Power. Control. Pain.” Early’s blind ambition would be his undoing.


With the faces of evil exposed in the FIREFLY universe, I must now turn to the second part of the question of evil: Where does evil come from? Quite simply, evil is a human construct, and the effects of that construction is social in nature.


It was the Alliance desire to create a inter-planetary system whereby all human beings would be conformed in the Alliance’s image. To do this, the Alliance sought a way to prevent human persons from fighting back. Their solution was to experiment with a gas that would end human aggression. The Pax gas (pax being Latin for peace, the false peace of empire, i.e., Pax Romana) was used in experiments on the terraformed planet Miranda, on the very outskirts of the Universe. Rather than weeding out aggression, however, it had two affects. First, a large portion of the population on Miranda died for not eating, losing the will to survive. However, the remnant became even far more aggressive to the point of losing their humanity: The Reavers, a cannibalistic nation that would ravage ships. Multiple times in the series and movie, the shipmates of Serenity would try to remind themselves that maybe in another life, the Reavers were human, but now they are monsters. The interesting part about the role of the Reavers is that about half of those living on other planets do not believe in the existence of Reavers (that they should be left to old wives tells) while those that have seen them first hand know how dangerous they are. The legend works to make them larger than life, and in the process, works towards furthering their marginalization and dehumanization.

The monstrosity, however, is not the Reavers’ collectivity, but in fact, the society that gave birth to them: the Alliance is the monster that made the efforts to marginalized these people. The Reavers are the blowback of imperial domination. The source of evil is group of human beings that work against human liberation.

The last five parts of this series will be the crew of Serenity, as Whedon’s anti-colonial religious response to evil.

Enhanced by Zemanta